|
|
|
|
|
|
My mate, despite being clever, is a firm believer in those MPG cap tablets from Fuel Freedom International. The ones that you pop in your tank and magically get more mpg and better emissions.
I was doubtful, slapped him about the head and offered to sell him powdered water. However since then he's done two emissions tests, before and after on his 3 year old Civic 1.6, and got the following:
Initial Test on 12/05/08 Repeat Test 21/08/08
Fast Idel Test 2500-3000RPM
CO Level 0.08% 0.00%
HC Level 18ppm 2ppm
Lambda 1.00 1.00
Natural Idle Test 450-1500 RPM
CO Level 0.04% 0.03%
Now he maintains engine temp and fuel used was the same at both instances, so on the face of this they seem to work, CO and HC on particular are much improved. Or am I missing something? Is that actually such a small variation it could be down to equipment error/operator error/random engine workings?
Please put my mind at rest or might start believing in these and then who knows where it will end, I'll be ringing up Russell Grant maybe?
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
depends on the testing machinery really doesn't it?
needs more repeats too to draw a conclusive, erm, conclusion! although it does seem to have affected things well, but if he says fuel used was the same, where is the MPG gains?
|
| |
|
|
stinkwheel
Posted a lot
Doctor Of Gonzo Journalism - One of gods own proptypes, never even considered for mass production.
Posts: 2,280
|
|
|
|
|
Part of my job is repair, test and calibration of 4 and 5 gas exhaust analysers.
There is always a 10% margin of error claimed. So it could just be down to equipment,
|
| |
1973 Citroen Dyane 6 1980 Citroen Acadiane
1992 Citroen AX 1990 Citroen BX
1997 Citroen XM 1993 Citroen BX
1997 Citroen Xantia 1977 Citroen Ami 8
1996 Ford Escort 1989 Citroen BX
1997 Suzuki RF900 1988 Yamaha TDR250
1979 Honda CB400.
'I need less vehicles'
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 22, 2008 10:51:13 GMT
|
|
Sorry I meant the fuel used as in type and octane was the same. He's still working out mpgs.
10% margin is quite high and would certainly affect it! I'll await the results of his mpg and see. I still argue that if it was so good surely car manufacturers would install it themselves?
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 22, 2008 10:56:53 GMT
|
|
|
| |
1941 Wolseley Not Rod - 1956 Humber Hawk - 1957 Daimler Conquest - 1966 Buick LeSabre - 1968 Plymouth Sport Fury - 1968 Ford Galaxie - 1969 Ford Country Squire - 1969 Mercury Marquis - 1970 Morris Minor - 1970 Buick Skylark - 1970 Ford Galaxie - 1971 Ford Galaxie - 1976 Continental Mark IV - 1976 Ford Capri - 1994 Ford Fiesta
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 22, 2008 11:38:03 GMT
|
Properly calibrated test cell, corrected for temperature and atmospheric conditions, running on control fuel, back to back was it ? I didnt think so  Snake oil......... next you`ll be asking whether Slick 50 is a good idea  |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 22, 2008 14:13:47 GMT
|
|
from the fuelsaving.info site
theres also a section on there on why "MOT test style testing" of such devices is useless.
|
| |
Last Edit: Aug 22, 2008 14:14:53 GMT by akku
1941 Wolseley Not Rod - 1956 Humber Hawk - 1957 Daimler Conquest - 1966 Buick LeSabre - 1968 Plymouth Sport Fury - 1968 Ford Galaxie - 1969 Ford Country Squire - 1969 Mercury Marquis - 1970 Morris Minor - 1970 Buick Skylark - 1970 Ford Galaxie - 1971 Ford Galaxie - 1976 Continental Mark IV - 1976 Ford Capri - 1994 Ford Fiesta
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 22, 2008 14:47:21 GMT
|
|
If your mate has exchanged his hard-earned for one of those things he's a loser!
|
| |
1974 Lancia Beta Saloon
1975 Mazda 929 Coupé
1986 Mazda 929 Wagon
1979 Mazda 929 Hardtop
1982 Fiat Argenta 2.0 iniezione elettronica
1977 Toyota Carina TA14
1989 Subaru 1800 Wagon
1982 Hyundai Pony 1200TL 2-dr
1985 Hyundai Pony 1200 GL
1986 Maserati 425 Biturbo
1992 Rover 214 SEi 5-dr
2000 Rover 45 V6 Club
1994 Peugeot 205 'Junior' Diesel
1988 Volvo 760 Turbodiesel Saloon
1992 Talbot Express Autosleeper Rambler
2003 Renault Laguna SPEARS OR REAPERS
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 22, 2008 15:06:15 GMT
|
|
One of my friends, his uncle is a specialist mercedes machine, and knows his stuff, but he's into this fuel magnets stuff. It seems weird, I always just took it as rubbish. He also recommended once to me to use Slick 50.
|
| |
|
|
Enbloc
Part of things
Posts: 398
|
|
Aug 22, 2008 15:07:37 GMT
|
|
Fuel that comes out of pump differs depending on what time of the year it is. At its basic level there is a summer blend and a winter blend.
Theres over a 3 month time period between the two tests which the above could have effected results.
Also different petrol stations have different blends. So unless all the fuel was bought at the same time, from the same forecourt and used at the same time the results are void.
But at the end of the day any magical product you put in the tank is snake oil. If it worked they'd be using it in the Lemans 24hr!!
|
| |
Last Edit: Aug 22, 2008 15:09:38 GMT by Enbloc
|
|
bortaf
Posted a lot
Posts: 4,549
|
|
Aug 22, 2008 22:12:43 GMT
|
I've tested those magnets over a period of 2 years and 50,000 miles, total curse word/snake oil/plums ect, also tested those lead replcement fuel cats over a similar distance, both in tank and in line versions, also curse word, had to change the head 3 times in 20,000 miles until i fitted a propper unleaded head and still run the same head to this day 40,000 miles later  Slick 50 does work but after a few tens of thousand miles it falls off and blocks the oil filter. I say it works cos on 5 occasions i've had a pinto oil pump go, twice on just oil and it seized within 2 miles, 3 times with slick 50, i drove (the same car as the other 2 engines) 20 miles home before the cam started rattling, once i made it 10 miles without a noise but changed the engine anyway and once i got 35 miles before the engine siezed. Having been a minicab driver then a disabled minibus driver/delivery driver and on to a recovery driver i've been in the postion to test and log millages and results, not yet tested these cap thingys maybe i'll try them next ? |
| |
R.I.P photobucket
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 22, 2008 22:19:40 GMT
|
also tested those lead replcement fuel cats over a similar distance, both in tank and in line versions, also curse word No suprise! Lead pellets introduced into fuel tanks or lines are practically insoluble in petrol, and thus the lead content of the petrol, which results from temporary contact with the pellets is, in effect, nothing. |
| |
|
|
BiAS
Club Retro Rides Member
Insert witty comment here
Posts: 2,231
Club RR Member Number: 147
|
|
Aug 22, 2008 22:46:05 GMT
|
 ;D |
| |
Last Edit: Aug 22, 2008 22:50:41 GMT by BiAS
(car+wheels)-rideheight=WIN
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 27, 2008 15:56:47 GMT
|
|
Ok so in sumation you all think it's cack! Will have to try to convince him to stop being such a fool.
|
| |
|
|
