I googled "big rig mileage improver" to see what would come up. In addition to this search, I came across a website that was advertising some sort of oxygen mixer that could improve the big rig mpg. All you had to do is add de-ionized water every 10-12k miles.

It reminded me of some products I purchased for my car that claimed that you can save on gas mileage. There are all kinds of gimmicks out there. But there are a couple I've seen that looked promising: google:

Hydro-Assist Fuel Cell (HAFC)
Pre-Ignition Catalytic Converter, preignitioncc, or picc
hybrid garbage truck
Hybrid Truck Unveiled by Kenworth
National Vapor
[there's one more I can't find it right now]
Now there are things drivers can do to get good gas mileage. But what I'm looking for is an additive or hardware modification that can offer significant fuel savings miles per gallon. Now for a big rig, even 5% per tank can add up very quickly.

I didn't know where to put this, as I'm sure company drivers and O/Os would love to see if they can nab the fuel bonus the company would give them. The keywords gas savings were too short, so if there are other threads, linking to them here would be helpful.

So what do you think of the above or any other products any of you are using now to obtain fuel savings.

according to pittsburgh power..and any reputible diesel tech...air in fuel is a bad thing, and can lead to catostrophic failure and probally terrible mileage

i use howe's.....normally gets me .25/mpg better...one in each tank if i have forgotton lately and then half a bottle per tank

never have had any luck with lucus besides it gummin up my filters

that and at night i chain my truck to brickmans so he can drag me around and not cost me any money...now i just need to get him to go on my route's instead of his

From what I have heard from reputable sources (radio personalities in the trucking biz) there are none that measure up to their claims. The only way to improve fuel economy in a big truck is to get the proper specs for your type of job from the start, get an aerodynamic truck, do not idle, and keep your speed low (around 60 mph).

Progressive shifting and coasting down hills and to stops also will save fuel (as well as brake linings).

__________________
Knowledge is Power

In addition to commenting on big rigs (which is the main point), as a related question:

Does anyone have them installed in their cars? Are they receiving the claimed mpg improvement, if any at all?

My advice would be to stay away from the 'snake oil' altogether and just slow down. Bear with me... this one's long and contains lot's of math.

There's a reason they set the speed limit at 55 mph during the oil crisis in the 70's. That's because wind resistance above 55 mph increases exponentially. Those of you who ride motorcycles without windshields already know this--ride much above 55 mph and you'll tire your arms quickly hanging on to the bars. When the wind resistance goes up, your mpg goes down.

I used to have a 91 Escort GT with the Mazda 1.8 liter in it--it got 38 mpg on a regular basis keeping it to 55 or less. Mind you, this car had 250,000 miles on it! When I drove it with a lead foot (75 to 80), the mileage would drop to about 27 mpg. 11 more mpg just by keeping the speed down on the highway--pretty good deal I'd say.

Now then, I'm sure someone is gonna say it... "I can't drive that slow, I got places to go."

I had a 28 mile trip to get to work, one way. Using the formula:

Distance / Speed x 60 = Minutes

28 / 55 x 60 = 30.54

This works out to approximately 30 minutes and 30 seconds.

Using the same formula but changing the speed to 70 mph:

28 / 70 x 60 = 24

So, a difference of about 6 minutes and 30 seconds on a 28 mile trip. For those short trips, you'll never miss that 6 minutes.

Even over the long haul... lets do a 1000 mile trip... one at 65 (speed of most company trucks) and one at 55.

1000 / 65 = 15.38 hrs (multiply the .38 by 60 to get minutes)

15 hours, 23 minutes.

And at 55:

1000 / 55 = 18.18

18 hours, 11 minutes

A difference of 2 hours and 48 minutes on a 1000 mile trip.

Now lets say you got 7 mpg instead of 5 by dropping your speed. You'd burn 200 gallons at 5 mpg and 142.85 gallons at 7 mpg over that same 1000 mile trip--a savings of 57.15 gallons of fuel. Calculate that fuel at an average price of $3.39 a gallon.

57.15 x 3.39 = 193.7385

So, you just saved $193.74 for getting 7 versus 5 mpg. It may have taken you 2 hours and 48 minutes more, but if you own the truck, you got $193.74 more dollars in your pocket for that time.

__________________
This is NOT the Daytona 500... you don't win a prize for being first.

Coasting down hill? I hope you're not suggesting putting the truck in neutral and going down the hill?

Nope I would never advocate "Ga overdrive."

Coasting to stops on a long off ramp and light pressure on the throttle rather than mashing it to the floor will help save fuel.

Using terrain to assist you is also helpful when stopping or starting. Letting gravity increase your speed on a downgrade to gain momentum for the next upgrade is also a technique I use although the truck I currently drive is terrible on fuel mileage regardless (Volvo engine).

__________________
Knowledge is Power

What about having the lead removed from your foot...:biggrin_2552 3:
Just kidden, its 0417 where I am and I have been up all night. Couldn't help myself.

Well put. You make valid points withOUT using any additional devices or modifications. But I do think that these devices could have merit, if they are working as advertised. I would like to see Because if these modifications I mentioned above in fact DO have merit, then:

a) you can have the heavy foot over a long haul and still get some gas savings (You'll save the time, and equal out on the mpg)

b) drive at 55 mph and get even more savings.

Imagine getting a 20% increase with the hydrogen (or any other legitimate) modifications .20 x 7mpg = 1.4 mpg increase or 8.4 mpg total. .20 x 5mpg = 1mpg or 6 mpg total. Let's regroup the stats to see what we could have:

1000 mi trip. one at 55 and one at 65. Regular engine setup.
200 gallons at 5 mpg [minus]
142.85 gallons at 7 mpg = 57.15 gal savings x $3.39/gal for diesel = $193.74 dollar savings

Same trip, but with legit hydrogen/combustion modifications resulting in 20% mpg increase:

167 gallons # 6 mpg
119 gallons # 8.4 mpg

But compared to 142.85, 119 gal is 23.85 gal difference. x $3.39 =

Okay, I decided to do a more conservative savings, so lets do 10% mpg increase: ( 5.5mpg and 7.7 mpg respectively)

182 gal # 5.5 mpg
130 gallons # 7.7 mpg

and 5% mpg increase: (5.25 mpg and 7.35 mpg respectively)

190.5 gallons # 5.25 mpg
136 gallons # 7.35 mpg

Let's recap and make it less cluttered

[65mph]
200 gallons at 5 mpg [no mod]
190.5 gallons # 5.25 mpg [5% mpg improvement]
182 gal # 5.5 mpg [10% mpg improvement]
167 gallons # 6 mpg [20% mpg improvement]

[55mph]
142.85 gallons at 7 mpg [no mod]
136 gallons # 7.35 mpg [5% mpg improvement]
130 gallons # 7.7 mpg [10% mpg improvement]
119 gallons # 8.4 mpg [20% mpg improvement]

So you can see that if the fuel saving devices are legit, even a modest percentage improvement over the year would be quite a bit. Does an average driver drive at least 100k miles a year?

100,000 mi / 5 mpg = 20,000 gal x $3.39/gal = $67,800 [no mod]
100,000 mi / 7 mpg = 14,286 gal x $3.39/gal = $48,430 [no mod]
100,000 mi / 7.35 mpg = 13,605 gal x $3.39/gal = $46,121 [5% mpg imp]
100,000 mi / 7.7 mpg = 12987 gal x $3.39/gal = $44,026 [10% mpg imp]
100,000 mi / 8.4 mpg = 11905 gal x $3.39/gal = $40,358 [20% mpg imp]

Over a year with 20% savings, that's over $8,000 extra in your pocket. If you spent $500 installing the device in your truck, that pays for itself in a little over 3 weeks.

Believe me, if there was a device out there that could save you even 3% of your fuel bill, still allowed you to drive 70mph and it only cost $500... people would be on it like a dirty sock.

With a heavy duty background in mechanics, I'm very skeptical of any mileage boosters. Even computer chips... if it were possible to extract more mpg out of an engine just by reprogramming the computer, the manufacturers would have done it already.

I also see a lot of drivers pouring various sorts of chemicals into the tanks, hoping for some benefit. Probably the most popular additive (cough... Howes... cough cough) is nothing more than heavy aromatic naptha, and hydrotreated (sulfur removed) mineral oil... sold for a hefty price. The MSDS doesn't say what the concentrations are, but I'd suspect it's heavy on the mineral oil being that the flash point is only 160F. Again, I don't see the need for this stuff if you buy good quality fuel to begin with.

One area that could be improved using hardware, is aerodynamics. Most trucks, being as aerodynamic as a brick, would reap considerable gains towards fuel mileage just by smoothing the flow of air. While that big flat shiny chrome bumper may look cool, it kills the drag coefficient. I'd like to see what a belly pan on a truck could do in a wind tunnel. Moon discs over the wheels... things like that.

__________________
This is NOT the Daytona 500... you don't win a prize for being first.