To answer you we rot the initial post which deserves a little better
so open another post
PB2487
Maintaining the confusion, I see it rather when André quotes me on 2 subjects of 2 forums different with a somewhat wacky conclusion, say, but I'm sure he won't have a moderation problem.
Especially since it will still need, on occasion, to demonstrate what it advances, by what I feel rather the opposite side question / answer (by the way, let's be crazy, I want do your test but an ocean separates us, lol) but hey it's not the debate (for that, there is the other forum at the limit).
You would not be the first European who makes me take a ride on cars and each time I demonstrate during a full trip to full also I put the water in front of them (when I fill I especially don't want him to pay (however ridiculous for a 3 hour trip around $ 20.
Because going to the pump with a guest (so that he pays) is not in my education.
Next month one of your lecturers from the Thionville region will find out.
I am sure there are other (water doping) near you who would test you but with your reasoning as below the tests will not be good.
No need to do this kind of test, it has no value. A test at 100km / h in steady state does not demonstrate anything. In such a condition, the engine of a car develops only about 25 CV to advance once launch. If the engine is flanged by the GP system and therefore, the maximum power decreased, the average consumption decreases.
At 100km / h on roughly flat roads, my 110hp HDI consumes less than 4 liters / 100. If I clamped it down to 90hp for example, it would do the same but on average consumption would drop.
A much more comprehensive test bench or test is needed to validate performance.
I maintain that this is a far-fetched conclusion, which gives an idea of your mechanical skills.
What you don't know, the more power we use the more favorable the test (in my country the speed limit is 100kmh it tolerates 110kmh 115kmh) so all my tests are done at constant speed.
But precisely, I refuse to believe in something that combines all these characteristics:
- Inventor / crook in prison unable to make his invention work,
- marginal belief,
- demagogic overtones of conspiracy, ill will and incompetence,
- completely-downright illogical non-development,
- only very subjective evidence,
- contempt for those who do not believe it,
- no explanations by science (and there are rather scientists who understand why it does not work than the reverse - MIT and mining schools)
Now the day that one of these criteria evolves, I would certainly change my opinion on the subject but will it evolve, we cannot know: there, it is a matter of belief !!!
You hang on that after that, from the start and you use a different language depending on the forum
You could also give the results of your survey on the other forum ??
Andre