Well I may be totally out of place, but in the test report all it does is talk about emissions testing. This site and most of the people on it are not interested in making worse emissions, or better, per se. Were interested in getting better mileage. How in the world does getting a summary from some test station, on emissions help me get better mileage? I don't get it.
Reread it. I see hybitgibbity, mumbitiumbito, but I still don't get. Can someone, else, interpret or explain the mileage numbers? |
^^^^ dude i have no idea. what i do know tho is im getting 40% over epa without this crap and any outer money making bs that rips people off.
|
Quote:
|
ecoclean -
Quote:
One thing you have to realize is that it doesn't matter if your are the "real deal". You are offering a product in a field that is jam-pack-filled with charlatans and snake-oil salesmen. You've got to be willing to admit this. Because you have put "your hat in the ring", you have to understand that the burden is on you to prove you are innocent first, not for us to prove you are guilty. It may not be fair from your POV, but I think it is realistic to make this assumption. Matt has said time and again that we are willing to test the stuff. Form a sales POV, it would make more sense for you to send samples to X number of people. Of those, some would have success and others wouldn't (not all drivetrains are the same). After that, people would have to buy it. If it works and it saves us money for some people, they'll buy more and become advocates. CarloSW2 |
Gary -
Quote:
Mach 3 ULTIMATE ME2 Highway Exhaust Emmisions Test Baseline Test ID THC CO NOx CO2 ONT08089 0.0062 0.2103 0.0285 237.5447 ONT08103 0.0064 0.1954 0.0245 237.0813 0.0064 0.1954 0.0245 237.0813 With ULTIMATE ME2 Test ID THC CO NOx CO2 ONT08089 0.0056 0.0515 0.0049 235.2699 ONT08170 0.0061 0.2186 0.0249 234.4385 0.0061 0.2159 0.1351 234.8542 Improvement: %7 33% 44% 1% For one variable only : THC : (.0062 + .0064) / 2 = 0.0063 --> Baseline (.0056 + .0061) / 2 = 0.00585 --> with ME2 => 0.00585 / 0.0063 = 0.9285 => 0.93 => 93% => 7% less emissions => 7% improvement. In terms of the MPG test, the "real world conditions" are interesting, but they way these drivers drove the truck could not be ascertained. I think they should have a different test as follows : 1 - Put the trucks side-by-side in a Smog-Test Garage. 2 - Make sure the tanks are empty (hard to do?) 3 - Put X gallons of gas in each tank. 4 - Run each truck at 35 MPH under cruise control conditions (remove human driving bias). 5 - Run the tanks to empty. This will establish baseline performance of each truck. Hopefully, they will run out of gas at the same time or within a statistical margin of error. If they don't, then multiple baseline test runs may be required to asceratin the baseline truck MPG differences. Then, repeat the test, except with one truck having the fuel additive. The test could also be repeated for different MPH cruising speeds. I think that real-world driving tests are good, but in this situation, we want to eliminate as many variables as possible. CarloSW2 |
Quote:
Furthermore, the company making the product supplied the cars that the testing was done with, and we have no idea how well those cars were maintained before the test (my guess is that they were well ridden cars with carbon buildup problems, before the test was done). Finally, many of the benefits that the product claims to offer, are in fact benefits that could easily be had by cleaning out built-up carbon in the fuel system (especially the engine itself). In fact, a good job of carbon cleanup could easily result in much more benefit than this company is claiming their product offered! So I'm wondering if this product is nothing more than a decent fuel "detergent" additive, and possibly also a top head lube. Here's why I think this theory may have some merit: 1) Buildup of carbon in the engine (especially anywhere near the combustion chambers) is known to rob performance, hurt FE, and even result in more pollutants in the air. 2) Carbon buildup is a VERY COMMON problem in engines. And while this can be kept to a minimum with the proper fuel additives (especially the proper "detergents" in the fuel), a large fraction of the fuel out there doesn't have enough of these additives to keep most engines free of this carbon buildup. 3) The proper fuel additives are known to be able to clean out this builtup carbon. As just one example (of several out there), you can buy "Techron" concentrate (the same stuff in some higher end "brand name" gas), and add it to your own fuel. And if you have builtup carbon in your engine, adding these additives to your fuel will tend to help both the engine and FE (by clearing out the carbon, that is preventing the engine from working as well as it should). 4) At the same time, it is known that engine oil can't get to all parts of the engine. Therefore, having a little "lubricant" (additive) in your gas, can also help lubricate (lower friction) in parts of the engine the gas gets to but the oil doesn't. 5) BUT, if this is what is going on, than a noticeable fraction of the benefit will continue AFTER the additive is no longer used (as one main purpose of the additive was to clean out the engine, so it was again working as a properly tuned engine should). Which means that an A-B-A test of the additive would show that much of the benefit remains AFTER the additive was no longer in the gas (as it would take a while before the car engine again got polluted with carbon byproducts of combustion). But guess what? The testing done by that site showed only an A-B test, not the A-B-A test that would tell if the (small) benefit remained after the additive was no longer in the car... NOTE: If this "miracle additive" is really a gas detergent and/or a "top head lube" it no doubt is useful. However, the question then would be benefit for cost. Because there are already a number of companies that sell decent "detergent" and/or "top head lube" additives you can add to your gas (some of them reasonably inexpensive to buy), as a way of making sure the gas you use has more additives than the few the cheap gas stations put in for you. My current personal favorite combined lube/detergent fuel additive is "FP Plus" (concentrate) from https://www.lubecontrol.com/fuel.htm , but (as I said) there are a number of products that exist in this area. So really, to be fair about this, you really have to way the cost/benefits of these various fuel additives (especially the detergents and fuel system lubes) against each other, vs just comparing a single "miracle additive" against the default case of doing nothing (and IMHO that web site's "testing" really only tested their product against the default "do nothing" case, and even there the results weren't that impressive vs the results of some of the other fuel additives out there)... |
Quote:
Would those who are willing to test please step forward? |
So did anyone ever get any of this stuff? Has any sales person given anything to anybody on this site for testing?
|
i think he left were not dumb enough for it
|
Quote:
|
you guys are tough, I am up for the challange! Do you guys have any one in Arizona where I can send a sample of my "Snake Oil? If not send me a name and address to some one who is honest, prehaps a christian with a good reputaion!
I'll make some arrangements to send some? Send the information to me at Idemandresults@hotmail.com |
Atheists are people too, :(
|
Quote:
|
I'm willing to take the challenge. I live in Mississippi where it's warm and very humid. I've also kept a gas log ever since my van was purchased in Mach.
|
wtf is that suposta mean. i am cristian and that still makes no sense to me. there are lots of people who are not christaian that are better people then some that are WTF...
prehaps a christian with a good reputaion! |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:44 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.