Gutting 100lb interor, 12% taller gearbox, 8% larger circumfrence high pressure low rr tyres, leds allround. Only areomod was cutting rearbumper lip to get it out of the flow. Skimming head 0.2mm. Think friction mdified oil in engine and gearbox. Went from 39 mpg year average to 64. Record was 72 mpg During a 6k miles summer holliday trip.
My Holden Cruze 2.0 liter diesel ( Chevrolet Cruze Diesel 2.0 LUZ) has both grill shutters, rear spoiler, nearly full undertray and special tyres for better fuel mileage . It's a 6 speed automatic and is turbocharged. Julian is correct though, it's much harder to gain fuel mileage than performance. I'd love to throw some AirTabs on it to see if they'd help. Anyone notice that Julian's got 999 subs?? Congrats mate!! I'm going to throw him over to 1000 today!!
You are so right. It takes a certain attitude and just plain common sense. Tyres and tyre pressure, wheel alignment, clean air filters are all important. Then their is the biggest bastard. Your personal driving style. Avoid traffic congestions if possible. A smooth ride in stead of a jerky ride. Plan your trips. Reduce your speed to 60mph i.o. 70 will make all the difference.
😂🤣😂🤣 So true Julian. 80% would've been saying to themselves, "who's this boomer telling me I'm wrong?!" not knowing that you've been writing articles since before most of them were born. 👍 I'm forever a fan of the old $50 tech tips you used to do. 🤘
@@JulianEdgar No, thank you. The number of hours I read your articles in old FF&R's, working on the old Liberty RS was always monthly education for me as a teenager. 👍
My truck came without a fuel economy meter, so I added one. It plugs directly into the OBD port. The first one I got didn't last very long, but it was under warranty, and the manufacturer replaced it. The second one is still going strong years later. Anyways, a fuel economy meter is probably the best way to modify your driving habits. For the time I could spend doing other mods, I could just leave for work five minutes earlier every morning, and drive slower.
I agree Is some aspects but performance cars tend to have decent mileage because Improving preformance usually improves efficiency too. A wrx gets usually around 23mpg no matter how you drive it an impreza not so much one of my friends ae86 gets 50mpg Hwy because it weighs nothing has decent cd and very good thermal efficiency for the frontal area of the car and mass your accelerating accept for racecar levels of preformance fastcars are capable of high efficiency but usually that traded for power.
I would add one comment that I think shows how counterintuitive this whole topic can be. If you graph the thermal efficiency of any particular gasoline powered vehicle across various conditions (rpm, throttle opening, power output), then you graph fuel economy across these same conditions in operation over time, and then you compare them you will find that for the vast majority of your “operating cycle” your engine gets better fuel mileage when thermal efficiency is lower. That is not to say that lowering an engine’s thermal efficiency will help fuel mileage (that’s crazy talk), but in operation the things that help fuel mileage tend to reduce your operating thermal efficiency. THIS is where the next big improvement in fuel economy will come from. You’re right, it’s not easy but I’m working on it. If you can cruise on the highway at 40% thermal efficiency you can meet all existing and proposed emissions standards worldwide (if you can also control combustion temperature).
Hello Julian, my father had good results in improving mileage by making the gearing longer, and that way both increasing throttle opening and reducing the number of combustion events per elapsed mile. Most cars are geared rather too short due to the taste of most drivers, especially where I live. I also think it would be a very effective modification for driving in large flat regions like the Australian Outback. My father told me that aftermarket overdrive boxes were quite common in the UK in the 60s and 70s, and had considerable effect on mileage. Perhaps you have already tried such modifications, but if not, they might be interesting for some experiments.
Gearing of cars today is vastly longer than it was in the 1960s and 1970s. To give you an idea, in those days many cars reached the redline in top gear at maximum speed! Increasing gearing is very unlikely to give improved fuel economy now - not unless you want to trade-off a *lot* of top gear acceleration and hill-climbing performance.
@@JulianEdgar quite right, but what my father did was basically sacrifice those two attributes so that maximum speed would actually be achieved in fourth gear and any significant hill climbing would also require fourth. Cruise would be achieved in fifth gear using significant throttle openings and RPM as low as 1800. He managed an improvement of around 10% or a little more on mileage at the sacrifice of having to change between fourth and fifth more often on the highway. He intended to do other testing of a much more complex nature by using some kind of constantly variable transmission to try and achieve cruise in a way similar to a propeller aircraft where rpm/power is controlled by the load (propeller pitch), while keeping the throttle wide open. My father died not long after and didn't get around to it. Thanks for answering my comment, and congratulations on the videos and books.
@@RichardEricThompson Some cars cruise these days at even lower revs than that. One of my cars achieves top speed in manual third gear (out of 5). As I say, manufacturers are already specifying very high gearing, and to go even higher is likely to require major downsides in driveability - or, as is now often the case, require more ratios in an auto box. CVTs are now pretty common. Sounds like your father was on the right track but those techniques are now all widely used.
@@JulianEdgar yeah, probably takes a little longer for us to get those most recent powertrains here in Brazil. Although I was rather impressed with a new VW I drove here. It has a 1 litre turbo and 6 speed DSG, being capable of 18 km/l. It cruises at about 1500 RPM.
I'm looking to get an old Nissan Hardbody to see how fuel efficient I can get it. I'm looking to start with the under tray and some of the aero mods, then suspension/rolling resistance. I'm hoping that I can get a clean 40 mpg out of it.
Hi Julian, thank you for sharing your knowledge of the invisible arts. As fuel conscious as the OEMs are why don't we see more undertrays ? Are there any over heating concerns when fabricating a undertray? Where does the underhood heat vent? Thank you for your insights. Tim
Many current cars run undertrays, and quite a few have full undertrays. Other manufacturers carefully align the lower surfaces so that they form a de facto undertray. I've even seen rear transverse mufflers sloped upwards to form a diffuser (which will work if the floor is smooth enough head of it). Yes, completely blocking off the underside will reduce radiator airflow. (Simple pressure measurement will show by how much on any particular car.) However, many cars have engine bay air exits through the wheel wells, and if the exhaust is not covered by the undertray (my preference) then there will be an air exit out along the exhaust pipe. But if thinking of an undertray, always do a trial one first out of thin plywood or plastic sheet and monitor engine coolant temp and (if available) oil temp.
Awesome content, im very interested in all your books! If they were $30 each i would buy them all at once. do you have a method to order directly or is it all resellers? Dont use A/C or drive with windows down if you want better mpg and turn headlights off during the day if possible. Ive got a chevy sonic 1.4t (LUV motor OPEL design?) that im modifiying for performance+economy on the cheap. (im at 40 mpg!) i have k&n intake, 2.5 downpipe+highflow cat+nonbaffled muffler.(crush bent, less then $600 in all mods) headgasket was done under warrantee, probably .010" removed from cylinder head. this is all with near a full tank of fuel + the spare and some tools in the trunk. going to be adding undertray+european model grill shutters+lowering. also have a wideband sensor and tuning software waiting for install. as well as billet compressor wheel(4 grams lighter $30 from china, a junkyard motor is less then $500, i understand the risk). Should be right around 200hp, up from 140. (70% increase in power, hopefully 40+mpg!) Do any of your books talk about fuels? (im thinking about water+methanol, i understand the risks, just curious of efficiency/performance) THANK YOU! Do you take donations for your channel?
All my books are available through Amazon, and some are less than $30. I haven't written in a book about water/methanol injection, but I do have positive thoughts about it. I don't take donations - buy a book instead!
Julian, thanks for the video. One thing not mentioned is a front air dam. Is this an area to explore for a pick up truck? If so what would be an efficient design? Thank you for sharing your knowledge. Tim
Great video. I'm rebuilding a 1990s kit car, a GTM Rossa K3. It is mostly glass fibre with steel subframes front and rear to hold the mechanical bits. I am looking to incorpoate as much current tech and ideas as I can. A lot of the bits were stock, such as seats etc. so I will be looking at weight saving. It weighs about 800 Kg. You don't mention lightening the vehicle when trying to improve fuel economy. Your thoughts?
I don't mention weight reduction because in normal car modifications, it's very hard to lose weight. It looks like a fun car but from an aero perspective, it will have a large wake.
@@JulianEdgar Hi Julian, many thanks for your reply. I've just bought your new book and Optimising Car Performance so thanks. In the case of the K3 it's all MG Metro bits except for the centre tub, front and rear clamshells and hardtop which are all glassfibre. I'm looking to mould new clamshells and hardtop to improve airflow in line with your thinking. Also weight reduction; the heater is Metro, weighs 6.3Kg, modern one for a small 2 seater is 0.6 Kg, seats could save 10Kg and so on. I intend trying ideas and producing videos so that others can learn or laugh! We shall see. Again many thanks.
Great videos. Is there a contradiction between lowering ride height to reduce total drag and pushing more air under a car with a smooth undertray to achieve the same thing? Put another way, if I have a smooth undertray, should I not be pushing more air under the car by 'not' lowering the ride height?
Hi mate, nice video, if possible can you answer my question? In a manual transmission vehcial up shifting as soon as possible when possible is better to achieve higher mileage... What about a automatic ?changing shift patterns to shift sooner vs driving to the higet vacuum ?? Which one is better in you opinion??
@@ford351cleveland For economy, you want the transmission to be in as high a gear as possible. So, change-up at low revs and then keeping that high gear until kick-down.
Hello Julian, I have a Nissan 370z and thinking to put a bigger piping exhaust system so it saves fuel according to your video. Is this really true? Also where can I find more facts on this that it will save me more on fuel? Will any bigger exhaust be ok or is there one that you recommend? Thanks for the video Also about pulse and glide. So are you talking about when taking off at set of lights I should use wide open throttle (pedal to the metal all the way down) is more fuel efficient than if I were to take off slowly? I always thought taking off slowly saves more fuel
You would first measure exhaust back-pressure to determine if a larger exhaust is needed. Re pulse and glide, normally not full throttle (as usually the mixture is then enriched) but perhaps 80 per cent throttle. Moving away from a standstill, the longer it takes you, the likely less fuel you will use - pulse and glide is for maintaining a (near) constant speed.
Yes, I assume that you would start with the car that initially best meets your needs eg buy the manual version if the car is available with a manual gearbox. Swapping a manual for an auto if the car never came with a manual gearbox is a pretty big job!
I’ve got a 2000 Honda insight. I run the four yellow space savers. 100 PSI tires . Rs..20 Weight oil.Removed hybrid battery passenger seat got 165 pounds out of the car. Front bumper back bumper under tray took took off Muffler. Drive between 45-50miles an hour. Superheat the gas with copper tubing.Use to different orifice to control how much gas vapor goes into the injector fuel rail. Front grill block year round. Car gets over 100 miles per gallon easily. It’s all on insight central.net. I can allow so little gasoline into the motor it will not climb a small hill. But after I make the adjustments get everything right for my topical location the car set. The car has no power driving in a dirt front yard you have to leave it on the asphalt.
@@JulianEdgar I’ve been doing it for two years. Potenza R E 92 tires can handle 120 psi for two years straight no problems. Most of the gasoline that is lost it’s in the tires you don’t realize it until you go past 80 psi. And you don’t notice any gain in gasoline until you go high air pressure in tires.If I let my air pressure down to 44 psi which to me is a flat tire. The gasoline trick does not work because it would barely move the car. 50 mile an hour will turn into 30 mile an hour burning the same amount of gas. I put a 4 foot long boat tail on my car today I am Beyond happy with the results. All modifications expressed more when the tires are aired up to at least 90 psi.
I’ve got six different Honda insights. When I buy them a lot of the times there is a different brand name tire. No other tire brand that I have came across in the 14 size can withstand 70 psi. Potenza 92s are by far superior than any other tire as far as 100 psi goes. According to Google 30% of Parasitic loss comes from tires. Steel wheels and tracks on a train equals 1% loss. That’s why I got high pressure I’m trying to do like a train. I even took one front brake rotor off which is 7 1/2 pounds. That reduces rotation mass Almost like using a lite weight fly wheel. I watch people use those 1000 on up to $3000 bumblebee batteries. That go bad in less than five years. And you know they’re probably running 45 on up to 50 psi. With the additional 70 pounds of weight. It cost less money less weight to go 90 psi on up to 120 PSI. I got brave one day went up to 150 psi did not notice any difference in mileage. My tires are nine years old. They are beyond description tough. I only drive between three and 4000 miles a year in the car. I also have a Ford diesel truck also drive a semi truck a lot and serval John Deere tractors. The car is my hobby. They raised gasoline tax in Tennessee where I live to protest that I went and got a Honda Insight. That was in 2017. I thought they are already making us drive cars that get half the mileage they should be. That’s double taxation already and they raise the tax on us. I had never even heard of Honda insight until April 2017 bought my first car July 9, 2017.
I'm still learning and no one cares and Julian if you read this Im sure your well aware....but anyway auto manufacturers yeh they care about aeros after the fact, they have a shape and they optomise that shape aerodynamically within the boundries of styling budget and practicality. My 20 year old civic sedan was easy to get decent fuel economy gains from smooth hub caps, a rear spoiler front lip and lowering. Nowadays most cars probably have a lot more aero details already added and would be harder to gain and easier to go backwards.
Apart from decreasing rotational inertia (eg swapping heavy steel rims for lightweight alloy wheels) I've not seen any car lightening that doesn't either greatly degrade safety or comfort.
@@JulianEdgar Hi, so if safety and comfort went out the window, could you give a rough formula of how many pounds reduction it takes to get an additional mpg? Also is it across the board savings or only factor in stop and go city situations? Thanks!
You did not speak about the problem with the fuel. Pump fuel absorbs Air like a dry sponge absorbs water. If we remove the Entrained and Dissolved Air in the fuel,we will clean out dirt on the inside of the Engine,Restore lost fuel economy back to near the Manufacturers figures and stop Fuel Injector Cavitation from happening.
Refreshing to see an honest and accurate assessment.
Gutting 100lb interor, 12% taller gearbox, 8% larger circumfrence high pressure low rr tyres, leds allround. Only areomod was cutting rearbumper lip to get it out of the flow. Skimming head 0.2mm. Think friction mdified oil in engine and gearbox. Went from 39 mpg year average to 64. Record was 72 mpg During a 6k miles summer holliday trip.
My Holden Cruze 2.0 liter diesel ( Chevrolet Cruze Diesel 2.0 LUZ) has both grill shutters, rear spoiler, nearly full undertray and special tyres for better fuel mileage . It's a 6 speed automatic and is turbocharged. Julian is correct though, it's much harder to gain fuel mileage than performance. I'd love to throw some AirTabs on it to see if they'd help.
Anyone notice that Julian's got 999 subs?? Congrats mate!! I'm going to throw him over to 1000 today!!
Alex NutCasio you put Julian over the top! 1000 subs!
Edge separation not good on cruze
You are so right. It takes a certain attitude and just plain common sense. Tyres and tyre pressure, wheel alignment, clean air filters are all important. Then their is the biggest bastard. Your personal driving style. Avoid traffic congestions if possible. A smooth ride in stead of a jerky ride. Plan your trips. Reduce your speed to 60mph i.o. 70 will make all the difference.
😂🤣😂🤣 So true Julian. 80% would've been saying to themselves, "who's this boomer telling me I'm wrong?!" not knowing that you've been writing articles since before most of them were born. 👍
I'm forever a fan of the old $50 tech tips you used to do. 🤘
Thank you!
@@JulianEdgar No, thank you. The number of hours I read your articles in old FF&R's, working on the old Liberty RS was always monthly education for me as a teenager. 👍
Thank you for making this!
My truck came without a fuel economy meter, so I added one. It plugs directly into the OBD port. The first one I got didn't last very long, but it was under warranty, and the manufacturer replaced it. The second one is still going strong years later.
Anyways, a fuel economy meter is probably the best way to modify your driving habits.
For the time I could spend doing other mods, I could just leave for work five minutes earlier every morning, and drive slower.
I agree Is some aspects but performance cars tend to have decent mileage because Improving preformance usually improves efficiency too. A wrx gets usually around 23mpg no matter how you drive it an impreza not so much one of my friends ae86 gets 50mpg Hwy because it weighs nothing has decent cd and very good thermal efficiency for the frontal area of the car and mass your accelerating accept for racecar levels of preformance fastcars are capable of high efficiency but usually that traded for power.
I would add one comment that I think shows how counterintuitive this whole topic can be. If you graph the thermal efficiency of any particular gasoline powered vehicle across various conditions (rpm, throttle opening, power output), then you graph fuel economy across these same conditions in operation over time, and then you compare them you will find that for the vast majority of your “operating cycle” your engine gets better fuel mileage when thermal efficiency is lower. That is not to say that lowering an engine’s thermal efficiency will help fuel mileage (that’s crazy talk), but in operation the things that help fuel mileage tend to reduce your operating thermal efficiency. THIS is where the next big improvement in fuel economy will come from. You’re right, it’s not easy but I’m working on it. If you can cruise on the highway at 40% thermal efficiency you can meet all existing and proposed emissions standards worldwide (if you can also control combustion temperature).
Hello Julian, my father had good results in improving mileage by making the gearing longer, and that way both increasing throttle opening and reducing the number of combustion events per elapsed mile. Most cars are geared rather too short due to the taste of most drivers, especially where I live.
I also think it would be a very effective modification for driving in large flat regions like the Australian Outback.
My father told me that aftermarket overdrive boxes were quite common in the UK in the 60s and 70s, and had considerable effect on mileage.
Perhaps you have already tried such modifications, but if not, they might be interesting for some experiments.
Gearing of cars today is vastly longer than it was in the 1960s and 1970s. To give you an idea, in those days many cars reached the redline in top gear at maximum speed! Increasing gearing is very unlikely to give improved fuel economy now - not unless you want to trade-off a *lot* of top gear acceleration and hill-climbing performance.
@@JulianEdgar quite right, but what my father did was basically sacrifice those two attributes so that maximum speed would actually be achieved in fourth gear and any significant hill climbing would also require fourth. Cruise would be achieved in fifth gear using significant throttle openings and RPM as low as 1800. He managed an improvement of around 10% or a little more on mileage at the sacrifice of having to change between fourth and fifth more often on the highway.
He intended to do other testing of a much more complex nature by using some kind of constantly variable transmission to try and achieve cruise in a way similar to a propeller aircraft where rpm/power is controlled by the load (propeller pitch), while keeping the throttle wide open.
My father died not long after and didn't get around to it.
Thanks for answering my comment, and congratulations on the videos and books.
@@RichardEricThompson Some cars cruise these days at even lower revs than that. One of my cars achieves top speed in manual third gear (out of 5). As I say, manufacturers are already specifying very high gearing, and to go even higher is likely to require major downsides in driveability - or, as is now often the case, require more ratios in an auto box. CVTs are now pretty common. Sounds like your father was on the right track but those techniques are now all widely used.
@@JulianEdgar yeah, probably takes a little longer for us to get those most recent powertrains here in Brazil. Although I was rather impressed with a new VW I drove here. It has a 1 litre turbo and 6 speed DSG, being capable of 18 km/l. It cruises at about 1500 RPM.
I'm looking to get an old Nissan Hardbody to see how fuel efficient I can get it. I'm looking to start with the under tray and some of the aero mods, then suspension/rolling resistance. I'm hoping that I can get a clean 40 mpg out of it.
Hi Julian, thank you for sharing your knowledge of the invisible arts. As fuel conscious as the OEMs are why don't we see more undertrays ? Are there any over heating concerns when fabricating a undertray? Where does the underhood heat vent? Thank you for your insights. Tim
Many current cars run undertrays, and quite a few have full undertrays. Other manufacturers carefully align the lower surfaces so that they form a de facto undertray. I've even seen rear transverse mufflers sloped upwards to form a diffuser (which will work if the floor is smooth enough head of it). Yes, completely blocking off the underside will reduce radiator airflow. (Simple pressure measurement will show by how much on any particular car.) However, many cars have engine bay air exits through the wheel wells, and if the exhaust is not covered by the undertray (my preference) then there will be an air exit out along the exhaust pipe. But if thinking of an undertray, always do a trial one first out of thin plywood or plastic sheet and monitor engine coolant temp and (if available) oil temp.
Awesome content, im very interested in all your books! If they were $30 each i would buy them all at once. do you have a method to order directly or is it all resellers?
Dont use A/C or drive with windows down if you want better mpg and turn headlights off during the day if possible.
Ive got a chevy sonic 1.4t (LUV motor OPEL design?) that im modifiying for performance+economy on the cheap. (im at 40 mpg!)
i have k&n intake, 2.5 downpipe+highflow cat+nonbaffled muffler.(crush bent, less then $600 in all mods)
headgasket was done under warrantee, probably .010" removed from cylinder head.
this is all with near a full tank of fuel + the spare and some tools in the trunk.
going to be adding undertray+european model grill shutters+lowering.
also have a wideband sensor and tuning software waiting for install. as well as billet compressor wheel(4 grams lighter $30 from china, a junkyard motor is less then $500, i understand the risk).
Should be right around 200hp, up from 140. (70% increase in power, hopefully 40+mpg!)
Do any of your books talk about fuels? (im thinking about water+methanol, i understand the risks, just curious of efficiency/performance)
THANK YOU! Do you take donations for your channel?
All my books are available through Amazon, and some are less than $30. I haven't written in a book about water/methanol injection, but I do have positive thoughts about it. I don't take donations - buy a book instead!
Julian, thanks for the video. One thing not mentioned is a front air dam. Is this an area to explore for a pick up truck? If so what would be an efficient design? Thank you for sharing your knowledge. Tim
Better on any modern vehicle to add a full-length undertray.
Great video. I'm rebuilding a 1990s kit car, a GTM Rossa K3. It is mostly glass fibre with steel subframes front and rear to hold the mechanical bits. I am looking to incorpoate as much current tech and ideas as I can. A lot of the bits were stock, such as seats etc. so I will be looking at weight saving. It weighs about 800 Kg. You don't mention lightening the vehicle when trying to improve fuel economy. Your thoughts?
I don't mention weight reduction because in normal car modifications, it's very hard to lose weight. It looks like a fun car but from an aero perspective, it will have a large wake.
@@JulianEdgar Hi Julian, many thanks for your reply. I've just bought your new book and Optimising Car Performance so thanks. In the case of the K3 it's all MG Metro bits except for the centre tub, front and rear clamshells and hardtop which are all glassfibre. I'm looking to mould new clamshells and hardtop to improve airflow in line with your thinking. Also weight reduction; the heater is Metro, weighs 6.3Kg, modern one for a small 2 seater is 0.6 Kg, seats could save 10Kg and so on.
I intend trying ideas and producing videos so that others can learn or laugh! We shall see.
Again many thanks.
Great videos. Is there a contradiction between lowering ride height to reduce total drag and pushing more air under a car with a smooth undertray to achieve the same thing? Put another way, if I have a smooth undertray, should I not be pushing more air under the car by 'not' lowering the ride height?
For a normal road car, lower = better for both drag and lift. Below about 100mm clearance, it gets more complex.
@@JulianEdgar so, for a normal road car, the lower you can afford to go, the lower your drag and the greater your downforce. Is that correct?
Lower drag, yes. If a smooth underflor (basically, a full length undertray of the right shape), also lower lift, yes.
Hi mate, nice video, if possible can you answer my question?
In a manual transmission vehcial up shifting as soon as possible when possible is better to achieve higher mileage...
What about a automatic ?changing shift patterns to shift sooner vs driving to the higet vacuum ??
Which one is better in you opinion??
Same as with a manual car - upshift as early as possible and then hold that for as long as possible.
@@JulianEdgar i do not really understand your answer if you have time can you give a explanation please
@@ford351cleveland For economy, you want the transmission to be in as high a gear as possible. So, change-up at low revs and then keeping that high gear until kick-down.
Hello Julian, I have a Nissan 370z and thinking to put a bigger piping exhaust system so it saves fuel according to your video. Is this really true? Also where can I find more facts on this that it will save me more on fuel?
Will any bigger exhaust be ok or is there one that you recommend?
Thanks for the video
Also about pulse and glide. So are you talking about when taking off at set of lights I should use wide open throttle (pedal to the metal all the way down) is more fuel efficient than if I were to take off slowly?
I always thought taking off slowly saves more fuel
You would first measure exhaust back-pressure to determine if a larger exhaust is needed. Re pulse and glide, normally not full throttle (as usually the mixture is then enriched) but perhaps 80 per cent throttle. Moving away from a standstill, the longer it takes you, the likely less fuel you will use - pulse and glide is for maintaining a (near) constant speed.
@@JulianEdgar how do I measure back pressure? I live in Sydney by the way. It seems complicated?
Not hard. Covered in this book www.amazon.com.au/Optimising-Car-Performance-Modifications-aerodynamic-ebook/dp/B09Q6H3FDB
Awesome video but you forgot to mention changing from a automatic to a manual can make a huge difference
Yes, I assume that you would start with the car that initially best meets your needs eg buy the manual version if the car is available with a manual gearbox. Swapping a manual for an auto if the car never came with a manual gearbox is a pretty big job!
I’ve got a 2000 Honda insight. I run the four yellow space savers. 100 PSI tires . Rs..20 Weight oil.Removed hybrid battery passenger seat got 165 pounds out of the car. Front bumper back bumper under tray took took off Muffler. Drive between 45-50miles an hour.
Superheat the gas with copper tubing.Use to different orifice to control how much gas vapor goes into the injector fuel rail. Front grill block year round.
Car gets over 100 miles per gallon easily. It’s all on insight central.net.
I can allow so little gasoline into the motor it will not climb a small hill. But after I make the adjustments get everything right for my topical location the car set. The car has no power driving in a dirt front yard you have to leave it on the asphalt.
Hmm. I wouldn't modify my car like that but if you're happy with it, great!
@@JulianEdgar I’ve been doing it for two years. Potenza R E 92 tires can handle 120 psi for two years straight no problems.
Most of the gasoline that is lost it’s in the tires you don’t realize it until you go past 80 psi. And you don’t notice any gain in gasoline until you go high air pressure in tires.If I let my air pressure down to 44 psi which to me is a flat tire. The gasoline trick does not work because it would barely move the car. 50 mile an hour will turn into 30 mile an hour burning the same amount of gas.
I put a 4 foot long boat tail on my car today I am Beyond happy with the results. All modifications expressed more when the tires are aired up to at least 90 psi.
I’ve got six different Honda insights. When I buy them a lot of the times there is a different brand name tire. No other tire brand that I have came across in the 14 size can withstand 70 psi. Potenza 92s are by far superior than any other tire as far as 100 psi goes.
According to Google 30% of Parasitic loss comes from tires. Steel wheels and tracks on a train equals 1% loss. That’s why I got high pressure I’m trying to do like a train. I even took one front brake rotor off which is 7 1/2 pounds. That reduces rotation mass Almost like using a lite weight fly wheel.
I watch people use those 1000 on up to $3000 bumblebee batteries. That go bad in less than five years. And you know they’re probably running 45 on up to 50 psi. With the additional 70 pounds of weight. It cost less money less weight to go 90 psi on up to 120 PSI. I got brave one day went up to 150 psi did not notice any difference in mileage. My tires are nine years old. They are beyond description tough. I only drive between three and 4000 miles a year in the car. I also have a Ford diesel truck also drive a semi truck a lot and serval John Deere tractors. The car is my hobby. They raised gasoline tax in Tennessee where I live to protest that I went and got a Honda Insight. That was in 2017.
I thought they are already making us drive cars that get half the mileage they should be. That’s double taxation already and they raise the tax on us.
I had never even heard of Honda insight until April 2017 bought my first car July 9, 2017.
I'm still learning and no one cares and Julian if you read this Im sure your well aware....but anyway auto manufacturers yeh they care about aeros after the fact, they have a shape and they optomise that shape aerodynamically within the boundries of styling budget and practicality.
My 20 year old civic sedan was easy to get decent fuel economy gains from smooth hub caps, a rear spoiler front lip and lowering. Nowadays most cars probably have a lot more aero details already added and would be harder to gain and easier to go backwards.
Making the car lighter.
Apart from decreasing rotational inertia (eg swapping heavy steel rims for lightweight alloy wheels) I've not seen any car lightening that doesn't either greatly degrade safety or comfort.
@@JulianEdgar cool. Now I know where to put all my lead bricks that I need to keep, but takes up too much space in the closets at home 🤪🤪
@@JulianEdgar Hi, so if safety and comfort went out the window, could you give a rough formula of how many pounds reduction it takes to get an additional mpg? Also is it across the board savings or only factor in stop and go city situations? Thanks!
You did not speak about the problem with the fuel.
Pump fuel absorbs Air like a dry sponge absorbs water.
If we remove the Entrained and Dissolved Air in the fuel,we will clean out dirt on the inside of the Engine,Restore lost fuel economy back to near the Manufacturers figures and stop Fuel Injector Cavitation from happening.
Sounds like a crock to me.
@JulianEdgar fill up a large clear plastic bottle with pump fuel.....the problem will be easy to see.
What else would cause Fuel Injector Cavitation?
What fuel injection cavitation? I have never even heard of it.