Fuel additive for efficiency not the bug

[oldsaltoz]

This all sounds a bit like the adding 3% Acetone to diesel vehicles.

 

[Latestarter1]

If it worked I can assure you that every Haulage Contractor in Europe would use it.

My Company runs 10 lorries, MAN, Volvo, Iveco and Mercedes and manufacturers state that additives to the fuel and oils are not necessary and will invaidate any warranty.

If it works I am prepared to make an offer for the total shares of the Company and its patents and I can assure you that raising the capital would be very easy.

Just think of the returns on World Wide sales if it was to work!

If it sounds to good to be true ?

I violently agree!

What destroys the credibility of the product are the outrageous numbers. Truck operators would die for a PROVEN 1%. The Energy Saving Trust would be throwing funding at a proper test programme at the mere whiff of such a magic elixir and a credible technical organisation for example Ricardo would be ready to grab the funds and do the work. Do we see any of this evidence. No.

I used to get calls in my old job from these type of guys promising the earth, conversation went something like this:-

'Our widget will guarantee X% fuel economy improvement'

Reply 'Where is your data'

'Smiffs International Logistics have had amazing results'

Reply 'Ok I am prepared to give it a go based on what you are telling me. We will commit to testing your product on our engines. Our minimum validation would probably require three months, twenty four hour seven day a week dyno testing at £1000 per day plus fuel. You pay me up front for the test program. If your product meets your claims I will refund 100% of the test costs and formally endorse your product'

'Click buzz, line goes dead'

Adulteration of fuels is a fool’s game, on road vehicles which have SCR (Selective catalytic Reduction) utter madness.

 

[Hurricane]

Reply 'Ok I am prepared to give it a go based on what you are telling me. We will commit to testing your product on our engines. Our minimum validation would probably require three months, twenty four hour seven day a week dyno testing at £1000 per day plus fuel. You pay me up front for the test program. If your product meets your claims I will refund 100% of the test costs and formally endorse your product'

'Click buzz, line goes dead'

Why be so aggressive?
If they really did have something, you'd be the last person they would work with.

BTW, I'm with you. Very sceptic about the product.
But there are people out there that believe in it and have proved it to themselves.
Personally, I need to prove it for myself – just in case – they might have something!!

 

[djefabs]

I'm afraid our Landcruiser doesnt have a fuel computer fitted so I'll have to do the test by "topping off" the tanks. I think if I add the additive before filling the tank, it should mix the fuel before use.

But, as I say, probably not a long enough test to be conclusive.

Hi Mike
As you know I am very skeptical about all these type of products and would not normally post on threads about this type of snake oil.
But.......Last Friday I filled up (from very empty) with diesel at a Shell station on the outskirts of Reading. Whilst paying for the fuel I was handed a leaflet about FuelSave diesel which promptly went in the bin. Anyway we went away to the Peak District for the weekend, driving as usual (probably badly and to fast) I began to notice the trip computer given an improved MPG. First thought was something was wrong with it but on filling up on Tuesday and noting trip mileage there was a definite improvement (approx 4%)
This was not a very scientific test and was completely unexpected but maybe there is something in these additives.
I would suggest if you conduct your test try and fill with the same fuel. I am keeping an open mind and would be very interested in your results.

 

[jfm]

Hi Mike
As you know I am very skeptical about all these type of products and would not normally post on threads about this type of snake oil.
But.......Last Friday I filled up (from very empty) with diesel at a Shell station on the outskirts of Reading. Whilst paying for the fuel I was handed a leaflet about FuelSave diesel which promptly went in the bin. Anyway we went away to the Peak District for the weekend, driving as usual (probably badly and to fast) I began to notice the trip computer given an improved MPG. First thought was something was wrong with it but on filling up on Tuesday and noting trip mileage there was a definite improvement (approx 4%)
This was not a very scientific test and was completely unexpected but maybe there is something in these additives.
I would suggest if you conduct your test try and fill with the same fuel. I am keeping an open mind and would be very interested in your results.

But was that just the "premium" fuel DJEfabs, with higher calorific value? I don't have a diesel car but I think these premium diesels work the same as the premium petrols. They are blended to have higher calorific value. For sure on my car if I fill with the premium petrol I get an mpg improvement of around 4% (AOTBE) which you can see on the computer, but of course that benefit is more than taken away by the higher price of the premium fuel

 

[sarabande]

that sounds as if Shell are putting something extra into their standard diesel ?


Anyone know anything ? Apart from their website, which mutters with circumspect periphrasis about saving 1 litre in 50l.

http://www.shell.co.uk/home/content/gbr/products_services/on_the_road/fuels/fuelsave/diesel/

 

[djefabs]

But was that just the "premium" fuel DJEfabs, with higher calorific value? I don't have a diesel car but I think these premium diesels work the same as the premium petrols. They are blended to have higher calorific value. For sure on my car if I fill with the premium petrol I get an mpg improvement of around 4% (AOTBE) which you can see on the computer, but of course that benefit is more than taken away by the higher price of the premium fuel

Hi JFM
No not premium fuel just standard diesel at the pump. In fact it was 1.169/ltr which is as cheap as it gets in my part of the world. Do not normally fill up at Shell Garages but the price was good and the tank was empty. I think I will repeat the excersie and keep a close check on the trip/computer/ av speed etc.
Some detail here, not sure if its a new product or just sales blurb.
http://www.shell.co.uk/home/content/gbr/products_services/on_the_road/fuels/fuelsave/diesel/

 

[jfm]

Hi JFM
No not premium fuel just standard diesel at the pump. In fact it was 1.169/ltr which is as cheap as it gets in my part of the world. Do not normally fill up at Shell Garages but the price was good and the tank was empty. I think I will repeat the excersie and keep a close check on the trip/computer/ av speed etc.
Some detail here, not sure if its a new product or just sales blurb.
http://www.shell.co.uk/home/content/gbr/products_services/on_the_road/fuels/fuelsave/diesel/

Thanks. Very interesting then. They can tweak the blend cheapishly and give us 2% or whatever more energy from the same number of litres, at the same price, it seems

There must be a bit of a tax break here. If Shell can give say 2% more energy per litre, and (after initial marketing) charge say 1.5% more money, there is a change in the mix of revenues that go to Sjhell's pocket versus to the exchequer as fuel duty. The tax on fuel (other than VAT) is charged as a fixed amount per litre, and not as a %age of the retail price. I mean, by selling us the same energy at the same price (per joule) but in the form of fewer litres of physical fuel, they reduce their payments of fuel excise duty

 

[gjgm]

Have I got your point? They pay fixed tax per litre- or rather, we do, surely- and by selling us less fuel (because its super-improved) they(ie us) then pay less tax. How is that better for them if they make their profit by volume sold, and they now sell less?
Unless of course the premium charged for the super fuel is greater than the loss in volume sales. But I dont see how they benefit on the tax front, as surely its the consumer who pays that?

 

[jfm]

Have I got your point? They pay fixed tax per litre- or rather, we do, surely- and by selling us less fuel (because its super-improved) they(ie us) then pay less tax. How is that better for them if they make their profit by volume sold, and they now sell less?
Unless of course the premium charged for the super fuel is greater than the loss in volume sales. But I dont see how they benefit on the tax front, as surely its the consumer who pays that?

Shell pay the fuel tax, not the customer. Sure, they pass it on to the customer, but like VAT it is embedded in the price.

Let's say a litre of fuel retails £1 and the fuel tax is 60p/litre. Ignoring VAT (which doesn't alter the analysis), the customer gives £1 to Shell who give 60p to exchequer and keep 40p as Shell's revenues.

Now let's say Shell make this new fuel that has 10% more calorific value and they sell it at £1.10 a litre. As a customer you are indifferent becuase you pay 10% more per litre but you buy 10% fewer litres for the same mileage, AOTBE. As a customer you therefore only buy 0.9 litres to drive the same miles as the 1 litre of old fuel would have taken you. Shell still get £1 of gross revenue, but now they only have to give 54p to government as tax, so they get to keep 46p of revenues, not 40p

In other words, in a theoretical world and AOTBE, if Shell can pack more joules of energy into a litre of fuel, in a tax system where fuel duty is charged on volume not energy content, then their revenues rise (in the above example by 15%, being the 10% x the ratio between the 60p and the 40p ie 1.5x).

 

[Latestarter1]

Why be so aggressive?
If they really did have something, you'd be the last person they would work with.

BTW, I'm with you. Very sceptic about the product.
But there are people out there that believe in it and have proved it to themselves.
Personally, I need to prove it for myself – just in case – they might have something!!

I agree with people and still get villified!

 

[rubberduck]

Man from these people phoned today, we will start trial in September, we shall see.

 

[Latestarter1]

Certainly not a trial of any validity unless they are introducing a placibo.

Just a bunch of people after a bit of a freebe.

 

[Hurricane]

Certainly not a trial of any validity unless they are introducing a placibo.

Just a bunch of people after a bit of a freebe.

I wouldn’t have thought that he needs a placebo.
If it really DOES save 8 to 10% he will see it in his running costs but if I were him, I'd do some more focussed tests.
Just a single test on a single truck would be convincing enough if it works – IMO.
Remember the amount of saving that is being claimed here is significant.

Actually, I’m sure we would ALL like it to work…………..

Anyway – I’m due for a beer if it does

 

[tinkicker0]

I put a half bottle of Redex diesel treatment in me little Fiesta 1.6TDCI ghia about every fourth tankful.

The engine is noticeably smoother and quieter with the additive and I can confidently state that according to the fuel comp, the average MPG goes up by around 2 mpg from about 58 to 60mpg.
This at motorway speeds.

A far cry form the headline banner screaming mpg saving though!


Still, since I buy it in bulk when it is on special offer, the mpg saving means it almost pays for itself.

 

[omega2]

I put Shell V power diesel into my Honda one in four top ups, no noticable difference, but maybe that ONE is doing the business, regularly return 50mpg, no matter how I drive it.

 

[ontheplane]

Only sure test IMHO in your Landcruiser is to check consumption over say 3000 miles, then start using the additive and do another 3000 miles. One tankful is no-where near enough. Psychologically, if you know you are looking for an extra 1-2mpg then you could subconciously change your driving style - even slight changes in one tankful will show a difference, whereas over 3000 miles or so, it's not likely to...

 

[Hurricane]

Only sure test IMHO in your Landcruiser is to check consumption over say 3000 miles, then start using the additive and do another 3000 miles. One tankful is no-where near enough. Psychologically, if you know you are looking for an extra 1-2mpg then you could subconciously change your driving style - even slight changes in one tankful will show a difference, whereas over 3000 miles or so, it's not likely to...

Absolutely agreed but I thought I'd see what happens over a couple of hundred miles.
In theory though, it shopuld show something 8 to 12 per cent is quite significant.

 

[Latestarter1]

Gone are the days when Cummins PT or Detroit unit injectors would burn just about anything you threw at them and suffer zero ill effects.

When we talk about modern on road as well as future off road diesel engines adulterating diesel fuel could end up a costly mistake. We are not discussing the additives which the fuel supplier blends into the fuel which are formulated at huge cost and understanding of the technologies being dealt with.

As emission levels have tightened it is only electronics and material technology which have enabled diesel engines to stay ahead of the game.

Diesel engines have two primary exhaust components which are on legislators’ hit lists.

#1 Pollutant is oxides of Nitrogen (NOx)
#2 Pollutant are particulates.

We have a dilemma inherent in diesel engine design. If we retard the engine combustion temperature goes down and so does Nox. At the same time particulates go up. Advance the timing and the reverse occurs, so there is a limit as to how much you can clean up “in cylinder”. Get a long party balloon; blow it up, write NOx on one end and particulates on the other. If you squeeze one end what happens to the other, it gets bigger. That is all you need to know to understand low emission diesel combustion technology. Trick is getting the best trade off.

We also have a further problem in that the more we chase the production of particulates in an engine, for example by using higher injection pressures we get less dense but a far finer particulate formation.

The new particulates, below PM10 have a nasty habit of passing straight though the walls of our lungs and into your blood stream.

We have to have some external levers to pull to clean diesel engines up if we cannot do it in cylinder.

Looking at NOx SCR or Selective Catalytic Reduction is the most favoured strategy to clean up truck diesel engines as well as keeping them fuel efficient. Coming back to the party balloon I am going to squeeze the end which says particulates, the end marked NOx balloons out behind me.

I design my motor to advance the heck out of the timing to get particulates down, as for the NOx we let it all hang out!

Now comes the clever bit, could say we are taking the p*ss as we have a small tank of aqueous urea. Under the direction of the vehicle’s ECU/ECM, urea is delivered in precisely metered spray patterns into the exhaust stream just ahead of the SCR converter.
In the SCR converter the conversion happens.

Exhaust gases and an atomized mist of urea enter the converter simultaneously. Together with the catalyst inside the converter, the mixture undergoes a chemical reaction (I can give you the formula, but it would take up most of the page) put simply the reaction produces harmless nitrogen gas and water vapor.

Exhaust gases are monitored via a sensor as they leave the SCR catalyst. Feedback is supplied to the engine computer to alter the urea flow if NOx levels fluctuate beyond acceptable parameters.

Now we take our passenger car diesel engine, put the balloon under our arm and squeeze the NOx end giving us a bundle of particulates to deal with.

This time we are using a DPF which is an acronym for Diesel Particulate Filter. A DPF works in conjunction with an oxidation catalyst and EGR to remove a majority of the NOx, particulate matter and unburned hydrocarbons from the combustion process. As soot is a natural byproduct from the combustion of diesel fuel.

Inside the DPF is a porous honeycomb structure that catches the soot as it passes through. After the soot builds up over time, the onboard computer controls fuel injection to allow unburned fuel to enter the filter at measured intervals where it flares off and generates increased temperatures that incinerate the accumulated soot. The result: Soot is reduce by over 90-percent.

This story is a bit like Alistair Cooke letter from America, where on earth is this leading us?

Screw with a system which uses SCR by adulterating fuel and you are likely to get ammonia slip, the finely balanced chemical reaction results in the production of ammonia from the exhaust, not nitrogen and water. The vehicle system is set to monitor this condition, result engine shuts down to idle.

Trip to franchised dealer for tanks to be flushed and ECM/ECU reset, all at some considerable expense.

I am worried you say, I just have a DPF on my car. Well that sneaky snake oil you put in the tank can tend to coat the oxidation catalyst, so more junk goes down stream into the DPF which tries to regenerate, vehicle is constantly sensing the Delta P across the DPF, engine ECM/ECU is trying to get the DPF to regenerate by injecting fuel very late, in fact too late for generating engine power, just wants to reduce Delta P inside by incineration.

Warning light comes on in vehicle, trip to the dealer. Unless dealer can use his service tool to force regeneration you are saddled with the cost of a new oxycat and DPF.
All manufacturers are testing these technologies on future marine engines, it is here, now today.

Now you know why I believe in clean fuel free of third party junk.

 

[Seahope]

Very enlightening.

Thanks!