Drive a Zafira 1.6? Get 7 more mpg!

[TW]Fox;17234966 said:
No, it was over 12 months!
Click to expand...

So you can honestly say that every time you use SUL for a period - each tank of SUL revealed a 10MPG gain? Without fail.

[TW]Fox;17234966 said:
Are you going for the all time hypocricy award or something? :p
Click to expand...

I'm not the one dodging questions, relying on other people to provide the intelligent conversation and then jumping on the tail end of it, bringing up out of context posts because I have nothing to add, or claiming a statement is wrong because it doesn't sound right.
 
If you hadn't give me reason to believe you are lying, and your car wasn't 10 years old and NA, then I'd be inclined to believe you, as I'd have no reason to believe you were lying.

But its obvious this is a terrible attempt to make a point, and its particularly unlikely for an old, NA engine to experience such a gain.
 
[TW]Fox;17235086 said:
My car is 10? Time sure does fly :eek: could have sworn it wasn't that long ago I had a slice of cake for its 8th birthday :(
Click to expand...

I was talking about the model, and being generous in going from facelift rather than when the E39 first appeared.
 
Well considering the engine range was new with the facelift that is indeed so generous of you.

I am so hurt you dispute my personal experience :(
 
MikeHiow said:
And a VXR doesn't? Where does the shopping trolley come from? (But you should read the discussion regarding modern ECUs being adaptive).

Have you even read the thread before defaming my posts?
Click to expand...

The shopping trolley comes from the claims made by Thorney and Tesco, they claim great gains in cars which won't receive those gains. I say they won't see those gains because that is what has been accepted in the past by all of the manufacturers, if you want proof of that I'll go and take a picture of my fuel cap if you like. This "test" tries to prove everyone wrong, but all it proves is that Tesco and Thorney are a joke, because they havn't done it in a scientific way.

As for reading the thread, yes I have, but I've been skimming a lot of your posts; they are such utter trollop that there's just no point.
 
I get 20 more MPG with magnets that make the fuel cells get in a straight line.

hrM1Y.jpg.png
 
Ok. I must have been wrong because you all say I am (Without reasoning, I "just am" because what I say "doesn't sound right"). All variables have a strange affliction to making SUL look good, Vauxhall are awesome at making their engines fall back from the fuel they are designed to run on and my basic math skills are fail in working out MPG (despite them being used daily in my job).
 
MikeHiow said:
Well seeing as I've made no claims about the TMS claims other than they may be technically possible, I don't think that is what is being disputed here. People are telling me I didn't experience a 6MPG increase on my VXR - a consistent trend over 8 months.
Click to expand...

this whole thread stemmed from whether we thought TMS research was good and scientific or not.

We said because they were only driving "similar" roads, not the same, and they were just driving till "the light came on" it couldnt be scientific. You said it was and that it agreed with your findings.

We disputed both - that YOU cant possibly say that you consistently got that much extra mpg RELIABLY because you cant accurate recreate the same driving experience on the same road. The MPG increase you experienced could have been down to the prevailing wind at that time or anything. You cant attribute all of that MPG increase to the fuel.

And that thorneys research was good scientific and reliable. Which it isnt.
 
MrLOL said:
this whole thread stemmed from whether we thought TMS research was good and scientific or not.

We said because they were only driving "similar" roads, not the same, and they were just driving till "the light came on" it couldnt be scientific. You said it was and that it agreed with your findings.

We disputed both - that YOU cant possibly say that you consistently got that much extra mpg RELIABLY because you cant accurate recreate the same driving experience on the same road. The MPG increase you experienced could have been down to the prevailing wind at that time or anything. You cant attribute all of that MPG increase to the fuel.

And that thorneys research was good scientific and reliable. Which it isnt.
Click to expand...

Yes and he was saying that it "might" be right because he had a similar experience. And we're saying that we count his experience as even less valid than Thorney's "research" and he doesn't get that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom