fuel-saving devices

thanks..there are claims re a "leon" device ( $495) can make up to 40 % difference

Stef

wood no good, use an egg for better effect!

Well said.

Similarly if there was a way to stop rust in a vehicle just by adding an 'electronic device' in lieu of all of the costly primers, care in selection of metals and design, then the auto manufacturers would have done that too.

Aftermarket products depend on claims that a vehicle has some 'fault' for which the aftermarket entrepreneur has a 'solution' (but of course!).

The good thing about Net forums is that sometimes people are willing to step forward and give consumers some help to discriminate between fraud and fact.

EV700

EV ,

How come the sacraficial anode on my boat motor corrodes but the motor doesnt.

Car companies dont want your bodywork , engine , gearbox to last a long time or you wouldnt need to get a new car. ( ok I accept the engine and gearbox may be a Nissan thing ).

Maybe if you lash out on the ' paint protection ' that would make your bodywork last longer , after all car companies are selling it so it must be the right solution.

Glenn.

Because otherwise your boat motor wouldn't last the length of it's warranty if used in salt water....

Then you'd be back gunning for them for a new motor under warranty because you used it within the design parameters for it's intended purpose.

Dave

Glenn,

See here for an answer to your question

Site Link

R.

An excellent, simple to understand article that completely debunks much of the crap floating around the marketplace about anti-rust gizmos. Thanks robak!

Agree too that if there was a cost effective way for manufacturers to save fuel / prevent rust ect then they would be doing it as standard. Free market economics means that if somebody comes up with a good idea then it won't be long before everybody else does basically the same thing if they don't want to go out of business, even if they have to pay licence fees or do it a slightly different way. (Anti-lock brakes being a good example)

Muddy

Thanks for setting me straight robak,

Guess the electric protection systems are missing the vital electrolyte.

Glenn.

Aamazing how everybody was urging for one to be tried & tested, & then shot the messenger!

Those of us who wanted it "tried and tested" meant under controlled conditions ,meaning having it done by independant technicians who know what they are doing.
Not someone like Bill driving around on his own making up figures with 4 numbers after the decimal point and claiming them to be authentic

I ddin't think it was 'Bill' that did it, isn't F4Phantom a forum member?

If I remember correctly, everybody was waiting for his report, when it came back positive all the armchair experts here were disappointed, & as he said, questioned his credibity.

Okay; do they have a version for women drivers? If so, where do you attach the string?

Fish hook in the privates replaces the knot around the nut. Note: Fish hook is the unisex solution.

Geoff

Only problem is ppl getting their jollies from having their piercing played with.....

I do agree with the water meth as it certainly increased horsepower on aircraft engines or restored power on hot days or altitude, the RR dart was a classic example as was the TPE331 as installed in the J32, but the expense of the water meth and the installation in motor vehicles will outweigh the cost of other means of getting more power with the exception of gas.
Graeme

Water/Meth certainly works as explained above, but in aircraft it is only used for power recovery - not to ïncrease the baseline power.

It's been a while since I flew the J31/32, but from memory the fuel flow increased when the W/M was on during takeoff - because the fuel controller responds to the more dense/cooler air and hence adds more fuel, then voila! There's your power recovery.

I have my doubts as to the economic operating cost of W/M in a car, because a litre of methanol costs several dollars. To have it on all the time would need to be measured in several litres per hour.

I know it's a difficult comparison, but I remember a "WET" takeoff used between 10 and 20L of W/M in about 1 minute.

Please read my post on costs etc and you can buy methanol at $1 per litre in 200L drums made in Australia.

4 litres per tank of diesel with controlled input under power and adjustable to suit circumstances like towing etc not on when cruising on under acceleration load.

Yes but how long to recover the cost?

I can buy 22,500 km worth of diesel for $4000.

All I have to do is put up with my existing factory spec power and torque.

Not a tough decision.

If you save 10% on your fuel bill - and that's debatable - you need to buy $36000 worth of fuel before you are in front on the gas install (excluding gov't rebates) and $9000 worth of fuel to be in front on the Chem cool. Not including the cost of the methanol.

The diesel options take much longer to recover than a petrol where it's the whole fuel that's changed over. Where it runs in concurrently with the expensive fuel as an additive it's a diferent scenario.

I'm sure if I've got the maths wrong someone will correct me.

Dave

Im interested. Is there any independant testing done by accredited technicians or is this from watching your speedo?

This has been my personal experience and I do not drive on fuel guages I drive on kls per tank and use reset trip meter with every fill up.
The dyno testing was professional by G Force Engines in Newcastle NSW and I have the before and after print out from that testing.
Go to www.snowperformance.net and that is the unit Im using and it is imported to Australia by Mark Alford in Minto NSW.
The basic small diesel kit starts at $649 plus installation.

//and you have not read and or understood the costs as posted. //

Maybe there is more than one person who doesn't understand the costs because of your posting is very hard to understand :-~

Just checked out that site, and correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't this setup mainly designed for racing and/or "large" engines? They keep mentioning anywhere from 5.9L Cummins up to a 7.3L Ford and 350HP plus for more than one stage!! Do you happen to know anyone that has used one for a "standard" Diesel :-0

Andrew

I believe replies like that first sentence is not required in this forums thanks.....Where did i say that i didn't want to understand???

I have asked a simple question as i was merely interested in this concept, yet i (and i would guess others) could not understand your figures, especially considering your response to djcache.

Out of interest (to gain a better idea if the concept works) what type of vehicle do you have it fitted to at the moment to achieve a 25% saving in fuel? As you should realise from my rig profile, i could possibly benefit if the product worked on my Pajero, however i am trying to working out what vehicle is getting 500k out of a tank AFTER fitting this product?

Help me understand instead of jumping to conclusions without fact.

Andrew

Andrew,
Wheeley's vehicle is a 3.1 litre factory turbo diesel Isuzu MU.

As way of somewhat independent varification I'll offer my take on what he's done.

First, Seat of the pants.
The bloody little MU goes like a scalded cat.
It tows a trailer long enough to be continued, enough axles to nearly call a road train and enough weight to satisfy most any test.

Varifiable,
The MU travelled 750km on a tank in factory trim. With the addition of the mentioned Water/Methanol kit it now does 900km to the tank.
Note: I've no idea the capacity of an MU tank but an approximate 20% range increase is impressive to this sceptic!!

Wheeley also holds the before and after dyno readouts he speaks of. The best part is they are from the same dyno on the same day. That makes them pretty credible within the bounds of atmospheric variation!

How does his kit work?
It has a pressure switch that measures manifold pressure after the turbo. It then injects the 50/50 Methanol/Water mix on an increase in manifold pressure.
What other equipment does it use?
It has a windscreen washer bottle to hold the mix, a pump to inject the mix. A jet in the manifold to meter it and I think from memory a solenoid at the jet to prevent "dribbling" of the mix.

Further advantages,
It very much drops the inlet and exhaust gas temperatures whilst it's injecting. To me, anyone with an aftermarket turboed diesel would definitely benefit from this system.
Why? One of the bains of the aftermarket turbo under load are high Exhaust Gas Temperatures. This system certainly cures that problem.

In Ian's (Wheeley's) defence I'd suggest he's very passionate about things he knows work and equally passionate about things that don't work.

This from my limited experience is one system that really needs an open exploration.

Hope that clears up some of the questions you have,

Geoff

Thanks Geoff,

Those figures are impressive, especially for a Holden Frontera :-) For a vehicle that would have around a 76L (?) tank , 900km would be exceptional to say the least.

I wonder what the difference would be between an '94-96 vehicle and a newer TD? I would summise that the older vehicles may have more room to play with these additions :-)

Thanks again

Andrew

Hi Andrew,
I've no idea on the advantages to earlier or later vehicles.
I do know when Ian and I talk about his MU and the methanol injection he often suggests fitting it to my 78 series factory TD troopy.
At the moment I'd like to get a little more than 9 months of the Toyota factory warranty that's so far passed!

Maybe down the track I can use personal experience to answer the next stage of your question,

Geoff

Again my enthusiasm exceeded my brains capacity to explain fully.
On visiting the full-throttle site you will see the diesel kits at a higher price than what I quoted and being curious I asked why and Mark said that the Stage 1 kit for petrol supplied with a pressure switch instead of a vacuum switch will do the job for most small diesels and that is what I have installed.
Ian