50 mpg Matrix/Vibe?

Daox · Post by **Daox** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 5:23 am

Just for kicks I thought I'd throw this out there. I'll be starting my modifications soon, and my goal is to get my base Matrix to get into the 50 mph range (average tank mpg, not single trip, downhill all the way, wind at your back) as I stated in my first post. The modificaions will also not degrade utility, drivability, or comfort.So, do you think its possible to get 50mpg out of a modified Matrix/Vibe?

kevera · Post by **kevera** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 5:25 am

ahahaha,No

02csnow · Post by **02csnow** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 5:25 am

i doubt you will be ever able to do it and if you can i would suggest a patent when you find out how to do it.

GrayFox · Post by **GrayFox** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 5:26 am

I'll say "NO" but I'll also say Good Luck & I hope you proove me (& others) wrong

scherry2 · Post by **scherry2** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 5:45 am

I believe you could!! it was on mythbusters! they took a new magnum and tailgated a semi at 5' and it got 45 MPG. with the weight difference I'll bet you could get 50 MPG

Daox · Post by **Daox** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 5:56 am

Thats an interesting idea... However I don't always have a semi handy. I'll have to try it without the semi unless you have a spare I can borrow.

keithvibe · Post by **keithvibe** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 6:24 am

if you do it... you MUST tell us how!

prathman · Post by **prathman** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 6:37 am

I think it would be possible using driving techniques for maximum fuel economy, especially if combined with high-pressure, low resistance tires and similar modifications. But those would have an effect on comfort and/or performance.I'm skeptical that it can be done while driving in a normal manner (keeping up with other traffic) and not having any negative impact on comfort, performance, or handling.Good luck and let us know how things work out.

GMJAP · Post by **GMJAP** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 6:50 am

I think 40mpg average would be lofty enough of a goal.I was getting 35-36mpg average per tank on the OEM tires (which are low resistance) during mild weather (no AC, but not cold either which drops mileage). However, I got new tires and went for all-season performance over rolling resistance and it dropped my average to 34mpg. Getting another 15% would be like squeezing water from a stone. I wanted to get to 40mpg and was starting to think crazy stuff like removing the alternator and running all electric loads off a bank of plug-in-charge batteries, etc. Then I realized it was getting loony-tunes, and that I had neither the time or cash for stuff like that and wouldn't ever make it back in fuel savings anyway.Good luck to you, and keep us posted on your progress.

VivaVibe · Post by **VivaVibe** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 7:58 am

Quote, originally posted by GMJAP Â»OEM tires (which are low resistance)So how does one determine a "low rolling resistance" tire? I don't see that on any tire ratings. And would such a tire necessarily also have less traction? I am considering the Kumho Solus as a possible replacement. How would they rate?

prathman · Post by **prathman** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 8:55 am

Quote, originally posted by VivaVibe Â»So how does one determine a "low rolling resistance" tire? I don't see that on any tire ratings. In general you'd want a very non-aggressive tread pattern (squirm of the tread increases resistance), fairly thin rubber, and a design made for very high pressures. Tires made for mpg competitions are almost slick and have 100 psi or so. But that's certainly not what you'd want on a family car in normal use, not to mention wet or snowy conditions.Item 27 at this site:http://scottelkin.com/archive/2005/10/13/4479.aspx gives some suggestions of reasonable regular tire models that can give modest fuel economy improvements but still have decent traction, tread life, and comfort. A narrower tread width than the OEM 205mm should have somewhat less resistance. Also note the comments there that Prius owners after maximum efficiency frequently inflate the tires to near the maximum rating (44 psi) rather than the recommended level (about 35 psi). Consumer Reports has been including rolling resistance as a rating factor recently and there are moves to have the tire manufacturers include such a rating on both the federal and California state level

djb383 · Post by **djb383** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 10:03 am

You'll need to lighten it up considerably. Something like this. http://img481.imageshack.us/im...0.jpg

GMJAP · Post by **GMJAP** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 10:39 am

Quote, originally posted by VivaVibe Â»So how does one determine a "low rolling resistance" tire? I don't see that on any tire ratings. And would such a tire necessarily also have less traction? I am considering the Kumho Solus as a possible replacement. How would they rate?I couldn't tell you offhand about the Kuhmo's. See the following info:http://www.tirerack.com/tires/...id=29

dianebrat · Post by **dianebrat** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 7:50 pm

Quote, originally posted by Daox Â»The modifications will also not degrade utility, drivability, or comfort.I think that's the Achilles heel, drivability will suffer to get the extreme MPG.Can you do it? most probably, will acceleration and driving comfort suffer? most probably.you can't have it all (and in the infamous words of Steven Wright, "if you did have it all, where would you put it?)

DavidPIL · Post by **DavidPIL** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 11:55 pm

One Word..."Sails!"As windy as it was last week around here, I'm sure, in the right conditions, sails would have increased the mpg by 2-3x... although, you'd have to count on the winds to change direction for the return home but...ok, maybe not.Dave

drunkenmaxx · Post by **drunkenmaxx** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 11:59 pm

yeah, not to mention all the drag created by the sails! you would lose a hell of a lot of mpg, no matter what the wind was doing!

ZubenElGenubi · Post by **ZubenElGenubi** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 1:06 am

The best single tank mileage I ever got was 39.9 MPG and that was going 60-65 mph with a tailwind of at least 10 mph.With the ScanGaugeII as a guide, I've been measuring MPG vs MPH when in overdrive (4th gear on my Base Auto). The highest MPG rates are in the mid 40's when below 45 MPH:If your average speed is below 40, chances are you're using a higher gear (whether auto or manual), so MPG rates will be lower regardless. The only way I see to reach the 50 mpg plateau would be to convert to a hybrid power format. The Vibe and Matrix are good platforms; there's adequate space in the rear for the necessary batteries.

Attached files

BlueCrush · Post by **BlueCrush** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 1:24 am

Daox, maybe you should try what ProtonXX did with an Aquatune system: http://forums.genvibe.com/zerothread?id=28346

Daox · Post by **Daox** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:18 am

Thanks BlueCrush. But, I already have the plans pretty much laid out to get me to 50 mpg. I'm also not a huge fan of the Aquatune. IMO its insanely overpriced. And, like ProtonXX said, he lost power. While I'm not horrified of the thought of loosing a few horsepower, its not my aim to loose any. In any case, I'll be posting soon enough in the garage section.

engineertwin2 · Post by **engineertwin2** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:23 am

Quote, originally posted by Daox Â»Thanks BlueCrush. But, I already have the plans pretty much laid out to get me to 50 mpg.Do you mind sharing with us what your plan is? I'm kinda curious what plan you have and if you are game for defending the plan? I promise to be open-minded and non-harsh with any criticism or praise I have of the plan...

melders · Post by **melders** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:32 am

thats funny...good luck, if you succeed, let us know what you did!

Daox · Post by **Daox** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:32 am

Of course I'll share. I'm not in it for money or patents or anything (theres tons out there for fuel saving devices BTW). I'm just a guy trying things out. Its a learning experience for me and hopefully for others too. I very confident that I can get 50 mpg (hopefully even more), but to be totally honest I can't say with absolute certainty that I know I can. I'll put up a post in the garage section real soon with my plans. But, its not going to be one big thing that gets me there. I think its going to be a bunch of things that all help out. Mostly it'll be engine (fueling specifically) modifications, but I'll also probably do some things like aerodynamic modifications as most of my time driving is spent at higher speeds. Driving style is also a major factor. Since its been warmer I've been getting consistantly 35-36 mpg. This is on the higher side for Vibe/Matrix owners. There are other areas for improvement as well. I'll see where the road takes me. I guess we all get to wait and see if this can be done. Also, feel free to ask any questions or flame if you wish. I'm ready to explain and back up my decisions and designs. If it sounds like I've done this before its because I have. I haven't done it with mileage modifications, but I have developed a few things for previous cars on other forums.

ProtonXX · Post by **ProtonXX** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:47 am

lol hi doax. My goal is 40mpg...I came a long way from 22mpg & 280 Miles a tank. So for my plan mod list isO2 fuel trim sensor - Coming this weekPulse Plugs - comes out june 18Hydrogen injection - winner but building my own super cell this weekFuel heater - installed..uninstalled worst MPG drop but due to pipe sizeThottlebody Spacer - terrible with SR intake, works great with stock air boxAir Intakes - failed, lost mpg but may revisit with fuel trimmerPulleys - winnerUrban Racing Rims - WinnerTall tires - WinnerSynthetic Oil = WinFuel Additives = All Fail. Only thing that adds MPG is 87 Shell gas.Octane booster Techron & seafoam does wonders on dirty systems but its not cost effective. Higher octane adds power but no mpg, Acetone is just a cheap cleaner.My goal is to get about 40MPG but thats only possible at 50 mph. I think in about month or 2 Ill have everything in place for the final results

silver_vibe · Post by **silver_vibe** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:52 am

Quote, originally posted by ZubenElGenubi Â»The best single tank mileage I ever got was 39.9 MPG and that was going 60-65 mph with a tailwind of at least 10 mph.With the ScanGaugeII as a guide, I've been measuring MPG vs MPH when in overdrive (4th gear on my Base Auto). The highest MPG rates are in the mid 40's when below 45 MPH:image removedIf your average speed is below 40, chances are you're using a higher gear (whether auto or manual), so MPG rates will be lower regardless. The only way I see to reach the 50 mpg plateau would be to convert to a hybrid power format. The Vibe and Matrix are good platforms; there's adequate space in the rear for the necessary batteries.Does someone know the optimal speed for a base with a 5-speed?

ColonelPanic · Post by **ColonelPanic** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 9:48 am

Whatever you try, just make sure your plans don't include that stupid tornado thingy. If you want to give it a shot, first mod needs to be a ScanGauge so you can see whether the things you're adding are having an impact on mileage.A buddy of mine was telling me about this site he found (wish I knew where it was) that had some guy with a Civic who took off the power steering, filled the grille in with cardboard, took off both outside mirrors, and then shut off the engine while coasting (very dangerous!) The guy got some astronomical mileage figures but man, that sounds crazy. Maybe try the grille stuff and make some fender skirts to boot, like this guy. http://metrompg.com/posts/gril...2.htmI don't think 50 will be easy to attain, but it's always worth a shot. 40 sounds like a better target to shoot for consistently, that's hard enough as it is. Many times, it was a stretch for me to get 30 out of my Vibe.

tnpartsguy · Post by **tnpartsguy** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 9:55 am

Michelin makes a series of "Green" Tires which are proven to save gas, due to high carbon rubber and a very low rolling resistance. 50 MPG is going to be hard, but I believe you'll get mid 40's.

shane_c · Post by **shane_c** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:20 am

The best I've gotten was 43 mpg (canadian) mixed driving. I'm going to try and better it with my current tank. I've been driving very conservatively. No hard acceleration or sudden stops. My only problem is that the 'highway' driving I do getting to and from work is mainly stop and go. So I guess it's more like city driving than anything else. I'll post my results when I fill up in a few days.

ZubenElGenubi · Post by **ZubenElGenubi** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 1:17 pm

Quote, originally posted by silver_vibe Â»Does someone know the optimal speed for a base with a 5-speed?Generally speaking, the optimal speed will the slowest speed in the highest gear, so that you're getting the highest ratio of MPH to RPM while keeping drag force to a minimum.With the auto, overdrive kicks in around 2K RPM / 40 MPH out of 3rd gear. RPMs drop to around 1600 @ 40 MPH.

shane_c · Post by **shane_c** » Wed Jun 20, 2007 11:03 am

So I just filled up and equaled my best of 43.5 mpg highway/city

quicksilver · Post by **quicksilver** » Wed Jun 27, 2007 5:11 am

Some of the talk is about will it result in savings in the end...Hybrids and the like along with being more efficient with fuel/energy shouldn't be prohibited by cost, it should be what's best for the environment and in turn humanity...

engineertwin2 · Post by **engineertwin2** » Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:38 am

Quote, originally posted by quicksilver Â»...Hybrids and the like along with being more efficient with fuel/energy shouldn't be prohibited by cost, it should be what's best for the environment and in turn humanity...I absolutely agree, but who should pay the cost? Should I pay a fortune on a vehicle that may/may not get me to and from work everyday because it is best for the environment (referring to current fuel cell technology)? Someone has to bear the cost until technology gets affordable for the masses.Now, someone does bear this cost...someone always bears the cost of a brand new model vehicle because they want it. But them bearing the cost provides the opportunity for company XYZ to improve the model until they can control these unplanned maintenance issues. Typically, these issues are merely fit and finish concerns for new models, but if these issues grow exponentially if the model features a brand-new, never seen drivetrain, etc.First off, a car is an investment that never (ok, very rarely) gains in value. I prefer to see a car as an investment in my income - a reliable method of transportation that can get me to and from work in a time effective manner.The risk of owning a car can be seen in two ways - fixed risk and variable risk:Fixed risks are essentially mostly sunken costs. The price of the vehicle is a sunken cost - once you buy it, you are paying that amount (or financed increase) whether you own it or compound the loan into another vehicle (via trade in) or pay it off. The price of routine maintenance is a fixed risk - you can probably guess about $500 in routine maintenance on a car (not including oil changes). Oil changes are a fixed cost (every 5,000 miles it's gonna cost you $60 for an oil/filter change). Tires are a fixed cost (you know every 30k-40k miles you are gonna fork over $400 or so for new tires).Variable risk is typically a lot smaller portion of the overall risk/cost of a vehicle. It used to be that you could calculate fuel consumption as a fixed risk - 10 years ago gas prices were pretty firm and steady - but today, with as up and down as the fuel market is, you need to throw it in as a variable risk. The only other variable risk associated with a car is unplanned maintenance - (alternator fails, water pump goes, etc). 'Established' (models that aren't entirely new) vehicles have a decreasing variable risk value assigned to it, typically between 10% and 20% of the initial sales price, depending upon intial sales price, years 'established', etc. New model year vehicles sometimes have a risk value of 40%-75% minimum, depending upon the technology and drive train.So if you are buying a $20,000 car that gets 30 mpg @ $3/gal...the total life-cycle cost of owning this vehicle (over a 100,000 mile interval at 15,000 mi/yr) would be somewhere between $37,000 and $40,000. This is even a low estimate according to Edmunds.com (which claims the Vibe is about $0.52/mi to operate for 100k mi life-cycle).Granted, fuel is 25-30% of this cost...so if you mitigate the fuel cost via improved efficiency you can get this number down. The problem is that if you do it with new, still emerging technology, your risk number can go through the roof could go to 200% - who knows? This doesn't include collaterals of added rental car fees etc...The point of this tirelessly long rant is that I wholeheartedly agree that decisions should be made on a warm and fuzzy feeling on the environment and everyone loves bunnies and all the rest, but in the end, there is a significant financial cost to all of this and it MUST be considered by the end user. At $40k life-cycle cost, that makes a car worth about 1.25 times the average Americans annual salary - this makes it a significant investment and ultimately, cost is a factor in significant investments...Some people can afford the additional cost $35 at a time every two weeks and not $1,000 at a time every 3 months (pay more for fuel or pay for less fuel but more repairs).If we wanted to really do what was best for the environment, we'd be on the "Ride the Bus" board and not the Vibe board. What we really want to do is what benefits us and has the least impact on our environment without impacting our cost of living beyong our means.

GMJAP · Post by **GMJAP** » Wed Jun 27, 2007 5:39 pm

engineertwin2 - don't forget that you will be paying many indirect & direct costs that aren't in you calculations.Like the money saved by not buying "bunny-friendly" products may be spent on your kid's inhaler prescriptions & doctor apppointments, and on the higher insurance premiums because of all the kids' in the city's inhaler prescriptions and doctor appointments.Also, as people buy more fuel-efficient vehicles it reduces the demand for gasoline which reduces prices for everyone. By reducing fuel costs for everyone, this also reduces transportaion costs built in to the prices everyone pays for all kinds of products.Also, recent history hasn't really borne out your "Risk" & "cost of ownership with repairs" tirade. Hybrids - brand new cars with brand-new drivetrains - haven't really been shown to cost any more in maintenance than typical cars. In fact, with all the POS regular combustion engine cars out there, I bet the average maintenance cost of hybrids is well below that of the average cost of all other cars.(Throw in Mercedes, VW, BMW, SAAB, recent Volvos, Fords, Dodges - your "new-tech" cars not only look like gas savings but major maintenance savings as well).The cost-premium of hybrids isn't much more than a typical sedan 4cyl to 6cyl upgrade either, esp. once you consider gas savings for the hybrid (less cost over vehicle ownership) and gas expenditures for the 6cyl (more cost over vehicle ownership than 4cyl) and any hybrid tax credits. This premium certainly hasn't stopped anyone from getting the engine upgrade, which they almost never need, costs them more in gas, and is worse for the environment.Really, only a very tiny minority of car buyers put much more thought into buying a car than "I like 'at one! An' I ken afferd it with the big engine!...maybe...can I Mr. Salesman? What's the monthly gone be?"One could do, and many in fact do, much worse than make buying decisions based on "warm fuzzies for the environment".Sometimes, the cost analysis has to take more into account than the immediate, obvious expenses and they should also take in account the cost for society. They're going to pay it somehow, someday, anyway.People like to think of themselves as an island, and everything's OK as long as it doesn't actively hurt someone else. But we're all more interconnected than that. The army that wins is not the one where every soldier just looks out for their own personal safety, but the one where the soldiers make the necessary sacrifices for ultimate victory. The populations & countries that will lead the world in the future are the ones where individuals are willing to make some personal concessions for the greater benefit.

Vibr8tr · Post by **Vibr8tr** » Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:51 pm

You know.... I was looking at the "active topics forum" page, and I had to laugh, cause this disscusion that is filled with us all fighting for better gas mileage, and ways to lower prices and help out.... is followed closely by the Bugatti coversation where we have all said that if we won the lottery, we would buy one...I am just wondering (not accusing any one, cause we all know I don't like causing trouble... just disscussions).... is all our talk (including mine) about saving gas, and helping the planet hypocritical, and linked directly to our wallets... if we were rich would we care near as much? I am not saying if we were rich we wouldn't care about the planet... I just think we wouldn't try as hard maybe. Cuase I know the Bugatti get's let's than 15 MPG (if that much)...... Just a thought

engineertwin2 · Post by **engineertwin2** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:49 am

Quote, originally posted by GMJAP Â»engineertwin2 - don't forget that you will be paying many indirect & direct costs that aren't in you calculations.GMJAP - 1, engineertwin2 - 0Great point here...I certainly can't attempt to cover all of the costs. You are absolutely correct that there are collaterals that occur as a result of saving money here. I certainly don't want to be considered an environment hater here, but battling this is what I do for work. I have seen the industries' side of things and only wish to offer an alternative view. If there could be regulations that spelled things out for a good portion of time, industry as a whole would be much more compliant. If we were capable of saying "These are where the target goals are through 2060, then that 'risk' of compliance goes away to almost nil."Also, I'd like to remind you that a good portion (I don't know the numbers, but I am aware it is fairly high) of plastic products today are made from soy...Quote, originally posted by GMJAP Â»Also, as people buy more fuel-efficient vehicles it reduces the demand for gasoline which reduces prices for everyone. By reducing fuel costs for everyone, this also reduces transportaion costs built in to the prices everyone pays for all kinds of products.The media has been lauding the significant drop in SUV sales since 2004, but gas prices have increased over 43% from 2004's average annual price to 2007's current average annual price, according to http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas....htmlSo it's easy to say that as people switch to hybrids, and stop buying gas-guzzling SUVs and trucks that gas prices will go down. But that hasn't been the case so far. The OPEC countries are some of the wealthiest in the world, and one would think they might do anything to protect it. They currently control the market by controlling how much oil is produced and if demand dipped, they would simply curtail supply, and at the very least maintain fuel prices. The caveat of buying gasoline hybrids is just that - they consume gasoline. OPEC still has the control so long as you consume gas. I think we'll see prices rise to compensate for the loss of demand (because there will still be demand through reduced supply).Ironically, the best way to reduce fuel prices would be increased refining capacity, but they can't get a new one in because of their environmental impact...not saying that's a bad thing.Quote, originally posted by GMJAP Â»Also, recent history hasn't really borne out your "Risk" & "cost of ownership with repairs" tirade. Hybrids - brand new cars with brand-new drivetrains - haven't really been shown to cost any more in maintenance than typical cars. In fact, with all the POS regular combustion engine cars out there, I bet the average maintenance cost of hybrids is well below that of the average cost of all other cars.Not sure how you could look at a system that includes a gasoline engine mated to a transmission driving a differential that turns the wheels is a POS system. A hybrid system is a gasoline engine mated to a differential that also has an electric engine mated to it, that then mates to a transmission that mates to another differential, that then drives the wheels that have alternators that drive batteries that recharge...the hybrid system is inherently more complex.However, I'll concede this point because Toyota systems have been great. But Toyota's "POS" gasoline system has been great too...But what happens if every manufacturer has inherently more complex systems? Their quality problems transfer over...and the more stuff that moves, the more things that can go wrong.Quote, originally posted by GMJAP Â»The cost-premium of hybrids isn't much more than a typical sedan 4cyl to 6cyl upgrade either, esp. once you consider gas savings for the hybrid (less cost over vehicle ownership) and gas expenditures for the 6cyl (more cost over vehicle ownership than 4cyl) and any hybrid tax credits. This premium certainly hasn't stopped anyone from getting the engine upgrade, which they almost never need, costs them more in gas, and is worse for the environment.GMJAP - 2, engineertwin2 - 0However, I'd do some more research into whether hybrid tax credits really exist anymore. It was a fading tax credit based on time and units sold and (at least in AZ) no major tax benefits exist anymore. I also didn't account for the "market-value" adjustment of $3,000-$5,000 that dealerships here in AZ were applying to the Prius when I was shopping for a new car in April of 2005.Also, I'd like to point out that a hybrid isn't necessarily better for the environment. Sure, we don't pollute as much into the air, but everything poops. What happens when lifecycle costs are done and we have to "throw out" "retire" (whatever you want to call it) the vehicle? Does it go to a junkyard, where batteries can contaminate the drinking water? Do we recycle the batteries where we still dispose of 30% of the heavy metals and the resulting battery acid? It's just a different environmental impact.Lastly, GMJAP - 3, engineertwin2 - 0This one is because a lot of people do treat themselves as an island and that is irresponsible. Again, I'm not trying to be defiant or argue here, but it's important that people try to see the full picture and why someone would argue the otherside. My fiancee drives a prius. Our next car will be a hybrid. But that doesn't mean I won't look at the otherside and try to see that side.

Sublimewind · Post by **Sublimewind** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:17 am

^^^ wow man, look like your fighting a losing battle with GMJAP^^^

engineertwin2 · Post by **engineertwin2** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 3:32 am

Quote, originally posted by Sublimewind Â»^^^ wow man, look like your fighting a losing battle with GMJAP^^^This is a battle I'm growing accustomed to losing - not to GMJAP, but at home with the Mrs. (or soon to be Mrs.). My job is at a power company as an engineer that works on pollutant controls. We discuss several things..."solar and wind are better. I hate coal" to which I respond "but what do you do when the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow?"...we go back and forth in these great conversations.Unfortunately, my job may have twisted me as I'm forced to think about the economic impact of this environmental control versus that one and how our ratepayers might respond. If I can get 95% removal of pollutant X by spending $25 million, but it takes another $25 million to get from 95% to 97%, how do I justify the expense of the additional $25 million? As a rate payer, that can result in a rate increase of 10%-15%...how do I justify it?I just hope that I can show the other side of the argument at times, if only to play devil's advocate. Some things work great in theory and a lot of things a great ideals, but in practice, mankind tends to get in its own way. It's important for us to attempt to see how we will trip ourselves up before we do so, if only just to prepare for it.

Sublimewind · Post by **Sublimewind** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 4:57 am

Well, I'm glad to see that you have such a worth while job, i mean at least by the sounds of it... at the same time sound very "high stress" when talking multi-millions and the impact that could have on the "people".I see a very technical "Robin Hood" in you... and ANYTHING you can do to reduce pollutants, I'll give you a HUGE thumbs up on... In fact i got to work on a development project for Fuel Cell technology and at the time our cell was producing the highest amount of current per cm(2) I left that company ~6yrs ago now, for IBM, left them to, now at Dow Corning, working on new lighting technology that could really change things in the years to come. I sure wish i knew how the fuel cell development was going, but i have lost touch.. anything we can do for the environment at this point is worth its weight in gold if you ask me

WaveAction · Post by **WaveAction** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:25 am

i think you could get to 50..the '07 vibes are 45mpg on the highway

ab2cmiller · Post by **ab2cmiller** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 1:51 am

Long article but pretty entertaining. Talks about people (hypermilers) who go to extremes to get better mpg. Here's a small excerpt.Drafting 18-wheelers with the engine off, taking death turns at 52 miles an hour, and other lessons learned while riding shotgun with the king of the hypermilers Here's a link to the whole article. http://www.motherjones.com/new....htmlThey were getting 59mpg out of an Accord and 109 mpg out of a Prius.Yes, I think you can get 50 mpg from your vibe, but you may not live to tell us how you did it. LOLGood Luck

ab2cmiller · Post by **ab2cmiller** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 3:04 am

ZubenElGenubi,I saw your Graph from data using the ScanGaugeII. How do you like it? Is the ScanGaugeII worth the $170? Can you please give any additional information that might help me decide wether to purchase this product.Thanks

Kamikaze · Post by **Kamikaze** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 3:56 am

That guy (from the article in ab2cmiller's post) is going to kill someone... and like I've said before, the money saved in gas is wasted on premature tire wear along with all the other components of the car.

ab2cmiller · Post by **ab2cmiller** » Thu Oct 25, 2007 10:57 pm

Any progress updates Daox?

Daox · Post by **Daox** » Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:26 am

Quote, originally posted by ab2cmiller Â»Yes, I think you can get 50 mpg from your vibe, but you may not live to tell us how you did it. LOLLOL, thats hilarious. I havent' forgotten about this thread, but I didn't see any posts for a while, and haven't seen the more recent ones.I haven't been able to do anything with my Matrix since I've got it besides get new tires put on it unfortunately. Also, since my original posts I have also come across a few other ideas that I've added to the list of checking out when I get a minute. For instance, I'll probably not be starting out with water injection. While I think there are some gains to be had with it, there is more to be seen with other technologies from the small amount of testing I have done.FYI, all my time is going into my 1993 Tercel that I'm custom fitting a supercharger on. You can check it out on my website here for kicks.BTW, the scangauge is an incredible tool for monitoring your engine. I'd highly recommend it.

ZubenElGenubi · Post by **ZubenElGenubi** » Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:43 am

Quote, originally posted by ab2cmiller Â»ZubenElGenubi,I saw your Graph from data using the ScanGaugeII. How do you like it? Is the ScanGaugeII worth the $170? Can you please give any additional information that might help me decide wether to purchase this product.ThanksSorry for the late reply, but I think the ScanGauge is a very valuable tool. I'm sure my driving habits (i.e., MPG ratings) have improved since I purchased it. Not to mention the half-dozen or so times I've been able to read and reset CEL codes in my family members' cars. Probably paid for itself right there.

quicksilver · Post by **quicksilver** » Fri Nov 09, 2007 3:13 am

WOW...I've been on the forums since June, but I guess I overlooked this thread, and interestingly enough, my point seems to have been the catalyst for the larger discussion here, I just now read it, and I'm very intrigued by these viewpoints. How does the 2007 Vibe get such a better mileage rating than my 2004?

Daox · Post by **Daox** » Sat Nov 10, 2007 1:20 am

It was probably the change to drive by wire.

Kamikaze · Post by **Kamikaze** » Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:40 pm

Daox,My last tank of gas (8 gallons) I got 21mpg.. my worse so far.I have an 06 base, auto, no engine mods (or air intake) It was all intown driving, about 14 miles per day is hwy 50-60mph. I don't floor the car and very rarely do the RPM's go over 3k.I'm thinking it has to do with the difference in temperature (colder weather) and possibly a switch over to the winter blend of gas that we get with additional additives that give us worse gas milage.Usually my milage is in the 27-28mpg range, I just switched over to Mobile 1 Syn. oil too.

quicksilver · Post by **quicksilver** » Tue Nov 20, 2007 1:31 am

That sucks! Nice "Down" album btw, a classic. What does 'drive by wire' mean?Also Daox, how do you get that good of mileage?

BlueCrush · Post by **BlueCrush** » Tue Nov 20, 2007 1:35 am

Quote, originally posted by Kamikaze Â»Daox,My last tank of gas (8 gallons) I got 21mpg.. my worse so far.I have an 06 base, auto, no engine mods (or air intake) It was all intown driving, about 14 miles per day is hwy 50-60mph. I don't floor the car and very rarely do the RPM's go over 3k.I'm thinking it has to do with the difference in temperature (colder weather) and possibly a switch over to the winter blend of gas that we get with additional additives that give us worse gas milage.Usually my milage is in the 27-28mpg range, I just switched over to Mobile 1 Syn. oil too. Yep we are on winter gas now which equals crappy gas mileage no matter what you do.Quote, originally posted by quicksilver Â»What does 'drive by wire' mean?Drive By Wire = Electronic throttle instead of a traditional cable throttle.

Tubaryan12 · Post by **Tubaryan12** » Thu Nov 22, 2007 8:07 am

Quote, originally posted by Kamikaze Â»Daox,My last tank of gas (8 gallons) I got 21mpg.. my worse so far.I have an 06 base, auto, no engine mods (or air intake) It was all intown driving, about 14 miles per day is hwy 50-60mph. I don't floor the car and very rarely do the RPM's go over 3k.I'm thinking it has to do with the difference in temperature (colder weather) and possibly a switch over to the winter blend of gas that we get with additional additives that give us worse gas milage.Usually my milage is in the 27-28mpg range, I just switched over to Mobile 1 Syn. oil too. One thing you need to do is to check your tire pressure. When the weather got cold here I didn't check. Then I got a tank of gas that got me 31mpg (I usually get between 33-36 mpg combined...90% highway). When I checked I had one tire that was around 15 psi and the others were 25 psi. I pumped them up to 34 psi and the next tank was back to 33.8 mpg.