Par,I can't remember. It's been so hot this summer,I keep it on all the time. I did another trip to round to Montreal this morning and the fuel economy is about the same as the last two trips... 366 kms consumed 18.445 litres (5.0 litres/100 kms). Average consumption since switching to Amsoil "mtf" is 5.0 litres/100 kms for pure HIGHWAY driving. I will do a trip with a/c off and let you know the fuel savings.
Amsoil "mtf" testomonial: "2 thumbs up"!
- Thread starter airbus
- Start date
- Status
It isn't at all inconceivable that a decrease in the very steady drag a heavy fluid could exert on a gearset could result in a corresponding decrease in fuel consumption. Who better than an airline pilot to realize this?! Even as an AMT I constantly hear about measures to decrease fuel consumption by our aircraft. (Some of us taxi them around in the course of our work.)
Thanks for the compliment Lance. I got tired of "needing a sledge hammer" to shift gears in my 5 speed manual 2001 Civic on those -30 celcius days. The initial portion of my drive from my house has quite a few stop signs/traffic lights. In the winter it would take about 5 minutes of driving before my gearbox was sufficiently warm enough to shift smooth enough for my liking. I was going to try out "Redline MTL". However when I saw the lower viscosity specs. of the new "Amsoil MTF" I figured I'd give it a try. When I used to work up in the high Canadian Arctic,virtually everybody used some sort of a synthetic lubricant - I was sold on its benefits.
Mileage update. As I mentioned previously,I am getting a fuel economy figure of 4.95 l/100 kms for pure highway driving (with a/c on). This translates into 48 mpg. Now for city driving (mixed with some "rural"). I'm getting 5.8 l/100 kms. This translates into about 40 mpg. The highway p[ortion is with cruise control on doing a steady 100 km/h (63miles).
Basically you are saying that your mpg (for us non metric types) increased by more than 10% (100%*100kms/900kms) by reducing the transmission fluid viscocity by a small amount. I don't know what the crank versus wheel horsepower is for the manual transmission 2001 Honda Civic, but your numbers seem far too optimistic to me. You would probably have to eliminate the transmission altogether to get a 10% mpg improvement. Or switch to a summer gas formulation.
Keith,I am just posting my mileage figures FWIW. Maybe the earths magnetism or gravitational pull has decreased in my area (joke). But all kidding aside,I am getting about 0.6 per litre increase in fuel economy.
That's what I meant - it doesn't seem possible that that much improvement could be from such a small change.
FWD vehicles lose 15-20% HP from the crank to the wheels.
That loss is from tires, brakes, wheel bearings, CV joints and axles, etc., and of course, the transmission.
10% from gear oil alone? Wow! I'm glad you got it.
FWD vehicles lose 15-20% HP from the crank to the wheels.
That loss is from tires, brakes, wheel bearings, CV joints and axles, etc., and of course, the transmission.
10% from gear oil alone? Wow! I'm glad you got it.
Correction. I'm getting a 0.6 litre increase in economy per 100 kilometers.
I have over 25 years of experience with synthetic gear lubes and I've generally see an increase of 1% to 3% in fuel efficiency, by changing over the transmission and differential to a synlube.
I'm sure these new Amsoil fluids are excellent, but an increase of the magnitude cited in this thread isn't possible, due to the degree of friction losses in the drivetrain of a passenger car.
Tooslick
Dixie Synthetics
I'm sure these new Amsoil fluids are excellent, but an increase of the magnitude cited in this thread isn't possible, due to the degree of friction losses in the drivetrain of a passenger car.
Tooslick
Dixie Synthetics
What can I say? All I've done is share with you people what I have personally experienced since using Amsoil's new "MTF". I'm not a guy who hypes stuff up. I've used both "Autorx" and "FP60" and did not notice one performance improvement in terms of fuel economy. Having said this,I did significantly decrease my oil consumption after using "Autorx" (that's what I bought it for). Using "FP60" also did not increase my mileage one bit,but it resulted in my car idling much smoother. Both products are great and I would recommend them to anybody. I'm not sure I fully understand what you don't believe about the mileage improvement gains I've experienced. I too have many years of testing - my mileage. I have been driving the same portion of pure highway with cruise control on for almost 5 years/182,000 miles (290,000 kms). I use the same gas and drive at the same speed (100 km/h or 63 mph). It has always taken,for this time of year (a/c on),20 litres to fill my tank after completing the trip (229 miles/366kms). I make sure to FULLY fill the tank. This results in a "burn" of 5.5 litres per 100 kms travelled. Since switching to Amsoil "MTF",It now takes only 18 litres to do the same trip. This translates into 4.9 litres per 100 kms travelled. Savings= 0.6 litres per 100 kms. It's impossible for the numbers to lie (and I don't lie either). There isn't a more obsessive-compulsive perfectionist than me when it comes to checking my mileage. Like I said before,some people get something stuck in their mind and will not be convinced regardless of the facts. Remember,I have nothing to gain from using this stuff other than improved mileage. I guess next time I review the flight plan on my Airbus A320,I had better get the passengers to review my fuel burn calculations to make sure I fully understand exactly where I stand in terms of required trip fuel. Believe it or not. I give up.
I wouldn't give up just because your mpg gains have been questioned. Every little thing gets questioned, especially when it is out of the ordinary. I'm not sure you appreciate how exceptional your results are, which is reason to be skeptical.
Shift on, airbus! He is trying to say HE experiences a big increase, not that everyone here must believe it. There is always a doubting Thomas, I have to take Airbus at his word, he's an airline pilot, they have to be able to do math, among many other things, to do that job.
Lance,
Do you also believe in the tooth fairy?
The extend of frictional losses in a manual transmission are only on the order of 1%-2%. In other words, the mechanism is about 98%-99% efficient. The only way to get a gain significantly larger than that would be to use a much thinner fluid than what was in there. Certainly given that it's summer time out, the low temp flow of a synthetic would not have much effect on fuel efficiency under steady state conditions.
"He's an airline pilot, they have to be able to do math..." LOL!
I'm sure Terry will find that amusing!
TS
Do you also believe in the tooth fairy?
The extend of frictional losses in a manual transmission are only on the order of 1%-2%. In other words, the mechanism is about 98%-99% efficient. The only way to get a gain significantly larger than that would be to use a much thinner fluid than what was in there. Certainly given that it's summer time out, the low temp flow of a synthetic would not have much effect on fuel efficiency under steady state conditions.
"He's an airline pilot, they have to be able to do math..." LOL!
I'm sure Terry will find that amusing!
TS
There's no tooth fairy
This is my final response. As I mentioned previously,the only reason that I posted this thread was to share with BITOG members MY PERSONAL RESULTS after having switched from Honda OEM MTF to the new Amsoil "MTF". I did so in a TOTALLY honest,unbiased and extremely accurate fashion. It's not based on my opinion,which alot of people on this site seem to have no problems whatsoever expressing without a single shed of PERSONAL experience to back it up (this does not apply to anyone in particular) - it's based on FACT! The fact that I am an Airline Pilot doesn't lend any more credibility than I should already have based on my PERSONAL experience using this product. I just had to throw that in because I had to laugh when I repeatedly hear/see people on this site flashing their "credentials" around! Many pilots have run out of gas -but not transmission fluid! Thats a joke. But seriously,back to the Amsoil MTF testomonial. I am not a chemist nor an engineer,so I couldn't personally care less about straight percentages or hypothetical (not all drive trains are the same) drivetrain "frictional losses" - I base my substantiated "opinion" on what I PERSONALLY WITNESS/EXPERIENCE - THE NUMBERS DON'T LIE,AND NEITHER DO I -thats also a fact. I've read many "interesting" threads on this site and really wondered if what people were saying was true. Then,the more I thought about it,I said,who am I to publically criticize/"shoot down" their PERSONAL testomonial. Their claim IS TRUE as far as I am concerned until I can personally debunk their claim. Either they are correct or incorrect. If they are incorrect then either they have incorrectly assesssed their facts or they are a liar. I've been called many things in my life,but being inaccurate and being a liar are not some of them (pigheaded yes). I sincerely don't mean to be rude when I say this,but one of the first things I noticed when I visited this site was that there are more than enough "arm chair quarterbacks". That includeds some other "experts" (not you Terry) that are higher up the viscosity table. It's meant to be partly a joke as well as to get my point across. I just finished visiting the Amsoil Corporate website. There are more than one "satisfied customers" that make GREATER claims than me. Actually,they are not "claims" - they are facts (according to them). Amsoil says that they are "test proven" by an independent test facility. One claim is for 11% and the other is for an 8.9% savings (yes I realize that one of the claims resulted from switching from all dino fluids to all synthetic). "TooSlick", are THEY also lying/incorrect? In closing all I can say is this. I used to use Honda MTF (visc@100=11.26) and consume 20 litres per trip. I now use Amsoil's new "MTF" (visc@100=9.6) and now consume only 18 litres per trip. Something has changed that is resulting in a 2 litre decrease in consumption savings. The only thing that has changed is the new Amsoil "MTF" - either that or I am experiencing a low level jetstream (strong wind) on my "tail" regardless of which direction that I am travelling! As for .."pilots being good at math"...,I'm terrible and thats why I fly hi-tech aircraft so it can do all the thinking -or I get the passengers to help me with my calculations. "LOL"...hmm...landings only long.
I got through putting Amsoil MTF into my 5 speed fwd transmission tonight. So far it feels better than Redline MTL, and GM Synchromesh, and the stock ATF+4 which my transmission uses as a stock fluid. I need more miles on this fluid to really do a fair comparison but so far it feels very good.
Just wondering what Amsoil could have done to make it shift better than original GM Synchromesh fluid ?. Obviously the base fluid would be superior for wear protection since it is a true 100% synthetic fluid, but I'd like to know what the did to make it a smoother shifting fluid. So far so good with this fluid.
Just wondering what Amsoil could have done to make it shift better than original GM Synchromesh fluid ?. Obviously the base fluid would be superior for wear protection since it is a true 100% synthetic fluid, but I'd like to know what the did to make it a smoother shifting fluid. So far so good with this fluid.
Good to hear that. Happy shifting.
In my 2002 F-150, with the 5 speed manual transmission, I went from The factory dino Mercon ATF to Schaeffer's synthetic blend ATF to MolaKule's SF SynchroGlide full synthetic all in about 19,000 miles. I can't say my mpg increased to any measurable amount but my shifting quality improved TREMENDOUSLY with the synthetic SF SynchroGlide. That alone made it real worthwhile
.
Whimsey
Whimsey
Last time I checked the Civic used a transaxle and not just a transmission. This would equate to a transmission and axle combo. Amsoil claims 4.82% on OTR trucks in the transmission and diffs.
Here is an integra website that claims 30hp losses in the honda transaxle.
http://www.prototyperacing.com/dynok20.htm
Amsoil always does their homework on anything they release and they tend to improve the formulations. I switched my PT GT getrag 5 spd to the Amsoil MTF about a month ago. So far so good. I had dumped the original Mopar ATF+4 at 15 k miles and used the Amsoil Universal ATF in it for another 17K miles and that seemed to work very well. The new MTF seems to have improved the 1-2 shift and everything glides in easier vs the ATF. Personally I dont think the ATF is the way to go because they used to recomend that back in 1985-1987 and factory filled all the A525, A520's and A555 Getrags with ATF and then midyear 1987 recommended filling with 5w30 oil and from that point forward the factory fill was 5w30. Also Ed Peters DCX reliability engineer from that era also recommended the 5w30, ATF was only used as it was convevient and would allow easier cold shifting but wasnt optimal for long term wear.
- Status