Businessweek Article

Interesting...

Very interesting - tells you why the us carmakers are in so much trouble.

"Taxes aimed at commercial trucks mean diesel costs anywhere from 40 cents to $1 more per gallon than gasoline"

I don't think so!!!!!

US average per gallon of gasoline is 47 cents.
US average per gallon of diesel is 54 cents.

I wish people would cut the lying, BS crap.

Congrats to Ford...seems to be a pretty nice vehicle!

If it's not the taxes, why does diesel cost so much more then?

Your friends in the industry, Bill.

This is something that has annoyed me for a while. As far as I understand diesel is much cheaper to produce. More diesel can be produced per barrel of crude and its cheaper/eaiser to refine than gas. If all this is true why is diesel so much more per gallon?? I do know that the ultra low sulfer diesel has an extra refining step that will increase the cost, but I heard that this is minimal. Can anyone shed some light or verify/dispute any of my babble?

AJ

There are several individuals who are runnung this device on their trucks in my neighbothood. Pretty amazing results too.

Showed me the bottle set up on his 1997 F150 Ford with the 5.7 L V-8 and his added underdash computer (not part of this device) that was tracking his miles. He had just averaged 50.1 mpg in city driving on his last tank. He said the OBD I vehicles were easier than the OBD II as you did not need to trick the oxegen sensor. Interesting [censored].


http://www.water4gas.com

The cost to refine to the new EPA standards is not excessive, but does require a refinery capable of the modifications. Because they could not be modified, many of the old refineries were shut down. That pinches the existing capacity and makes it harder to obtain enough.

As for the issues about Ford not bringing the engine here, they would make that call if and when the demand is seen as meeting the additional costs. It does not mention two things. Even without the diesel engines, the cars are coming here. What type of mileage will the cars get with a gas engine? And how much weight will it add to the cars to make them compliant with US requirements?

I watched an interesting program a while back on The History Channel (I think) about this very subject, i.e. "why not just refine more diesel per bbl?"

The answer went something like this: "Our refineries have been designed/built to refine x percent of gasoline per bbl, x percent of diesel per bbl, x percent of lubricating oil per bbl ... and so on down the line. They were designed/built to meet gasoline/diesel demand ratios during a that era (in which they were built).

Don't quote me, but it seems like it was 20 gal. of gasoline, and 8 gallons of diesel, are refined from a bbl of crude (or some similar ratio).

The conclusion presented was that it would be so complicated/expensive to alter the refining process (to manufacture more diesel/less gasoline per bbl) that the costs of both fuels would be driven even higher. That, plus said refinery would be off line for a long time, further driving costs up. Seemed to make sense to me.

Reporting from best of memory, usual disclaimers.

Been seeing ads like that in comic books and Popular Mechanics since I was a kid. Most people have the attitude, "it must work or they couldn't say those things" Yeah, right, that's why they still advertise male-enhancement pills and bustline-increasing lotions.

If you could really triple your F-150's gas mileage with water, it would be legislated into action and would be on every govt on the road as well.

But I still wish it was true.

WHOA, the article says that he drives his semi a 1000 miles a day
dot rules are only 10 hrs driving so this thing lets him run a 100mph?? I DON'T THINK SO!!!!!!!
I had a '95 freightliner that got 5 1/2 to 6 mph if I didn't run it hard.
woosterken

From the article:



If this vehicle hit the market tomorrow, how many of us (BABC regulars) would buy one in the next yr? I think we would take a look at it, say it is great for someone else, and continue driving what we have because the pain isn't THAT great yet.

How many Honda Fit, Corolla drivers are there here? You know, nice cars of about this size that with a 5 spd and moderate driving will give you close to 40 mpg highway. If I were buying right now, Fuel prices might cause me to buy a 4 cyl. Camry vs a V6. But I'm not in the market for a Yaris.....know what I mean?

I think that we as a country are going to be slower at embracing the idea of moving down a size or two to smaller vehicles.

The real truth is that fuel mileage improvement is due to small refinements to the existing process, not miracle products. An example is the new 4.5 diesel that GM is bringing out for their pickups. It is an impressive feat of enginering, but no miracle. The engineers got creative and removed the intake from the inside of the V. That allowed them to have a very short run into the turbocharger. And then to get the most efficient combustion cleanup, they mounted the catalytic converter directly to the turbo. Then with all the heat between the camshafts, they routed the air intake through the camshaft covers. This reduced the number of components significantly and produced a more efficient engine.

Actually, I don't think the auto industry, controlled by big oil, would do anything to promote this or any other device that extended the range on a tank. The jury is still out on this for me, I have since talked to about six other individuals here that are having the same kind of results. There is a small grass roots 'action' group here testing this and variations of this device for results.

The common thread seems to be "Yes it does seem to work, the big drawback is that it is a hassel filling the jar with distilled water and baking soda at each tank. and you have this weird contraption attached to your motor that seems to screw with your OBD computer". Most seem to think as gas got to around $4.50 here, it would get broader support, and no one knows what the long range effect might be on engine parts.

If you read the history on this device, it is not anything new. They apparently used these on Bombers during WW2 to get extended range on bombing runs. It is pretty interesting science. But as most have said, probably too much hassel if gas isn't costing more than beer......

The bustline-increasing lotion worked for me.....