turbo 3000d does it work?

I think your correct on the e.p.a. I have some facts about the e.p.a. plus your statement just makes sense, but I think my argument is not flawed, but you help make my point. I am not that good at translating my thoughts into words. my main thought is. back in the 60's 70's even though the e.p.a. was not as radical as now, just take the era & mindset. if we applied the same mindset, we would still be stuck with the 60's & 70's technology. I know the restrictions & our hands are tied, but the attitude NOW is what I'm referring too. IT CANNOT WORK, cause if it did, it would already be invented & used by others? i.e. mfrs. e.t.c. look at microsoft. when it started it was couple, few men with an idea. turbo, ecotech, or what ever, is just another idea. I don't know the % on new products that fail, or make false claims, but out of the vast majority there are, or can be some that make it & make it big. just look at everything we have that we did not have 30 years ago. it blows my mind. so when I hear of a product, I do not run out & by it. I am skeptical at first, very much, until something about the product or it's users makes me think twice about it. the folks on this forum, that I have come to know, are not endorsing any product,UNLESS it does what it is supposed to,and even then it is not really an endorsement, but more or less there honest experience with a certain product. inventors, entrepreneurs, risk takers are WHY we have the most advanced nation in the world. I just don't like to debunk, EVERYTHING! but those things that are bogus, I love for them to be exposed a.s.a.p.

 

I bought one for my previous truck after a fellow co-worker said positive things about it. I did notice more horse power, but can't say for sure it improved my mpg. The driver said it took three months to see the results. I think it took about two for me to notice the improvement. My truck had high miles at the time so I would say yes again when my second truck gets up in miles about another 200k or so and if I have the extra money.

 

I'm waiting for the Deee-Luxe Turbo 3000D that comes factory installed with Motor-Kote and Air Tabs.

I figure my truck should MAKE fuel with those two improvements added....

 

Most experienced drivers know you can't use the ECM to check fuel mileage and that is great advice to those doing that.

The "Magical Tube" fuel saver devices are sold most of the time to drivers getting very very poor fuel mileage in the 5 to 6 mpg range and are first time fuel savings device buyers who get caught up the sales hype so bad they want it to work so bad, they actually change their driving habits either by slowing down from 67+ mph to the 60-62 mph range after adding the "Magical Tube" in the fuel line and believed it was the device that got the fuel mileage gain when in reality slowing down and other driving habit changes really got the fuel mileage.

The "Magical Tube" salesmen love praying on those types that don't know any better.

Just read most of their ads or post about going from the 5s mpg range to the 6s mpg range by adding the "Magical Tube" in their fuel line.

Great advice on good driving habits will definately save money on fuel.

 

i think my heli-boots work better

 

Dice, you took Bill's comments out of context and twisted them to make your invalid point. Driving 60mph is how the guy has always driven and most times it's slower than that. You were offered an Eco-system to test for free. You chose not to, which is fine, but then you come on here trashing the device. You've had people trash you for wasting money on coated wheel bearings and yet you lecture them how they don't have a leg to stand on because they haven't tried these products. I find your pretense of objectivity interesting.

 

It seems the only way for the "Magical Pipes" to work is slow down and changing driving habits to yet again bring up a truck's very very poor fuel mileage that seems to be a pattern of only working on those type of trucks.

Notice you never see a driver putting one on that already gets great fuel mileage in the 8+ mpg range that they know will never work on due to more than likely that driver already has slowed down and has very conservative driving habits.

 

I never mentioned Bill and notice I was agreeing with that poster making the same claim about drivers slowing down to make the device to get better fuel mileage, The evidence is all over the place by putting them on very very poor mileage trucks that has to have bad driving habits and would not take a much of change in driving habits to get an improvement in fuel mileage.

This thread is about the Turbo3000d Vada. I have tried it and removed it years ago. I have experience with this product and have seen the claims on it about putting the device on making the gain in fuel mileage to find out they slowed down and changed driving habits.

I have not seen any post by Bill stating he uses the Turbo3000d Vada?

Notice it is always a very very poor fuel mileage truck.

 

Though most agree that the most accurate method for calculating mileage is odometer miles driven divided by fuel added (myself included), I think that it still introduces short term error. Much more than most drivers realize. You have to be very attentive and fill-up exactly, PRECISELY the same way every time.

IMO, the typical "fill-up" error is 5-6%, and could easily be a lot more. Of course it averages out over time. But we experience life through a roller coaster sequence of short term perceptions which can cloud our opinions and long term perceptions. That's just human nature.

In the following Excel chart, I used 6 months of fuel data from July to December 2008. I zeroed out right before the first refuel in July and right after the last refuel in December in order to remove any IFTA reporting bias.

The reason I'm using data from that period is because I drove a lot of miles, and I did nothing to the truck during that period that might influence the results other than a normal service (oil, filters, grease) in September. And, it reflects my sloppy driving habits back then. Sometimes I would concentrate on MPG, other times it's Hammer Down, I want to get somewhere fast. And 80 MPH across Utah is really tempting at times. The Devil that resides on my shoulder keeps whispering "go...GO".



Here's the chart. It's self explanatory, hopefully.
If anyone has questions or see's an error, shout out.






AS you can see,I added a "what if" scenario. "What if" I changed/modified something on my truck during the last week of September solely to improve fuel economy? Like, installing a fuel enhancing device? In reality, my fuel economy hasn't changed. But do to perception and the "re-fueling" error range (in light blue) there are 6 occasions during the 3 month period where I have dramatic short term improvement in MPG. Like wise, there are downside periods.

This is where human nature come's in to play. I just installed this device on my truck. I want it to work. I EXPECT it to work. I start patting myself on the back, telling my wife and friends every time I see improvement, not aware of my own bias and the 5-6% error range that occurs with sloppy, error-prone refueling habits alone, which could skew my short term results by as much as 12%.

And what about the downside periods? Do I perceive them the same? Or, do I rationalize irrationally? "I hit a lot of headwinds", "I was heavy", "I idled", or "Somethings not right here- I'm missing something, I'll recheck it the next time I fuel" are some of the things that come to mind. Valid reasons, for the most part.

But are you evaluating them accurately or are you perceiving them with a moderate dose of "human nature" bias?

To sum up in one sentence-

You could "think" you are seeing up to a 10-12% short term improvement, when what you are actually seeing is random short term fluctuations, in this case due to inaccuracies in how you fuel up and calculate your MPG, along with your misperceptions.

That's my story for now, I'm stickin' to it.

 

Don't forget to have your turbo 3000 micro blued