fitch fuel Catalyst

Submitted: Tuesday, Jul 05, 2005 at 19:22
ThreadID: 24463 Views:2389 Replies:7 FollowUps:5
This Thread has been Archived
Evening All,
Has any 3.0litre Patrol owners (or anyone else for that matter) had any experience with the "fitch fuel catalyst"? Saw it on tv tonight and have checked their website. Caims are impressive but would like some futrher feedback before spending $385.00.
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: F4Phantom - Tuesday, Jul 05, 2005 at 20:21

Tuesday, Jul 05, 2005 at 20:21
Gday Bob. I put a fitch on my 2.5L diesel navara last friday. I filled the tank completly. At around half a 60L tank I had done around 200k's. This means 15L/100km. This is shocking for my car as it is usually 10L or less. I was 4x4ing in mud and hills etc,, high revv for 90% of this time. The guy recons there may be some sort of break in period where fuel econ may go up (all fuel saving companies claim their device cleans out the engine as do fitch - they call it break in). Either way 4x4ing does use more fuel, how much more i dont know. So I cant reccomend this device just yet but i plan on doing a post to relate any positive or negative news. In 1985 I think it was, cat converters were made compulsary for all new cars in Aust. The converter is unchanged in the process of changing the exhaust to lower pollution output. I dont have a problem with fitch theory of a cat in the fuel line before rarther than after combustion. Time will tell for me tho.
AnswerID: 118985

Reply By: pprass - Tuesday, Jul 05, 2005 at 22:51

Tuesday, Jul 05, 2005 at 22:51
Same question asked the other day on here. My experience is on a 4.5ltr Patrol and a 4.2ltr Patrol. With the 4.2 diesel, I can be quite certain that there is no fuel gain whatsoever. Two almost identical 4.2's went across the Simpson (same age, Cooper tyres, suspension lift) and there was just under 2 litres difference in fuel over 600kms. The slightly heavier Patrol used 110 litres of diesel wheras the other used 108.8 litres.
AnswerID: 119026

Reply By: Leroy - Tuesday, Jul 05, 2005 at 23:26

Tuesday, Jul 05, 2005 at 23:26
Sssssss ssss Ssssssss s n a k e o i l

AnswerID: 119032

Follow Up By: Member - Bob K (QLD) - Wednesday, Jul 06, 2005 at 08:42

Wednesday, Jul 06, 2005 at 08:42
Thanks for the feedback fellas. I think I will save my money and move on.

FollowupID: 374208

Follow Up By: F4Phantom - Thursday, Jul 07, 2005 at 16:18

Thursday, Jul 07, 2005 at 16:18
"Testing by the Roads and Traffic Authority would suggest Mark is right. The RTA found emissions dropped a staggering 50 per cent after fitting a Fitch."
FollowupID: 374399

Reply By: locallaw - Wednesday, Jul 06, 2005 at 17:11

Wednesday, Jul 06, 2005 at 17:11
Gidday,Just watching t/v today and according to the RTA it does work.That is all I can say but time will tell.
Seeya Locallaw
AnswerID: 119139

Reply By: Member - Bill S (NSW) - Wednesday, Jul 06, 2005 at 19:15

Wednesday, Jul 06, 2005 at 19:15
TO Those DOUBTERS of the product if you dont have results FIX your F**++--
and you will get results that will blow you away.My landcruiser went from 7.2klms per ltr to 8.7 if thats not enough gain then I dont know what is.Fitted a F200 unit to a nissan 4x4 pathfinder he now uses two litres less fuel per 100klms.The only thing I have to say to non believers is YOU have TOO much money
AnswerID: 119152

Follow Up By: pprass - Thursday, Jul 07, 2005 at 23:03

Thursday, Jul 07, 2005 at 23:03

What is there to fix on a brand new vehicle? Both my Patrol's were regularly serviced every 10k's for the petrol and now 5k's for the diesel by a dealer. Maybe if the vehicle is old and runs inefficiently, this product may improve. But I certainly have not seen any difference and as mentioend above - I tested it over 7,700kms with two identical vehicles.
FollowupID: 374456

Follow Up By: awill4x4 - Friday, Jul 08, 2005 at 22:31

Friday, Jul 08, 2005 at 22:31
Enough of the anecdotal bulltish sprouted by those who have spent their money and see the product through rose coloured glasses. Have a read of these articles about various fuel saving devices and Fitch is also mentioned as well.
The last one also mentions vaporate, another one doing the rounds at the moment.
link text
link text
link text
Regards Andrew.
FollowupID: 374597

Reply By: Member - Bill S (NSW) - Friday, Jul 08, 2005 at 23:55

Friday, Jul 08, 2005 at 23:55
HI Andrew, You have a lot to learn, get to it buddy
AnswerID: 119515

Follow Up By: awill4x4 - Saturday, Jul 09, 2005 at 00:20

Saturday, Jul 09, 2005 at 00:20
Bill, I'd much rather be a well informed sceptic. If you bothered to read the whole site it's a well researched rebuttal of most of the "fuel saving" devices foisted upon us in recent years. In my opinion Fitch is just another to arrive in a blaze of glory only to promise a false dawn.
I find a healthy dose of scepticism is a prerequisite whenever these devices rear their heads.
The so called dyno test on TV the other night was a complete farce, who set the parameters? What temperatures were the cars run at? Was one directly from a cold start while the other was at normal operating temperature? Where the tyre pressures adjusted? What mode was the dyno set at? If a dyno dynamics dyno. Was it in shootout mode? If not, these dyno's can be fudged by simply changing the ramp rate with one flick of a switch.
I'll be waiting with baited breath for your comments about Fitch in 6 or 12 months time when all the hype has died down and the next greatest thing since sliced bread is on the market.
Regards Andrew. ps: (I've got transitions lenses in my glasses, not rose coloured ones)
FollowupID: 374616

Reply By: Member - Bill S (NSW) - Saturday, Jul 09, 2005 at 16:19

Saturday, Jul 09, 2005 at 16:19
HI Andrew, I ask a question of you why has the US navy contracted to fit some 7,000 of these units to their naval ships and boats? Have you checked the VIPAC report conducted some two years ago on a diesel cruiser? And I did read the information that you sent and what I have to comment is that whoever wrote that report obviously has not tested FITCH. I do understand how hard it is for people to come to grips with something as advanced as this unit. By the way the CUEDC test carried out by VIPAC was in a controlled environment in a sealed room at their labority in MELBOURNE. Further more if you had any nouse about you at all you would put it through its paces yourself before you comment any further and thank you for your input. I remember when I was first introduced to the product I was far more a sceptic than you and I got egg on my face big time. There is over 1,000 vehicles fitted in the illawarra and if it dont work WHY are these people happy with their fuel savings, but then by your reconing I guess that they are just immagining it and I suppose that it is just my imagination that my 80srs diesel which I have owned for 10years blows no smoke at start up cold?

Have a lovely day
AnswerID: 119564

Sponsored Links