1400 Kms or 875 Miles on One Full Tank of Gas
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, CA, USA
1400 Kms or 875 Miles on One Full Tank of Gas
Oil company in the Philippines made a challenge to beat the official record set on fuel economy of 1114 kms. The winning team went as far as 1400 kms or 875 miles on a full tank of gas on a 1.3L Jazz. 
http://www.petronfuelsuccess.c....aspx
http://www.petronfuelsuccess.c....aspx
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
From: San Jose, CA
Re: 1400 Kms or 875 Miles on One Full Tank of Gas (pogidawgie)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by pogidawgie »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Oil company in the Philippines made a challenge to beat the official record set on fuel economy of 1114 kms. The winning team went as far as 1400 kms or 875 miles on a full tank of gas on a 1.3L Jazz.
...produces more energy to maximize engine power...[/url]</TD></TR></TABLE>
What kind of bullshit IS that? That comes out to 87.5 mpg assuming a 10 gallon tank. Now the article doesn't say how much gas was in the car nor does it say what kind of fuel economy the car actually got. One thing's for sure is that a gallon of gas has about 18,000 BTU of energy in it. If anyone tells you their gas produces more energy, hence the quote in the article, they're full of crap. You can make it burn slower, add crap to it, but you can't squeeze more energy out of a drop of oil. You can modify the engine slightly for better economy at the expense of worse emissions but it doesn't appear that was done. You can also pump tires up to a higher pressure to reduce rolling resistance but that'll only get you a few more mpg.
Anyone remember Prolong oil additive? They ran infommercials about 10 years ago where they drained the oil from engines to prove their Prolong. Funny thing is someone called em on that test, ran their own test where they published test conditions and results, and found... bullshit. They sued the and company is now out of business.
I read the web site about this fuel and they don't provide any specifications about their product. Keeping things vague is their road to success like Prolong. Why don't they do a real world test - something akin to the US EPA method for determining gas mileage? Is their product clean enough to be used in Europe or California? Is it producible?
Until those questions are answered I label this a bunch of bullshit.
...produces more energy to maximize engine power...[/url]</TD></TR></TABLE>
What kind of bullshit IS that? That comes out to 87.5 mpg assuming a 10 gallon tank. Now the article doesn't say how much gas was in the car nor does it say what kind of fuel economy the car actually got. One thing's for sure is that a gallon of gas has about 18,000 BTU of energy in it. If anyone tells you their gas produces more energy, hence the quote in the article, they're full of crap. You can make it burn slower, add crap to it, but you can't squeeze more energy out of a drop of oil. You can modify the engine slightly for better economy at the expense of worse emissions but it doesn't appear that was done. You can also pump tires up to a higher pressure to reduce rolling resistance but that'll only get you a few more mpg.
Anyone remember Prolong oil additive? They ran infommercials about 10 years ago where they drained the oil from engines to prove their Prolong. Funny thing is someone called em on that test, ran their own test where they published test conditions and results, and found... bullshit. They sued the and company is now out of business.
I read the web site about this fuel and they don't provide any specifications about their product. Keeping things vague is their road to success like Prolong. Why don't they do a real world test - something akin to the US EPA method for determining gas mileage? Is their product clean enough to be used in Europe or California? Is it producible?
Until those questions are answered I label this a bunch of bullshit.
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
From: San Jose, CA
Re: 1400 Kms or 875 Miles on One Full Tank of Gas (Fitfokker)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Fitfokker »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">...gallon of gas has about 18,000 BTU of energy in it...</TD></TR></TABLE>
In case you were listening... I meant 18,000 BTU/lb not per gallon.
In case you were listening... I meant 18,000 BTU/lb not per gallon.
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Re: 1400 Kms or 875 Miles on One Full Tank of Gas (Fitfokker)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Fitfokker »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
What kind of bullshit IS that? That comes out to 87.5 mpg assuming a 10 gallon tank. Now the article doesn't say how much gas was in the car nor does it say what kind of fuel economy the car actually got. One thing's for sure is that a gallon of gas has about 18,000 BTU of energy in it. If anyone tells you their gas produces more energy, hence the quote in the article, they're full of crap. You can make it burn slower, add crap to it, but you can't squeeze more energy out of a drop of oil. You can modify the engine slightly for better economy at the expense of worse emissions but it doesn't appear that was done. You can also pump tires up to a higher pressure to reduce rolling resistance but that'll only get you a few more mpg.
Anyone remember Prolong oil additive? They ran infommercials about 10 years ago where they drained the oil from engines to prove their Prolong. Funny thing is someone called em on that test, ran their own test where they published test conditions and results, and found... bullshit. They sued the and company is now out of business.
I read the web site about this fuel and they don't provide any specifications about their product. Keeping things vague is their road to success like Prolong. Why don't they do a real world test - something akin to the US EPA method for determining gas mileage? Is their product clean enough to be used in Europe or California? Is it producible?
Until those questions are answered I label this a bunch of bullshit.</TD></TR></TABLE>
What can I say. I don't work for this oil company, merely reporting an amazing feat.
My friends in Manila witness it first hand since they went along the whole trip in another vehicle that was not part of the challenge. The feat can be achieved by skillfull driving and a well-maintained vehicle. The Jazz had a standard 42liters or roughly 11 gal. fuel tank. They were filled up at the start of the trip and sealed by neutral parties representing the auto clubs in Manila. Of course, Petron, the gas company will milk these achievements by claiming that their fuel is responsible for stretching the fuel economy.
For the techies, these are what Petron claims.
One of Xtra Unleaded’s abilities is its knack for becoming environment-friendly, thanks to a light virgin naphtha isomerization process (the first and only in the country) that lowers aromatics and benzene content. This makes Xtra Unleaded comply with the Clean Air Act as well as stringent Euro IV emission standards.
Xtra Unleaded also features gas saving boosters that promote a more complete combustion for better fuel economy. These boosters act as fuel conditioners which create a catalytic reaction and enable more oxygen to combine with carbon molecules, essential for a more complete burn within the piston walls. Also, these boosters make this unleaded gasoline burn longer with more uniformity, thus maximizing engine power.
There were no "magic" done to these vehicles. They were all stock Honda Jazz with a 1.3L idsi engine. The teams did not turn on their a/c for the whole trip. They kept their speed to around 50 kph and were never in any of the notorious Philippine traffic jams. I was also informed that they put the gears in neutral during steep decents (which I will not recommend for normal driving). It's the drivers and their well-maintained vehicles who made possible these records.
If it was just one vehicle doing 1400 kms, then I would also doubt it. But for 6 vehicles to do over 1350 kms and witnessed by the news media and auto club officials? I don't think that is BS.
You can checkout the complete article at this site. http://www.petronfuelsuccess.c....aspx
What kind of bullshit IS that? That comes out to 87.5 mpg assuming a 10 gallon tank. Now the article doesn't say how much gas was in the car nor does it say what kind of fuel economy the car actually got. One thing's for sure is that a gallon of gas has about 18,000 BTU of energy in it. If anyone tells you their gas produces more energy, hence the quote in the article, they're full of crap. You can make it burn slower, add crap to it, but you can't squeeze more energy out of a drop of oil. You can modify the engine slightly for better economy at the expense of worse emissions but it doesn't appear that was done. You can also pump tires up to a higher pressure to reduce rolling resistance but that'll only get you a few more mpg.
Anyone remember Prolong oil additive? They ran infommercials about 10 years ago where they drained the oil from engines to prove their Prolong. Funny thing is someone called em on that test, ran their own test where they published test conditions and results, and found... bullshit. They sued the and company is now out of business.
I read the web site about this fuel and they don't provide any specifications about their product. Keeping things vague is their road to success like Prolong. Why don't they do a real world test - something akin to the US EPA method for determining gas mileage? Is their product clean enough to be used in Europe or California? Is it producible?
Until those questions are answered I label this a bunch of bullshit.</TD></TR></TABLE>
What can I say. I don't work for this oil company, merely reporting an amazing feat.
My friends in Manila witness it first hand since they went along the whole trip in another vehicle that was not part of the challenge. The feat can be achieved by skillfull driving and a well-maintained vehicle. The Jazz had a standard 42liters or roughly 11 gal. fuel tank. They were filled up at the start of the trip and sealed by neutral parties representing the auto clubs in Manila. Of course, Petron, the gas company will milk these achievements by claiming that their fuel is responsible for stretching the fuel economy.
For the techies, these are what Petron claims.
One of Xtra Unleaded’s abilities is its knack for becoming environment-friendly, thanks to a light virgin naphtha isomerization process (the first and only in the country) that lowers aromatics and benzene content. This makes Xtra Unleaded comply with the Clean Air Act as well as stringent Euro IV emission standards.
Xtra Unleaded also features gas saving boosters that promote a more complete combustion for better fuel economy. These boosters act as fuel conditioners which create a catalytic reaction and enable more oxygen to combine with carbon molecules, essential for a more complete burn within the piston walls. Also, these boosters make this unleaded gasoline burn longer with more uniformity, thus maximizing engine power.
There were no "magic" done to these vehicles. They were all stock Honda Jazz with a 1.3L idsi engine. The teams did not turn on their a/c for the whole trip. They kept their speed to around 50 kph and were never in any of the notorious Philippine traffic jams. I was also informed that they put the gears in neutral during steep decents (which I will not recommend for normal driving). It's the drivers and their well-maintained vehicles who made possible these records.
If it was just one vehicle doing 1400 kms, then I would also doubt it. But for 6 vehicles to do over 1350 kms and witnessed by the news media and auto club officials? I don't think that is BS.
You can checkout the complete article at this site. http://www.petronfuelsuccess.c....aspx
Trending Topics
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Re: 1400 Kms or 875 Miles on One Full Tank of Gas (Fitfokker)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Fitfokker »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
What kind of bullshit IS that? That comes out to 87.5 mpg assuming a 10 gallon tank. Now the article doesn't say how much gas was in the car nor does it say what kind of fuel economy the car actually got. One thing's for sure is that a gallon of gas has about 18,000 BTU of energy in it. If anyone tells you their gas produces more energy, hence the quote in the article, they're full of crap. You can make it burn slower, add crap to it, but you can't squeeze more energy out of a drop of oil. You can modify the engine slightly for better economy at the expense of worse emissions but it doesn't appear that was done. You can also pump tires up to a higher pressure to reduce rolling resistance but that'll only get you a few more mpg.
Anyone remember Prolong oil additive? They ran infommercials about 10 years ago where they drained the oil from engines to prove their Prolong. Funny thing is someone called em on that test, ran their own test where they published test conditions and results, and found... bullshit. They sued the and company is now out of business.
I read the web site about this fuel and they don't provide any specifications about their product. Keeping things vague is their road to success like Prolong. Why don't they do a real world test - something akin to the US EPA method for determining gas mileage? Is their product clean enough to be used in Europe or California? Is it producible?
Until those questions are answered I label this a bunch of bullshit.</TD></TR></TABLE>
there is no bullshit here but bullshit driving. to achieve this kind of mileage is not what u would do in a real world. just to name a few;
no A/C w/windows up for aerodynamics
turn off engine on stoplight if they feel it will last more than a min.
push the car on a queue to toll booth and other traffic situation.
drive dangerously slow or fast not stepping on the brakes.
turn of engine on downhill and sometimes put gear in nuetral.
remove all non essentials on the car. spare tires/ a/c evap, compressor. sunvisor etc.
if u are willing to drive that way im sure youll get similar mileage.
i have joined an economy run similar to this and there is no magic and no fun.
What kind of bullshit IS that? That comes out to 87.5 mpg assuming a 10 gallon tank. Now the article doesn't say how much gas was in the car nor does it say what kind of fuel economy the car actually got. One thing's for sure is that a gallon of gas has about 18,000 BTU of energy in it. If anyone tells you their gas produces more energy, hence the quote in the article, they're full of crap. You can make it burn slower, add crap to it, but you can't squeeze more energy out of a drop of oil. You can modify the engine slightly for better economy at the expense of worse emissions but it doesn't appear that was done. You can also pump tires up to a higher pressure to reduce rolling resistance but that'll only get you a few more mpg.
Anyone remember Prolong oil additive? They ran infommercials about 10 years ago where they drained the oil from engines to prove their Prolong. Funny thing is someone called em on that test, ran their own test where they published test conditions and results, and found... bullshit. They sued the and company is now out of business.
I read the web site about this fuel and they don't provide any specifications about their product. Keeping things vague is their road to success like Prolong. Why don't they do a real world test - something akin to the US EPA method for determining gas mileage? Is their product clean enough to be used in Europe or California? Is it producible?
Until those questions are answered I label this a bunch of bullshit.</TD></TR></TABLE>
there is no bullshit here but bullshit driving. to achieve this kind of mileage is not what u would do in a real world. just to name a few;
no A/C w/windows up for aerodynamics
turn off engine on stoplight if they feel it will last more than a min.
push the car on a queue to toll booth and other traffic situation.
drive dangerously slow or fast not stepping on the brakes.
turn of engine on downhill and sometimes put gear in nuetral.
remove all non essentials on the car. spare tires/ a/c evap, compressor. sunvisor etc.
if u are willing to drive that way im sure youll get similar mileage.
i have joined an economy run similar to this and there is no magic and no fun.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
From: gotham, gaseous, waffles
ekek888 is right, that aint normal driving anymore without the airconditioners and driving below the allowable speed. However, the 1.3 honda iDsi engine is quite promising when it comes to fuel economy, you just have to drive it very very very steadily.
to my surprise, i had the chance to win in their "city" ecorun contest last year covering the horrible manila traffic on a saturday morning. covered about 43 or so kilometers and coming home with at least 26km/ltr.
had a chance too to drive between gas stations at the NLEX, filled the tank to the brim, drove off with airconditioners on, driving steadily for 80km/hr, decelerating to 60km/hr to change lanes and accelerating bach to 80kh/hr until i reached the next gas station to arrive at a 28.5km/ltr fuel consumption on a late saturday morning drive.
to my surprise, i had the chance to win in their "city" ecorun contest last year covering the horrible manila traffic on a saturday morning. covered about 43 or so kilometers and coming home with at least 26km/ltr.
had a chance too to drive between gas stations at the NLEX, filled the tank to the brim, drove off with airconditioners on, driving steadily for 80km/hr, decelerating to 60km/hr to change lanes and accelerating bach to 80kh/hr until i reached the next gas station to arrive at a 28.5km/ltr fuel consumption on a late saturday morning drive.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,778
Likes: 1
From: BeaveRun, PA, USA
Re: (mrDFWmechanic)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mrDFWmechanic »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">topgear did the same thing making a 500 mile trip from town and back in some TT audi i believe on one tank of gas. very intersting episode</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yep. But didn't the Audi run out of gas just shy of their mark?
Yep. But didn't the Audi run out of gas just shy of their mark?
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
From: oxnard, ca, usa
Re: (susuking)
The vehicle driven in that episode was an Audi A8 not an Audi TT. He did make it the gas station, he only stated on camera he didn't think he was going to make it. I don't remember the exact numbers but he achieved over 6 mpg higher than the sticker claimed. He kept windows up the whole time, no AC, and absolutly no electronic devices (cell phone charger, windshied wipers, radio).
Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,338
Likes: 0
Re: (oxnardk20a2)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by oxnardk20a2 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The vehicle driven in that episode was an Audi A8 not an Audi TT. He did make it the gas station, he only stated on camera he didn't think he was going to make it. I don't remember the exact numbers but he achieved over 6 mpg higher than the sticker claimed. He kept windows up the whole time, no AC, and absolutly no electronic devices (cell phone charger, windshied wipers, radio). </TD></TR></TABLE>
no, he did use the radio because it is found that the radio uses almost no power, but he kept the heat off until it rained and fogged the inside of the car up. Oh, and it wasn't 500, it was 800 miles.
here is the episode...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...0audi
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...0audi
no, he did use the radio because it is found that the radio uses almost no power, but he kept the heat off until it rained and fogged the inside of the car up. Oh, and it wasn't 500, it was 800 miles.
here is the episode...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...0audi
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...0audi
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
B18CXr
Acura RSX DC5 & Honda Civic EP3
29
Aug 13, 2005 05:48 PM
