If the article report fuel consumption correctly, the mileage improvement is NOT 25% more like 33%. They say it REDUCES fuel consumption by 25%. That translates into a mpg improvement of 33%.
As an example suppose it takes 10 gallons to go 100 miles=10mpg. Now reduce the fuel consumption by 25%. So it then takes 7.5 gallons to go 100 miles=13.3 mpg, a 33% improvement.
Either way if the claims come anything close to what can be achieved over life cycle it's significant.
However, given all the work on engine design, something that claims to offer the improvement they claim, I'd like to see independent verification. Seems like these kinds of claims keep coming up and usually don't pan out.
