Acetone testing on a dynamometer

[ZugyNA]

From an old post on a Yahoo group:


[I've done a bit of research on ACETONE as fuel additive for
performance/economy.

From 4 different sources take a pick.

Approx .2% to .25% is suggested.

I also found info that suggest's .75% for octane boost/economy.

1% to 2.5% for blending ethanol/methanol e.t.c and small amounts of
water[approx 1% H2O].

And for racing fuel blends up to 15% Yee Ha!

Acetone is a good surfactant.It's a great fuel blender.It apparently
loves to scavenge/mix H2O into your fuel[good for your steel tank].It
melts plastic and is corrosive in large percentage amounts.

Does it work..Hmmmmmm...well I can vouch for it's power boosting
qualities at .75% to 1% range but as far as economy goes, the speedo
doesn't work.

As its octane rating is approx 150 [by memory] and it's not cheap so
you have to work out your priorities. "aussieburra"]



Here's one you (and I) will find hard to believe....1 oz acetone per gallon:

(Yahoo pes acetone group)

"Just out of curiosity I took it for a hwy test. It got 22.5 hwy.
Factory is 23 so I figured, he must be right about no gain at that
level of acetone. Shortly later, I checked my tire pressure. All
4 tires had 20 some psi in them, way to low. So I filled to 36psi
which is the full amount. Then I retested the car. This time I got
46mpg hwy. This is a 5.0L V8!!! Then I let an inexperienced
mechanic try to fine tune the car, to see if I could get even more.
He was inexperienced, and messed up the timing. Retarded it below
factory. Tested again. MPG went in the tank. 17mpg hwy. I was
pretty pissed, so adjusted the timing back up to factory myself, and
then, just for the hell of it, as I know this increases horsepower
and mpg, I went just a tad more advance than factory. Tested again."

Just did an emissions test today, to see if the extra advance put
emissions in the tank. It just BARELY increased, still way lower
that straight gas. Advancing timing increases compression pressure,
so you can EXPECT to get dirtier emissions if you do this. It passed
the emissions test with flying colors. And if you think about the
math of it, since it gets (400%?? sic) 100% more mpg, TOTAL parts per million,
>per mile<, is ACTUALLY 1/4 of the reading it gave. Talk about going
GREEN! This is a clean machine. Is a 1985 T-Bird, 5.0L w 4 speed
automatic.

"I will warn you, that no one, including me KNOWS if this will
damage anything. I have been warned by one fellow that it will
cause O2 sensor to misread and make engine run so lean that it
will burn the pistons. I have seen NO SIGN by my temp gauge of
overheating however. I have ran a total of about two 20 gallon
tanks with the 1:128 mixture. Car is running better that ever so
far. Try this at your OWN risk. Much testing is needed on this.
I am in touch with my state senate and a university engineering
dept. The university will be testing for any harmful
emissions or damage to car.

If I don't burn up my engine, my 20 gallon tank now has a range
of 2000miles! LOL, is another junk car. Don't have much in to
it money wise. So if she burns up, no great loss."

..............

I think you are involved in disproving, not testing. Mythbusters syndrome?

Not criticizing what you've done...but I think the real test is VALID on the road mpg testing as per LaPointe...not trying to translate torque/hp curves?