Bakari Kafele

Marcos Buenijo wrote:
The low rated power of your engine illustrates the dynamic I discussed. In other words, your post reinforces my argument.

Oh for sure! I didn't mean to imply I was contradicting you, I totally 100% agree with your first post. My personal example not withstanding (the truck was made in 1983), I actually meant to reinforce what you were saying and then some.

For example, on the efficiency issue: when discussing internal combustion engines, the efficiency reported is generally that of the engine alone. Most gasoline engines are only 25% efficient, meaning they lose 75% of the energy contained in the fuel to heat from the internal friction force of turning the engine itself.
Drive train losses, power accessory loses (alternator, power steering, A/C, etc) are ON TOP of that. Then, rolling resistance and aerodynamic losses are on top of that.
Once you factor in that a car typically weighs 2000lbs or so, and a driver weighs maybe 200lbs - which means most of the energy that finally makes it to moving the vehicle is moving the mass of steel more than the driver - you are left with approximately 1% of the energy in the fuel being used to actually transport the person.
Making it one of the most wasteful ways to get from one place to another that one could imagine.

Marcos Buenijo wrote:

paul wheaton wrote:Next, I'm kinda curious: would it not be possible to have a MUCH smaller engine and get far superior mileage? Granted, there would be less acceleration power, but this guy is already doing lots of stuff to go easy on acceleration.

Yes, that is true. Don't listen to anyone who argues otherwise.

It is true for most modern cars sold in America. It is not true in my truck. My truck is 5500lbs empty, and up to 10,000lbs full, but has less than 170 horsepower peak. Its not quite as slow in acceleration as a fully loaded semi-truck, but, unlike newer cars and trucks, it is not overpowered either. Today the average car - not truck, not sportscar - has 225HP. For trucks its somewhere around 350HP. This is one of the largest reasons why US mpg standards are so ridiculously terrible compared to the rest of the world. Modern cars are not built for "adequate" performance. They are all built to be high performance racing machines - even the station wagons, minivans and compact commute cars. And we can't blame the auto manufactures alone; they build more of whatever consumers buy. They stopped producing the 3 cylinder, 50mpg Geo Metro and the 2 seater original Honda Insight because they weren't selling.

You have the right idea in your calculations, but an engine that is 25% efficient isn't just losing 25% of its energy to internal forces, it is losing 75%. The efficiency % is the amount of power actually produced from the fuel, not the amount of loss. So its actually much worse than your example implies.
You are correct that having a hybrid engine helps mainly because it allows you to have a smaller engine and use it at higher load. This is also the reason that the pulse and glide driving technique works (despite the fact that it taks more energy to accelerate than it does to stay at a constant speed). Pulse and Glide driving allows you the advantage of minimizing engine on time (allowing you to save that 75% of frictional and pumping losses), while running the engine under higher load when it is on - and unlike a hybrid system, it is entirely free (disclaimer - don't try this at home unless you know what you are doing. search ecomodder.com for details)

tel jetson wrote:Bakari,
how difficult was the steering conversion? I'm suffering the usual Ford power steering obnoxiousness, and manual steering would suit me just fine. I just don't really know what's involved in installing a manual gear.

It all depends on your car.

I can speak for an older large truck, and a modern compact Toyota.
I suspect that many (maybe most) vehicles will be similar to one, the other, or some combination thereof, but I am not a mechanic or an expert on the topic.
In either case I definitely recommending buying or borrowing the Chilton and/or Haynes manual for your specific car (will easily pay for itself it not-going-to-the-mechanic over the years)

I'll start with the modern one, because it was simpler

2006 Toyota Matrix:
Most modern cars don't come with manual steering as an option. In other words, power steering comes standard on even the base model.
(This is the stupidist and most wasteful thing that is nearly universal that I can think of, but I'm going to try not to rant to the converted)
This means it may be difficult to find a manual steering gear, and it may be impossible.
(A steering gear meant to be manual has a lower gear ratio, so you turn the wheel further to make the drive wheels move a given amount. Since with power steering the engine does all the work for you, the manufactures make smaller steering wheels which don't have to turn as far to turn the drive wheels)

On the plus side, compact to mid-size cars are really pretty easy to steer even when using an unpowered power steering gear. The only time you will really notice it is when parallel parking, just like with a dedicated manual. I can't speak for how easy or hard it may be to steer a full-size car or SUV with an unpowered power steering gear.

The fact that a manual gear compatible with a modern car may be difficult or impossible to find is actually what makes the process easier.

Step 1: Find the power steering pump. Easiest way is to start from the point you fill the fluid, and trace the lines.
Step 2: Disconnect all the lines going to and from it. Fluid will drain out. Be prepared to catch the fluid in a container for proper disposal (mechanics, autoparts stores, and recycling centers will accept automotive fluids for free)
Step 3: Trace the lines that come off the pump and go downwards toward the steering axle. Disconnect and drain those, as above.
Step 4: Once (almost) all the fluid is drained, reconnect the lines so that dirt doesn't get in there. You won't get 100% of the fluid out, which is a good thing because it lubricates the steering gear. Ideally you should loop the two ports of the steering gear directly to each other.
Step 5: Find a belt diagram for your engine. If you can't find one, draw your own. Make note of which pulley runs what (esp the power steering pump) as well as which direction they go. That last part is important!
Step 6: Figure out how a belt could hypothetically run across the pulleys while skipping the power steering pump, and nothing else (except any idler pulleys, if that works out better). If it has individual V-belts, this is pretty easy. If it uses a serpentine belt, this can be tricky, depending on the layout of the particular engine. You may have to skip the tensioner (I did). Trace out a path that will make everything turn the correct direction while skipping the PS pump. Measure the distance around the pulleys in the new set-up you just traced - use a or belt or any other long flat flexible thing and actually wrap it around. This measurement needs to be accurate. Measure in millimeters, to the millimeter.
Step 7: Go to the local autoparts place, and give them that measurement, along with the number of ribs on the original belt. (If the PS pump had its own separate V-belt, you can skip this step)
Step 8: Somehow get the new belt in place. This was neither easy nor fun. And I had to go back to exchange the belt twice because it wasn't the exact right size. But it did work out eventually.
Step 9: Enjoy your gas savings and (extremely minor) arm work-out

Seems like a lot when I write it out, but it was all a few hours (annoying and moderately stressful) work
In fact, my girlfriend (its her car) - whose previous auto machine experience was one oil change and one flat tire change - did the first 4 steps on her own (I was out of state, and coached her by phone)
Without the fluid to resist movement, it is much easier to turn the steering wheel than the impression you get by trying to steer with the engine off.


1983 Ford truck:
Steps 1-3 are the same.
Step 4: Remove the power steering pump, and all of the lines attached to it
Step 5: Disconnect the recirculating ball steering gear from the steering axle
Step 6: Disconnect the steering gear from the steering column - some older vehicles this may be one piece, in which case you have to remove the steering wheel - you can borrow a special puller for free at most autoparts stores
Step 7: Remove the entire steering gear. Its heavier than it looks.
Step 8: Attach the manual gear exactly where the power gear just was. I found mine at an auto wreckers. Depending on the car, and how common manual steering was as an option, you might find one at a U-Pull-It kind of place, or on ebay, or whatever. You can find them in decent shape, since others pull them out fully functional in order to "upgrade". Lazy pathetic Americans...
Step 9: Reattach steering column, steering wheel if applicable
Step 10: The belt issue should be much easier if its a vehicle that came with manual as an option all along. V-belt, you are done. Serpentine belt, just tell the person at the parts store your model of car and that it has manual steering, and the computer should spit out the right size belt, so you don't have to do any measuring or diagram drawing.
Step 11: enjoy your gas savings and (even more minor) arm work out!

The longest part of the process was finding a manual steering gear.
Having had 4 vehicles with manual steering (including my current F-250 and a 15ft camper van) and 2 with, I would never not do this to any I ever owned.

tel jetson wrote:
I've seen magnets sold that wrap around the screw-on filter. I like the idea. I'll probably do it.



something else I should mention regarding turbochargers: if you've got a turbo, don't do pulse and glide with the ignition off. unless there's an auxiliary oil pump to keep cooling the turbocharger, the bearings would be cooked in very short order and dreams of increasing fuel economy will be forgotten in favor of more pressing issues.

I just stick a magnet directly to the metal body of the filter itself. Same effect, no money spent on a rubber ring to hold the magnet.

If you have an automatic you shouldn't coast engine off either.

And if you have power steering, you should be aware that the steering feel will change with the engine off.

The good news is that coasting with the engine on (at idle) still saves fuel compared to holding down the gas at all times, as their is no load and RPMs drop to the minimum.

Andrew Parker wrote:How much fuel do you save turning off a diesel, rather than idling it without a load? I remember someone once telling me that idling a big semi tractor overnight to keep the heater or air conditioner going took maybe a quart of fuel.

Most sources I've found say that a big semi tractor uses a gallon of fuel per hour to idle.
It is illegal in almost 1/4 of US states for them to do that anymore, because it is so insanely wasteful and polluting.

It is not as bad with a smaller engine, and I don't know the exact numbers, but there is really no circumstance where it ever makes sense to idle for more than a minute (including for "warm up" - modern engines do not need to warm up at all)

For more: http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/TA/374.pdf
and: http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/EE/642.PDF

tel jetson wrote:

Peter DeJay wrote:Bakari and I have motors that will accept the filter spec'ed for the mid-90s 7.3-liter Powerstroke diesels. the filter is larger, so there's more actual filter element to better clean the oil and it adds an extra quart of capacity to the oil system.

I wasn't aware of that! I'll be doing the same now on my next change

tel jetson wrote:

Bakari Kafele wrote:
The first start in the morning causes considerably more wear than idling, but once the engine is warm and the oil is distributed, starting causes less.

this is why I'm looking into a 12-volt oil pump to pre-oil the engine. with your setup, you could use a 120-volt pump plugged into an outlet at home for the first start in the morning. there are also kits that involve a small tank to store oil pressure that releases back into the engine at startup.

I forgot about that part.
I looked into a system that would store oil pressure too, for the same reason, but the only ones I found I decided were too expensive.

Keep me posted on anything you learn

tel jetson wrote:is it a 6.9-liter Navistar you've got under the hood?

I think so... Its the 6.9 International Harvester - which later changed their name to Navistar (?)

tel jetson wrote:just watched Bakari's video. good stuff. after I finally destroyed my grandpa's old pick-em-up truck, we got a truck very similar to Bakari's.

I, too, prefer to ride my bike, but moving big loads of lumber, rock, or wood chips around just isn't going to happen with my bike trailer. trying to work toward using the truck less and eventually not at all. in the mean time, I'll certainly be looking into the tricks Bakari used and some others. I've got access to biodiesel for rather less than retail prices, which is nice, but I'm certainly still motivated to save fuel.

I'm curious about potential wear on the engine, though. I'm convinced that starting and stopping the engine saves fuel, but does it accelerate engine wear? I really have no idea about this. in addition to wanting to increasing fuel economy, I'm also looking into ways to make the engine last longer since a new engine is expensive and involves a considerable amount of embodied energy. I'm looking at installing a 12-volt oil pump to pressurize the oil system before it's started, a bypass oil filter, and an engine oil centrifuge. I'm not sure I'll do all or any of those, but they all seem like good ways to extend the life of an engine. I'll certainly be switching to a good quality synthetic engine oil, too, which should help fuel economy a bit and slow wear.

That is the best question anyone has asked so far.
And the answers is - I don't think anyone knows! There is a whole community of ecomodders (ecomodder.com), but its only existed a few years. I believe some people started developing similar techniques back during the US oil embargo, but basically everyone stopped when gas prices dropped again. So no one has done it long enough for it to wear out an engine. Since a decent, well taken care of engine can last 20 or 30 years, if EOC (engine off coasting) caused an additional 5% wear, it could be well over a decade before it manifested.

The first start in the morning causes considerably more wear than idling, but once the engine is warm and the oil is distributed, starting causes less. But how much less? Only time well tell...
On the plus side, if one saves $10,000 in fuel over a decade, the easily pays the cost of an engine rebuild (several times over), and an engine rebuild requires considerably less embodied energy than scrapping it and buying a new one would, but it is pretty much a- good as new performance wise.

All other common questions and criticisms of these methods are addressed on my latest blog post: http://biodieselhauling.blogspot.com/2012/03/mad-max-hypermiler-questions-and.html

Oh, and for more on Aerocivic, the website is http://www.aerocivic.com/

greg patrick wrote:
But what about some other options? We bike commute, combine trips, work close to home, etc. to good effect.

I couldn't agree more! I did mention in the video that bikes are still better.

I worked for 6 years (until last year when I joined the Coast Guard) at a community bike shop that offers free valet parking to bike commuters in order to facilitate more people riding.
I used to do low cost bike repairs at a local farmer's market. I work and volunteer for the local bike coalition. I drive the truck exclusively for work, and use bicycle and public transport for my own personal transportation.

But I realize that the entire country is not going to give up petrol powered ICE cars anytime soon, so as long as people are going to drive, I hope they do it as efficiently as possible.

Jonathan Fuller wrote:
I think, at least when it comes to vehicles, the goal of more efficiency is less about making the energy go further and more about reducing the insane amounts of co2 being released into the atmosphere.

As long as we are using any fuel based energy source, those are both the same thing.
Pollution controls do not reduce CO2. They can't. Combustion is the processes of turning some form of hydrocarbon into CO2 and water, with a release of energy as a result. That is true for gasoline, natural gas, even biodiesel.
A ULEV hybrid that get 40mpg puts out more carbon per mile than a '90 Metro that gets 50mpg
The only way to get less co2 is to make the vehicle go further on a given amount of fuel.

However, we have a finite supply of petroleum in the world, and NOx, CO, soot, and all the other pollutants in exhaust are problems in their own right, so regardless of whether CO2 is contributing to climate change, we still need to change our lifestyles.