Mobil 1 better cleaner than AutoRx?

[Rick20]

Chambers,

Tell us a little about your application and what your are looking to achieve. If it has anything to do about safely cleaning oiling system deposits, then you are on the right track.

Folks like ionbeam22 have no experience running ARX, so don't be dicouraged by their posts. ARX is the only product that has shown time and again to safely clean oiling system deposits.

Somehow even the toughest objectors will never admit that the product doesn't work. Safe motoring .

 

[chambers]

Well Rick I asked other guys about it in this thread on pages 23 and 24 and did some research reading through the autorx website. I also gave some info on it to explain my short OCI of RP here RP UOA.

Basically the previous owner didn't keep up w/ the maintenance and I believe there may be some sludge buildup based on the few times I have changed the oil. The truck a Dodge Ram 3.7 should take 5 qts. to reach full but only takes about 4 1/4, maybe a little less. I have checked w/ other guys who own the same vehicle and engine and they said there trucks take at least 4 3/4 qts. The dipstick is the correct part number as well as the proper oil filter, so I assume some kind of buildup is in there.

 

[chevrofreak]

Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: chevrofreak
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: Rick20
Great. So what will Mobil 1 be next year, Group IV, part group III, mostly group III? I am not posting here to debate whether or not M! is a great, good, or okay oil. But it seems to me that the transparency rules of the mere definition of what comes into play regarding the badging of full synthetic oils is far from transparent. After all, we have seen diester, triester bottling labels in the past all associated with one brand name. Is it too much to ask the manufacturer whether or not it is all group IV or not?


What does this have to do with it cleaning my engine?

And with a pour point of -65F, I'm pretty sure M1 10W-30HM is mostly Group IV/V...


I put a quart of M1 10W-30 HM in my freezer at around 0F for 3 days. It was quite thick and slow to move in the bottle.


I'm not driving in your freezer. and what other oils have you tried this with?


Mobil 1 0W-30, Quaker State Torque Power 5W-30, Pennzoil Platinum 5W-20 and Valvoline Synpower 5W-30. Though, the Mobil 1 0W-30, Quaker State Torque Power 5W-30 and Mobil 1 10W-30 High Mileage were the only ones in clear bottles (I put the oil in empty Quaker State bottles to make to easier to see). The M1 0W-30 and QSTP 5W-30 seemed pretty equal in this test. I've put a few other oils into glass measuring cups and inside of a plastic bag, then in the freezer, but that's not really a good comparison to the ones that were tested in the bottle.

Here's a stupid little video I made when I opened to freezer to compare the Quaker State and the M1 High Mileage. Quaker State Torque Power 5W-30 vs Mobil 1 10W-30 High Mileage - freezer test at 0F.wmv

 

[ionbeam22]

Originally Posted By: Rick20

Folks like ionbeam22 have no experience running ARX, so don't be dicouraged by their posts. ARX is the only product that has shown time and again to safely clean oiling system deposits.

Somehow even the toughest objectors will never admit that the product doesn't work. Safe motoring .


Rick, I have no idea if AutoRX works or not. And I haven't heard anyone I find credible (e.g not you) give me reason to have a belief that ARX is anything special.

Even if ARX did work and was special, you would have the question of if ARX represents a substantial advantage over alternatives. E.g Marvel Mystery Oil, Seafoam, Rislone, or even just straight 3000 mile oil changes. Given that, ARX is very expensive relative to the alternatives.

As I see it, no one has shown to my satisfaction that ARX is worth the money over putting a pint of MMO in the oil 500 miles before an oil change, and using synthetic oil.

Even more than that, the idea that some unknown named "Frank" knows more about desludging motor oil than the PhD oil chemists at Exxon/Chevron/BP/Shell/Ashland/Lubrizol etc is silly. If ARX was as effective as claimed, then there would be other people making similar (or perhaps better?) products.

 

[BrianWC]

Worked great for me. I've got some posts somewhere on here with my pics. Not magic. But based on before after pics of my engine and cutting open filters, nothing worked better for me over an OCI. Take that for what it's worth. Probably not much, but who knows. Just using it for maint doses now since I traded off my sludger.

 

[chevrofreak]

Originally Posted By: ionbeam22
Originally Posted By: Rick20

Folks like ionbeam22 have no experience running ARX, so don't be dicouraged by their posts. ARX is the only product that has shown time and again to safely clean oiling system deposits.

Somehow even the toughest objectors will never admit that the product doesn't work. Safe motoring .


Rick, I have no idea if AutoRX works or not. And I haven't heard anyone I find credible (e.g not you) give me reason to have a belief that ARX is anything special.

Even if ARX did work and was special, you would have the question of if ARX represents a substantial advantage over alternatives. E.g Marvel Mystery Oil, Seafoam, Rislone, or even just straight 3000 mile oil changes. Given that, ARX is very expensive relative to the alternatives.

As I see it, no one has shown to my satisfaction that ARX is worth the money over putting a pint of MMO in the oil 500 miles before an oil change, and using synthetic oil.

Even more than that, the idea that some unknown named "Frank" knows more about desludging motor oil than the PhD oil chemists at Exxon/Chevron/BP/Shell/Ashland/Lubrizol etc is silly. If ARX was as effective as claimed, then there would be other people making similar (or perhaps better?) products.


Wow.

 

[ADFD1]

Originally Posted By: ionbeam22
Originally Posted By: Rick20

Folks like ionbeam22 have no experience running ARX, so don't be dicouraged by their posts. ARX is the only product that has shown time and again to safely clean oiling system deposits.

Somehow even the toughest objectors will never admit that the product doesn't work. Safe motoring .


Rick, I have no idea if AutoRX works or not. And I haven't heard anyone I find credible (e.g not you) give me reason to have a belief that ARX is anything special.

Even if ARX did work and was special, you would have the question of if ARX represents a substantial advantage over alternatives. E.g Marvel Mystery Oil, Seafoam, Rislone, or even just straight 3000 mile oil changes. Given that, ARX is very expensive relative to the alternatives.

As I see it, no one has shown to my satisfaction that ARX is worth the money over putting a pint of MMO in the oil 500 miles before an oil change, and using synthetic oil.

Even more than that, the idea that some unknown named "Frank" knows more about desludging motor oil than the PhD oil chemists at Exxon/Chevron/BP/Shell/Ashland/Lubrizol etc is silly. If ARX was as effective as claimed, then there would be other people making similar (or perhaps better?) products.


+1 Not bashing the product but I know several people via PM who have tried both and feel that MMO, some of the HM oils, or a good synthetic oil is doing a fine job for a lot less. Nothing wrong with experimenting and coming to your own conclusions, or going by testimony of people who you feel are creditable and not on someone's payroll, or given free product. Recent discussion in some of these other threads has been a real eye opener for me.

AD

 

[dbdeland]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Most of the posts on this string are not backed up with anything but zeal to try and degrade someone else's product. If you have any third party data from the products you promote (thats analysis etc not your beliefs ) contact Auto-Rx for free product first make sure you post it. Because real oil analysis people are going to analyze it.

This fleet taxi test is as good as any test ever done and it is verifiable.





Taxi tests, six cars all Ford Crown Vics
Notes on tests:
All cars were driven by taxi drivers in regular service in good weather. Mileage was tested and hand calculated at the start and was compared with Scangage readings. The Scangage was used for all future readings. The errors were consistent, that is, if it was 4% off it was 4% off on every tank, for a given vehicle. Error rates ranged from 2% high to 7% high for different gages on different cars and since this test looks for trends not absolute values because we were using different vehicles the Scangage readings were accepted. One thing in our favor is that the same driver always drove the same car.
All vehicles were serviced every 3k miles and conventional 5w-30 oil was used. Each car was driven for 500 miles to get a base line for mileage and then the testing began.

Vehicles
1 & 2 received Auto-Rx and the driver was aware of the test. 3 Driver was aware of the mileage test but was told we were testing mileage with different tire pressure settings but did receive Auto-Rx..
4 Driver was aware of test but we used an engine flush.
5 Driver was aware of a test but also was told it was a mileage test with different tire pressures. This was also an engine flush car.
6 Driver was aware of the test but was again told it was a tire pressure test and received a gas additive which was really regular unleaded gasoline with a blue dye.

All vehicles were run with 40psi which is the usual pressure for the fleet.

Mileage varied a great deal between cars and is the result of very different driving styles. All vehicles improved their mileage numbers when the test began over the first 4 thanks of fuel. At the beginning the worst was 11 mpg and the best was 16 mpg during the 500 mile pre test run. The average improvement over four tanks was 3% from the actual start of testing.
The Scangage readings for gallons per hour at idle were recorded and all vehicles read .5 to .8 gph.
All cars were in good working order with odometer readings from 180k to 455k. The 80k vehicle was considered a new car by the drivers and the 455k an average vehicle that would be kept until its first major accident. Other than accidents these Crown Vics are kept until about 550k miles before being parked and used for parts. They are only put out at about 550 because there are rules about not using cars over 10 years old.

The point of this test is to see if Auto-Rx is worth the cost of the product and taking the time to add it at every PM (preventive maintenance)

The Auto-Rx vehicles (1,2,3) received 20 ounces and then 4 ounces every 3k oil change.
Cars 4 and 5 received a popular engine flush, one sold by dealers and the other available at your local parts store. The directions on the label were followed.
Car 6 received a very expensive gas additive. It costs about $1.88/gal (unleaded regular gas) plus the blue dye.

We did not do lab work and the test was aimed at taxi cab use so you dont need to take shots at the fact that is does not meet your needs. These cars see more hard use and more maintenance than you are likely to experience. We tried to get pictures under the valve covers but it did not happen. The mechanics messed up the camera, and we never recovered the pictures taken. Also no one volunteered a replacement camera.

Numbers at the start of testing.

1. 15mpg, .6pgh at idle
2. 13mpg, .7gph
3. 14mpg .5gph
4. 15mpg .6gph
5. 12mpg .6gph
6. 15mpg .5gph

Auto-Rx was added and 2 engine flushes done

3k PM, 4oz of Auto-Rx added to cars 1-3

Numbers at 6k miles, after the second PM
1. 17mpg, .5pgh at idle
2. 16mpg, .5gph
3. 15mpg .5gph
4. 15mpg .6gph
5. 12mpg .6gph
6. 15mpg .5gph

Numbers at 9k miles after third PM
1. 19mpg, .5gph at idle
2. 17mpg, .5gph
3. 16mpg .5gph
4. 14mpg .6gph
5. 13mpg .6gph
6. 16mpg .5gph

Numbers at 12k miles after fourth PM
1. 18mpg, .5gph at idle
2. 17mpg, .5gph
3. 16mpg .5gph
4. 14mpg .6gph
5. 13mpg .6gph
6. 16mpg .5gph

Notes on cars 1-3: Drivers reported idle readings often dipped to .4gph in the day time when a/c and lights were not on. We checked readings on several new caps (vehicles with under 200k miles on them) and did not see any .4gph readings. We checks several really new Crown Vics, Police cars and several had .4gph readings. Please note that all theses cabs in the fleet are X-police vehicles.)

I have not put the numbers into a spread sheet but that is coming as I get the time.

More comments:
It was decided that Auto-Rx is worth the cost and effort on mileage alone. We did look under valve covers and they went from dirty looking but not sludged to clean looking where you could see the actual color of the engine oil on the three Auto-Rx cars. The 2 cars that got flushed did look cleaner but did not have that clean look of fresh oil and left significant deposits behind. It was though that additional flushed would be needed so as a side test we took a seventh car and did three flushes over 9k miles. At 3k miles the results looks similar to cars 4 and 5. The next two flushes showed little or no improvement. The compression readings on this vehicle never changed from before the flush to after the third flush.
The untreated engines looked the same before and after.

The Auto-Rx treated engines all showed improved gas mileage and the mechanics commented that they ran smoother and the plugs looked cleaner. I am still putting compression numbers together but all Auto-Rx engines showed improved compression and the flushed and non-treated engines showed no change. This the mechanics said shows that the rings where actually being cleaned and allowed to better seal the combustion chamber. They said that this would not only improve performance but would help to protect the engine oil. The mechanics all agreed that this was the first product they thought lived up to its billing. They said they were skeptical at first but after this test they agree that Auto-Rx works.

Im sorry that Im late but Ive had some health problems and will be unable to supply all the data until after the holiday.




The taxi fleet test data has been extended out over a few more OCI's, also another test cab#8 was changed over from a lucas oil additive to ARX at the 15,000 mile mark. The results speak for themselves.

Results focused on gas mileage. Empty cells indicate mileage not achieved yet or not reported. Mileage is averaged over as close to 50 gallons starting on the first fill up after the PM..

Veh# 0K 3K 6K 9K 12K 15K 18K 21K 24K 27K 30K 33K 36K

1 15 17 19 19 18 18 18 17 17 18 18 18 18
2 13 16 17 17 17 15 18 18 17 18 16 18
3 14 15 15 16 16 15 14 15 15 15 15 15
4 15 15 15 14 14 11 14 15 15 13 12 15 15
5 12 12 12 13 13 11 12 12 13 10 11 11 13
6 15 15 15 16 16 14 16 13 15 16 15 14

2 vehicles were added, 7 and 8. Both vehicles received a Lucas oil additive at every oil change on the same PM schedule, that is 3k intervals.
Please note that at 15K miles on Vehicle 8, Auto-Rx was used, and Lucas was discontinued.
Notice the improvement.

7 12 11 12 10 11 12 12 10 9 10 11 12 10
8 14 15 15 14 13 13 15 15 16 16 16 17 16
***

...again, a ScanGauge was used in each vehicle. The readings were all off to some degree but consistent, that is repeatable and show trends, when is what we are looking for.

The maintenance dose was 4 ounces because these vehicles are in severe service and were a bit sludged up at the start of the testing. Otherwise 3 ounces would have been used.

Vehicles 1 and 2 showed the only significant increase in gas mileage. Compression figures are coming. I just have not collected them all from the 4 mechanics that worked on these vehicles.

A reminder about the vehicles
1. Auto-Rx, driver aware of additive
2 Same as 1
3 No Auto-Rx
4 No Auto-Rx, flush used
5 No Auto-Rx, flush used
6 No Auto-Rx, fake gas additive
7. No Auto-Rx Lucas every 3K
8 No Auto-Rx Lucas every 3K, Lucas stopped after 12K and Auto-Rx started at 13K

 

[ADFD1]

Originally Posted By: dbdeland

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Most of the posts on this string are not backed up with anything but zeal to try and degrade someone else's product. If you have any third party data from the products you promote (thats analysis etc not your beliefs ) contact Auto-Rx for free product first make sure you post it. Because real oil analysis people are going to analyze it.




Some posts show zeal (for and against A-rX), and others are testimony of average intelligent car enthusiasts posting their observations based on years of being around their cars. I tend to dismiss independent testing since they can be bias. Also the test tested A-rX and not MMO. For under $5/qt MMO does a wonderful job in the gas and oil, and many sincere individuals have stated so having no agenda. They are not working for the company or having a family member work for the company, or did some work for the company in another capacity.

Me I will take my dads word, the word of others I respect, and the proof that I have seen of just how well MMO works. Since I am not an agent of the company just a regular guy that likes tinkering, I have been impressed with what MMO has done for me, my family, friends and fellow Bitog members. I'm a tough sell for a $20+ 12 ounce engine cleaner, that might have to be used twice in certain applications doubling the cost. But I don't frown upon anyone who tries something and posts honest sincere testimony.

As a side note MMO has increased mpg's for many Bitog members too, and they've stated similar improvements in how their cars are running. JMO

AD

 

[Gary Allan]

Originally Posted By: buster
Seems like most people are disappointed with AutoRx when it comes to cleaning. ExxonMobil specifically states that their High Mileage oils, among other grades such as their 0w40, will clean up existing deposits and sludge.

http://www.mobil1.com.au/why/outstanding.aspx



For engines where heavy deposits and sludging exist, we recommend short initial oil change drain intervals of 3,000 miles as cleanup progresses.
[/quote]


Here's the fine print.

Quote:
In laboratory tests, we switched an American engine and European engine that had been running with conventional mineral oil to Mobil 1. Following 14,000 miles of driving with Mobil 1 at recommended oil drain intervals, the European vehicle returned to near showroom levels of cleanliness. The American vehicle experienced even greater improvement.


What was the M1 recommended drain interval to achieve this result. If it was most M1 ..that would be ONE. In this case was Mobil recommending the 3k OCI??

So, we can say that M1 over 4-5 oil changes (over a year for most users) can achieve the cleanliness level that we see in the photos?

I'm rather surprised that Mobil actually recommended anyone use their synthetics over a 3k period.


That is, can you imagine the roasting/flaming I would get if I posted that someone should change an Amsoil product @ 3k to clean up their engine? I'd have ZERO credibility as an honest vendor of my product and would be accused of taking unfair advantage of a sucker.

Naturally M1 would never do such a thing and is only bringing value to the consumer.

 

[greenaccord02]

That taxi test has been posted so many times it should qualify as spam.

 

[Oilpants]

What unit is gph????

I rememmber when slick 50 was the bea's knees!! Personaly I only use quality motor oil and don't seam to have any problems with my dirty engine.

Originally Posted By: dbdeland

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Most of the posts on this string are not backed up with anything but zeal to try and degrade someone else's product. If you have any third party data from the products you promote (thats analysis etc not your beliefs ) contact Auto-Rx for free product first make sure you post it. Because real oil analysis people are going to analyze it.

This fleet taxi test is as good as any test ever done and it is verifiable.





Taxi tests, six cars all Ford Crown Vics
Notes on tests:
All cars were driven by taxi drivers in regular service in good weather. Mileage was tested and hand calculated at the start and was compared with Scangage readings. The Scangage was used for all future readings. The errors were consistent, that is, if it was 4% off it was 4% off on every tank, for a given vehicle. Error rates ranged from 2% high to 7% high for different gages on different cars and since this test looks for trends not absolute values because we were using different vehicles the Scangage readings were accepted. One thing in our favor is that the same driver always drove the same car.
All vehicles were serviced every 3k miles and conventional 5w-30 oil was used. Each car was driven for 500 miles to get a base line for mileage and then the testing began.

Vehicles
1 & 2 received Auto-Rx and the driver was aware of the test. 3 Driver was aware of the mileage test but was told we were testing mileage with different tire pressure settings but did receive Auto-Rx..
4 Driver was aware of test but we used an engine flush.
5 Driver was aware of a test but also was told it was a mileage test with different tire pressures. This was also an engine flush car.
6 Driver was aware of the test but was again told it was a tire pressure test and received a gas additive which was really regular unleaded gasoline with a blue dye.

All vehicles were run with 40psi which is the usual pressure for the fleet.

Mileage varied a great deal between cars and is the result of very different driving styles. All vehicles improved their mileage numbers when the test began over the first 4 thanks of fuel. At the beginning the worst was 11 mpg and the best was 16 mpg during the 500 mile pre test run. The average improvement over four tanks was 3% from the actual start of testing.
The Scangage readings for gallons per hour at idle were recorded and all vehicles read .5 to .8 gph.
All cars were in good working order with odometer readings from 180k to 455k. The 80k vehicle was considered a new car by the drivers and the 455k an average vehicle that would be kept until its first major accident. Other than accidents these Crown Vics are kept until about 550k miles before being parked and used for parts. They are only put out at about 550 because there are rules about not using cars over 10 years old.

The point of this test is to see if Auto-Rx is worth the cost of the product and taking the time to add it at every PM (preventive maintenance)

The Auto-Rx vehicles (1,2,3) received 20 ounces and then 4 ounces every 3k oil change.
Cars 4 and 5 received a popular engine flush, one sold by dealers and the other available at your local parts store. The directions on the label were followed.
Car 6 received a very expensive gas additive. It costs about $1.88/gal (unleaded regular gas) plus the blue dye.

We did not do lab work and the test was aimed at taxi cab use so you dont need to take shots at the fact that is does not meet your needs. These cars see more hard use and more maintenance than you are likely to experience. We tried to get pictures under the valve covers but it did not happen. The mechanics messed up the camera, and we never recovered the pictures taken. Also no one volunteered a replacement camera.

Numbers at the start of testing.

1. 15mpg, .6pgh at idle
2. 13mpg, .7gph
3. 14mpg .5gph
4. 15mpg .6gph
5. 12mpg .6gph
6. 15mpg .5gph

Auto-Rx was added and 2 engine flushes done

3k PM, 4oz of Auto-Rx added to cars 1-3

Numbers at 6k miles, after the second PM
1. 17mpg, .5pgh at idle
2. 16mpg, .5gph
3. 15mpg .5gph
4. 15mpg .6gph
5. 12mpg .6gph
6. 15mpg .5gph

Numbers at 9k miles after third PM
1. 19mpg, .5gph at idle
2. 17mpg, .5gph
3. 16mpg .5gph
4. 14mpg .6gph
5. 13mpg .6gph
6. 16mpg .5gph

Numbers at 12k miles after fourth PM
1. 18mpg, .5gph at idle
2. 17mpg, .5gph
3. 16mpg .5gph
4. 14mpg .6gph
5. 13mpg .6gph
6. 16mpg .5gph

Notes on cars 1-3: Drivers reported idle readings often dipped to .4gph in the day time when a/c and lights were not on. We checked readings on several new caps (vehicles with under 200k miles on them) and did not see any .4gph readings. We checks several really new Crown Vics, Police cars and several had .4gph readings. Please note that all theses cabs in the fleet are X-police vehicles.)

I have not put the numbers into a spread sheet but that is coming as I get the time.

More comments:
It was decided that Auto-Rx is worth the cost and effort on mileage alone. We did look under valve covers and they went from dirty looking but not sludged to clean looking where you could see the actual color of the engine oil on the three Auto-Rx cars. The 2 cars that got flushed did look cleaner but did not have that clean look of fresh oil and left significant deposits behind. It was though that additional flushed would be needed so as a side test we took a seventh car and did three flushes over 9k miles. At 3k miles the results looks similar to cars 4 and 5. The next two flushes showed little or no improvement. The compression readings on this vehicle never changed from before the flush to after the third flush.
The untreated engines looked the same before and after.

The Auto-Rx treated engines all showed improved gas mileage and the mechanics commented that they ran smoother and the plugs looked cleaner. I am still putting compression numbers together but all Auto-Rx engines showed improved compression and the flushed and non-treated engines showed no change. This the mechanics said shows that the rings where actually being cleaned and allowed to better seal the combustion chamber. They said that this would not only improve performance but would help to protect the engine oil. The mechanics all agreed that this was the first product they thought lived up to its billing. They said they were skeptical at first but after this test they agree that Auto-Rx works.

Im sorry that Im late but Ive had some health problems and will be unable to supply all the data until after the holiday.




The taxi fleet test data has been extended out over a few more OCI's, also another test cab#8 was changed over from a lucas oil additive to ARX at the 15,000 mile mark. The results speak for themselves.

Results focused on gas mileage. Empty cells indicate mileage not achieved yet or not reported. Mileage is averaged over as close to 50 gallons starting on the first fill up after the PM..

Veh# 0K 3K 6K 9K 12K 15K 18K 21K 24K 27K 30K 33K 36K

1 15 17 19 19 18 18 18 17 17 18 18 18 18
2 13 16 17 17 17 15 18 18 17 18 16 18
3 14 15 15 16 16 15 14 15 15 15 15 15
4 15 15 15 14 14 11 14 15 15 13 12 15 15
5 12 12 12 13 13 11 12 12 13 10 11 11 13
6 15 15 15 16 16 14 16 13 15 16 15 14

2 vehicles were added, 7 and 8. Both vehicles received a Lucas oil additive at every oil change on the same PM schedule, that is 3k intervals.
Please note that at 15K miles on Vehicle 8, Auto-Rx was used, and Lucas was discontinued.
Notice the improvement.

7 12 11 12 10 11 12 12 10 9 10 11 12 10
8 14 15 15 14 13 13 15 15 16 16 16 17 16
***

...again, a ScanGauge was used in each vehicle. The readings were all off to some degree but consistent, that is repeatable and show trends, when is what we are looking for.

The maintenance dose was 4 ounces because these vehicles are in severe service and were a bit sludged up at the start of the testing. Otherwise 3 ounces would have been used.

Vehicles 1 and 2 showed the only significant increase in gas mileage. Compression figures are coming. I just have not collected them all from the 4 mechanics that worked on these vehicles.

A reminder about the vehicles
1. Auto-Rx, driver aware of additive
2 Same as 1
3 No Auto-Rx
4 No Auto-Rx, flush used
5 No Auto-Rx, flush used
6 No Auto-Rx, fake gas additive
7. No Auto-Rx Lucas every 3K
8 No Auto-Rx Lucas every 3K, Lucas stopped after 12K and Auto-Rx started at 13K

 

[greenaccord02]

Originally Posted By: Oilpants
What unit is gph????


Gallons per Hour.

Who here drives a taxi?

 

[Gary Allan]

Taxis serve as a convenient test platform that accumulate much usage over a short span. It makes the measurements more reliable and more easy to validate ..at least in terms of stuff like fuel and oil consumption.

The duty itself isn't severe beyond making an odometer a poor way to indicate usage. Fuel usage is a much more accurate way to measure things.

 

[Oilpants]

Is that measured at idol? I don't see how that data can be meaningfull if the involved car were not only idoling but also being driven isn't that the use of taxis???? And how do you measure feul consumption per hour any way?

Originally Posted By: greenaccord02
Originally Posted By: Oilpants
What unit is gph????


Gallons per Hour.

Who here drives a taxi?

 

[greenaccord02]

Originally Posted By: Oilpants
Is that measured at idol? I don't see how that data can be meaningfull if the involved car were not only idoling but also being driven isn't that the use of taxis???? And how do you measure feul consumption per hour any way?


Very good questions. Maybe this can help answer them:

You know, PP removes 46% of dirt and Synpower is 4X better than M1 and Edge is 8X better than M1... And AutoRx has good results in Taxi service (because it contains sheep extract).

What do all these data have in common? Two things:
1) They are part of a marketing scheme put out by their producers.
2) They mean nothing and have no value for the average driver. Taxi Drivers excluded...

Hope that helps

 

[ionbeam22]

Firstly,

idol = noun, a representation or symbol of an object of worship.

idle, idling = verb, to run at low power and often disconnected usually so that power is not used for useful work.

-----
Basic high school physics.

gallons per hour == fuel consumed vs hours of service.

If we assume that the energy content of gasoline is constant. Then gph is a better measure than mpg, since gallons per hour measures the amount of work (energy consumed) that the engine has performed during its time in service (power output).

 

[Oilpants]

Alrite professor you're grammer is better than mine I got it. I am interested in how you measure gallons per hour when you run a taxi buisness!!? Even if every vechile has an hour meter installed the car is also driven an indeterminate (sp???) distence per hour.

 

[greenaccord02]

Originally Posted By: ionbeam22

Basic high school physics.

gallons per hour == fuel consumed vs hours of service.

If we assume that the energy content of gasoline is constant. Then gph is a better measure than mpg, since gallons per hour measures the amount of work (energy consumed) that the engine has performed during its time in service (power output).


This only holds true if the car is running under a constant load at stable rpm. Your lecture goes to prove that the test means nothing and GPH is a poor way to measure efficiency in anything other than a generator.

...Basic common sense.

 

[ionbeam22]

Originally Posted By: Oilpants
Alrite professor you're grammer is better than mine I got it. I am interested in how you measure gallons per hour when you run a taxi buisness!!? Even if every vechile has an hour meter installed the car is also driven an indeterminate (sp???) distence per hour.


1. Each taxi is employed for a fixed shift.

2. You collect receipts from gas purchases, which list the amount of gas purchased.

gas purchased / time in service == gallons per hour

Otherwise you could collect this information with an engine logger which will report fuel send-out by the fuel pump/EFI system.

The whole point of this calculation is to take distance traveled out of the equation, and instead measure a more fundamental quantity which is work/power output.