Did I say that? No, I didn't think so.

 

Dude, do you NOT get it?

I know that is not what you said but basically it is what you are doing when you say "These numbers may not be accurate but show what is better for fuel consumption" So basically since we can't use these numbers, we don't really know the differnce between one speed vs another or clutch fan vs no clutch fan. All we know after one of you tests is that one speed is better then another, and no clutch fan is better then having one. But we all already knew that.

So basically what you are doing is pointless without usable numbers. Do you not get that? It's not rocket science. If you can't use the numbers what good does this test do us? We all already knew what was better, we just wanted to know HOW much better. But when you have un usable numbers, we don't know what is better...

I'm not trying to b!tch and complain about it, but if you're not going to do it right, why do it at all?...

 

I think I have covered this enough, everyone else seems to think it's okay.

These numbers are usable. I am not making you use them, so stop replying to this thread.

 

I don't think everyone else thinks its ok...

But please explain how they work. I am asking this in all seriousness. If you prove to me that they work, I will GLADLY tell you that you're right. You have my word. But I really don't understand how you can make use of numbers that we know could be off in either direction. Like I have stated over again, yeah we can tell what is better but not really by how much. These are things we really already knew.

I really just want to know how you can use numbers that aren't perfect. I'm not trying to be a dick but you kept running around what I'm getting at.

I don't want to come off as all angry or what not but I don't think you're seeing my side either.

Just looking for an awnser I have yet to get thats all....

 

When I run out do this trip, I will go 65. If the mileage is the same as it is on my previous test... the computer is right. If it is not, I will know what to base it off of.

Once again,

 

i agree with bPark8824, could you please explain how these numbers are accurate? not trying to cause a controversy just confused

 

So if the onboard computer says the samething this time it must be true? hahah oh boy

And AGAIN you won't awnser my question. I guess you know they don't work since you have yet to explain to me how they do. I'm asking a simple question, and that is all. How are the numbers usable when we know they could be off in either direction? All it tells us is what is better but not an accurate amount of how much. So basically telling us things we already knew.

I don't know how else to say it... It's a simple question. I'm guess you won't awnser because you don't have awnser. And I'm going to assume that until you do give me an awnser.

Thanks


And Billiam, don't get all upset when you read this and try to tell us to go to our corners. I'm asking a simple question that he won't awnser.

 

I am replying with this statement, again...again

 

I am going to be doing some driving ( a lot ) this next week, I am going to do my best to get accurate mileage according to the "****ing odometer". I will probably run 55mph for an hour, then fill up and measure mileage. Then 65 and then 75.

Then, I will compare those numbers to the test numbers from my overhead computer, if they are the same (within 1 MPG or so) I am counting my overhead as "Reliable enough to use as testing equipment." If they are not, I will see if it is a consistent amount i.e. 10% better gas mileage than the actual mileage. If it is, I will how much to scale the results to make them reliable enough.

I have said this plenty of times now, " I am not saying (yet) that the overhead is 100% accurate 100% of the time in 100% of all situations. (even the "****ing odometer" is wrong sometimes)

I replied to you, because you asked politely and didn't intentionally try to prove me wrong.

 

hahaha oh boy you are dumber then I thought. Im done here.