Mileage Improvement Program

1
Inontime, Inc.

• Mileage Improvement Program

2
Test Protocol Overview Inontime, Inc. purchased
a single Tadger device to demonstrate its
effectiveness for their fleet. A single test
unit is never the recommended process however we
have analyzed the data and provided both
comprehensive observations and recommendations. T
est data was collected using the fuel tracking
system at Inontime. A 2007 International DT466
engine was used and six weeks of baseline data
was captured without the Tadger and three weeks
of data was captured with the Tadger device
installed. The data has been presented with
similar data from a Control truck that did not
have the Tadger installed. The results have been
illustrated on the attached sheets, followed by a
concise summary. Additional test results for
other municipalities, private industry and larger
fleets are available upon request, or at
www.tadgergroup.com
3
Typical International DT466 Installation Picture
4
Test Procedure a) Six weeks of baseline data
was captured without the Tadger installed Sept.
24 Nov. 3, 2007b) Tadger was installed Nov.
3, 2007 c) Three weeks of data was captured with
the Tadger installed Nov. 5 Nov. 29, 2007 d)
All data was recorded and submitted to Tadger
Group for analysis and review e) TGI completed
and submitted final report Results The results
have been documented and illustrated on the
attached pages. Additional test results for
other municipalities, private industry, and
larger fleets are available upon request, or at
www.tadgergroup.com
5
Diagram 1
6

• Diagram 1 Observations
• The data is presented as the Miles per gallon
  (Mpg) at each fill up
• The Tadger installation date is marked so that
  the without Tadger and with Tadger data is
  clearly separated
• There was a Flier on Nov. 27th for the with
  Tadger data. This data point is 1.0 Mpg lower
  than any data point on the chart.
• The Flier must be removed as there is an
  obvious error
• Please see diagram 2 for additional
  observations

7
Diagram 2
8

• Diagram 2 Observations
• The data is presented as the Miles per gallon
  (Mpg) at each fill up with the Flier removed
• The without Tadger data is very erratic and
  unpredictable
• The with Tadger data is very consistent and
  predictable
• The Tadger has provided a consistent output in
  Mpg regardless of the driving habits and/or
  conditions
• Please see diagram 3 for a comparison with a
  control truck

9
Diagram 3
10

• Diagram 3 Observations
• The data is presented as the Miles per gallon
  (Mpg) at each fill up. This is data for a
  Control truck that was never equipped with a
  Tadger
• The Tadger installation date is marked so that
  the comparative time frame is exactly the same as
  the Tadger truck
• All of the data is very erratic and unpredictable
  both before and after the date the Tadger was
  installed on the other truck
• Please see diagram 4 for additional
  observations

11
Diagram 4
12

• Diagram 4 Observations
• The data is presented as the average temperature
  for each week
• The Tadger installation date is marked so that
  the without Tadger and with Tadger
  temperature data is clearly separated
• The average temperature for the without Tadger
  and with Tadger data has been calculated and
  documented
• The entire data has a downward trend from week 1
  to week 9
• The average without Tadger temperature (57.7
  deg) was warmer than the with Tadger
  temperature (37.3 deg) by 20.4 degrees
• This information is critical to understanding the
  effect of temperature on fuel economy. Please
  read the article on the next pages

13
Why is the fuel economy of an automobile worse in
the winter than in the summer?   Harold Schock,
professor of mechanical engineering and the
director of the Automotive Research Experiment
Station at Michigan State University, explains.
  Every new car sold in the U.S. has a
manufacturer-provided fuel economy sticker
describing mileage for urban and highway driving.
This fuel economy is measured by operating the
vehicle on a chassis dynamometer using a
repeatable driving schedule. A chassis
dynamometer acts like a vehicle treadmill,
allowing a drive train to operate while the
vehicle is stationary. Before these tests, a car
is "cold soaked" for 12 hours at temperatures
between 68 and 86 Fahrenheit. This treatment,
together with the specified driving schedules set
by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
provide a standard basis for comparing one
vehicle to another. Urban driving is simulated
using specifically prescribed accelerations,
decelerations and periods of idling typical of
the stop-and-go driving expected in cities. The
highway schedule contains fewer accelerations and
decelerations and speeds typical of freeway
driving. During these experiments technicians
measure both emission levels and fuel economy.
Emission levels must meet standards set by the
EPA, whereas the Department of Transportation
sets the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE)
standards, which are reported in miles per gallon
(MPG). The measured fuel economy is multiplied by
a scale factor to account for the differences
between laboratory measurements and real driving
conditions. For example, the urban mileage on the
sticker of a new automobile sold in the U.S. is
actually 10 percent lower than the laboratory
measured value and the highway mileage listed is
22 percent less than the laboratory value. Page
1 of 3
14
In contrast to the precisely controlled
experiments described above, a typical driver
does not operate under ideal conditions. The
actual mileage (MPG) that a given vehicle will
deliver depends on three general factors 
driving style, road conditions and the additional
energy consumed when the outside temperature
decreases. For example, aggressive drivers will
obtain fuel economy values that are lower than
those achieved by more cautious drivers. Vehicle
fuel economy can be severely diminished if
additional work is required to move a vehicle
through snow or water on a highway or if
excessive weight is stored in the car. Tire
slippage can occur on wet or icy highways, which
wastes energy and decreases fuel economy. In
addition, in cold climates many people bring the
interiors to a comfortable temperature before
driving and keep their engines idling during
prolonged waiting periods to maintain that
temperature. Excessive stop and go driving in
heavy traffic, use of heater motors, windshield
wipers and defrosting devices all cause
additional fuel consumption and reduce fuel
economy. It is difficult to estimate exact
percentages of fuel economy reduction for these
factors as they vary considerably between drivers
and different road conditions, but any time a car
is warming up or not moving with the engine
running, the fuel economy is 0 MPG. Page 2 of 3
15
  Auto components such as electric motors,
engines, transmissions and tires consume more
energy at low temperatures, especially during
startup. The viscosity of the oil and other
fluids increases with decreasing temperature,
which means that more work and more fuel is
required to overcome friction in the engine,
transmission and other drive train components. If
the outside temperature is significantly below
the ambient temperature at which the EPA
prescribed tests were conducted and trips are
short, the engine's coolant system never reaches
normal operating temperature and more fuel is
utilized. Additionally, the amount of drag
between tires and the road is about 20 percent
greater at 0 degrees F than it is at 80 degrees
F. Operating tires at lower than recommended
operating pressure further degrades a vehicle's
fuel economy, but this is also a problem in warm
weather.  Finally, a vehicle's aerodynamic drag
is proportional to air density. On a 70-degree-F
day, the density of the air is 16 percent lower
than on a day with temperatures around 0 degrees
F. Although this makes little difference in urban
driving, it could account for a highway mileage
per gallon reduction of 7 percent on the colder
day (including a 1.5 percent allowance for
improvement in fuel efficiency at the higher
engine load).   Considering all these factors,
the fuel economy during urban trips of less than
10 minutes, in cold weather with snowy road
conditions can easily be 50 percent lower than
operation of the same vehicle in warm weather
with dry roads. Page 3 of 3
16
Diagram 5
17

• Diagram 5 Observations
• The data is presented as the average Mpg for each
  week
• The Tadger installation date is marked so that
  the without Tadger and with Tadger data is
  clearly separated
• The Flier from Nov. 27th has been removed
• The average Mpg for the without Tadger and
  with Tadger data has been calculated and
  documented
• The without Tadger data has a downward trend
  from week 1 to week 6 even before the Tadger was
  installed. This trend is parallel to the
  decrease in temperature
• The initial week with the Tadger showed the best
  Mpg across the chart
• The lowest without Tadger weekly average Mpg
  (9.32) was lower than the lowest with Tadger
  weekly average Mpg (9.51)
• The average Mpg with the Tadger (9.67) was higher
  than the Mpg without the Tadger (9.66)

18
Diagram 6
19

• Diagram 6 Observations
• The data is presented as the average Mpg for each
  week for the Control truck
• The average Mpg for the same time frames as the
  Tadger truck has been calculated and documented
• The data has a downward trend from week 1 to week
  9 exactly the same as the Tadger truck. This
  trend is parallel to the decrease in temperature
• The average Mpg before the Tadger was installed
  (8.19) was higher than the Mpg when the Tadger
  was installed (7.69)
• The Mpg decreased by 6.13 from the time without
  the Tadger to the time with the Tadger on the
  Control truck

20
Summary Mpg Improvement
21
Summary R.O.I. Savings
22
Discussion Conclusion

• The purpose of this test program was to
  demonstrate the product for its effect on vehicle
  fuel consumption. It was obvious that the
  Tadger was effective for the following reasons
• On the Tadger truck, the with Tadger individual
  fill up data was very consistent and predictable
• On the Tadger truck, the Mpg average with the
  Tadger increased by 0.12 than the Mpg average
  without the Tadger even though the Tadger was run
  at average temperatures 20 degrees lower. On the
  control truck, during the exact same time period,
  the Mpg dropped by 6.13
• The Mpg average for the first week with the
  Tadger was higher than any other week without the
  Tadger even though the temperatures were 15
  degrees lower
• The lowest Mpg weekly average with the Tadger was
  0.19 Mpg higher then the lowest weekly average
  with out the Tadger even though the temperatures
  were 14 degrees lower