Hey Ernie how in the F#$k do you want me to post NUMBERS!!! I HAVE POSTED THEM. The ones I have posted are staight from my Navigator. It has a built in trip computer. This shows MPG and distance travled. As for the blind test, if you read back in the thread, I wrote , I did do it without my wifes knowledge. She drives the truck about 75% of the time. I also stopped using the acetone and the milage averaged about 13mpg. After switching back it went back up to 14 or more. Ernie I'm not sure what YOUR problem is, but I think you may be working for an oil company or something. You seem WAY to obsesed with trying to denounce other peoples results. BTW I call B#LL S%^T on you getting 20 MPG with an Excursion. WHERE ARE YOUR NUMBERS!!! as you put it.
Wow..this thread is starting to get personal. No need for that. These kinds of debates are how progress in any field is accompished..someone earlier mentioned the scientific method. Anything that fosters thinking and testing is positive in my view. As for settling the differences in theories/opinions why don't we refer this question to an independant 3rd party to test. I say contact Mythbusters....even though it may be more entertaining than scientifically reliable (don't tell them I said that).
Couple things I have found during my experimentation, the first one is if you want to try acetone, don't use it with gasoline blended with ethanol, it negates the effects of the acetone. I believe this was discussed in one of the acetone links and is probably responcible for some who see no response. Second, after reading about those who have put mothballs in their tanks and experianced power increases. The primary componant in mothballs is napthylene so I tried it in the same porportions as the acetone, with the acetone and while it seemed to enhance full throttle power it made the engine run worse at normal driving speeds. The best running and the best milage were with staight acetone 3 ounces/ten gallons combined with 3 ounces/ten gallons of Lucas upper cylinder lube and injector cleaner.
LOL!!!! Easy there cowboy, don't get your panties all wadded up. It's easy post your odometer numbers before you fill up, the amount of gallons you put in the tank, any snake oil (acetone) you do or do not use, and then the odometer numbers and gallons at next fill up. Simple as that. By the way it's an Expedition not an Excursion. But why would you call BS on that? After all "I said it does". I'm using the same method you are, "It has a built in trip computer. This shows MPG" Hahahahahahaaa!
Hey Ernie if I cared what you thought I guess I would post the way you wanted. But I don't. You should take a look back at your math , talking about wheel spin and all this other crap and rethink.Where did you come up with those numbers. I"m sorry the car you drive doesn't have a integrated computer, mine does, so therefore I have no need to make a little log book and anally keep all my little numbers. Once again, the computer does it. Simple. Fill tank, reset computer, drive. And yes the long highway trips I made I didn't count in the equation, knowing it would skew the results. I just can't believe you are calling me a liar. I have nothing to prove to anyone, with no agenda. I'm simply posting what I have found. BTW What numbers shall I post when I find a vehicle doesn't need to run race gas if I add acetone? Like I said before, I'm no longer running a 50/50/ mix in some, and I am not getting detonation in them.
Darrel, I am sure ernie will deny skewed and biased results and claim that your computer is somehow plugged into the internet and is aware of this grand experiment. He read it in a comic book. Look out here it comes, its so easy.
Hey Ernie if your not too afraid to be proven wrong why don't you try it in your expedition. Worried it might actually work? I still say you have a hidden agenda. You put waaay too much effort trying to disprove everyone else.
Actually I did try it and it didn't do anything. So your calling me chicken huuuuuu. It sound more like your the one who's chicken to put the numbers up. It isn't hard to type in the numbers. Cummon chicken, type in the numbers.
Shoot ernie what took you so long Huh! thats spelled with an "H" at the end. Stay tuned folks for more entertainment from ernievision.
Hey guys, I have a great idea why don't we let this thing die, we have just about said it all ad nausium. It died once but was resurected, there is nothing new so let's kill the old girl unless something new and exciting is revealed, then we will revisit. What do you say? Shall we? O.K. now go try your acetone. I'll see you when you have some news.
I know it was dead but I just found something new! Autoweek March 27,2006 on page 10 titled The Latest on Larry and Biodiesel by Denise McCluggage. Talks about acetone making marked difference in the performance of his diesel. Torque is better, smoke is gone and it certainly improves the way this diesel runs. Just another notch in the gun handle of the acetone crowd. The naysayers have taken a stand and will not change their minds so expect more negative retoric but do try acetone and you too will become a believer.
Well I tried it and it caused me NOT to believe. Since you said you wanted to end this discussion have the thread closed.
I guess I'll have to check it out if some guy named "Larry" (is he a cable guy?) likes it! I'm about to complete re-baselining in my Mercedes now that it's back in my possession and in semi-regular usage. Then I'll see for myself...
Don, I tried it in my dually Dodge/Cummins diesel, topped it up with 2/ounces/10 gallons diesel and then drove 120 miles and it just broke off the peg at the end of the trip. it has never done that before. Sorry ernie something new to talk about for the moment!
Not to dig up old contentious issues or anything... But the final results are in. I've grown tired of the experiment, so my remaining drops of acetone will be used as a cleaner! In my latest round of testing... Base 21.2 MPG 3oz..22.9 3oz..23.5 (E10) Base 22.4 (E10) 2.5oz 22.3 2.5oz 22.2 2.5oz 22.9 Base 21.9 End result? 22.77 MPG with acetone in varying amounts (23.18 at 3oz/10gal, 22.47 at 2.5oz/10gal), 21.79 MPG without. Net result: shown 4.5% improvement in fuel economy. YAY for acetone! But note the variability: the highest tanks, both with and without acetone are with E10 fuel which we all agree isn't good for fuel economy (it's about a 2.5% penalty). Bottom line: There ain't no 30% fuel economy improvement with acetone. It's a HOAX HOAX HOAX, even the Mythbusters saw that! LOL P.S.- regrettably, I can't compare to my rather extensive database of prior years fuel economy as the vehicle's fuel economy has dropped; I think while I wasn't driving the car prior to this test, looks like the alignment got knocked out by a monster Detroit pothole. That left front tire has a few hundred miles left before its shoulder gets ground off, so I'll have to fix it soon! :|
BLASPHEMER!!!! Blasphemer!!! Hahahahahahahaa! This would be a good subject for "Myth Busters" to put on their show. Then we could have the myth smashed on national television.
They did. It was on a couple or 3 months ago. I thought about posting then, but didn't want to fan the flames... They tested a number of fuel economy hoaxes including magnets, some water electrolyzer, acetone and one or two others. Their technique was better than in some other investigations they've attempted, they used a chassis dyno. There were a handful of questions I was left with, but they can be added to the list of people who didn't get it to work. What fun!
I've found that up to about 50% nitro actually does produce very noticable hp increases as long as you've re-tuned. I was in a dyno shoot-out about 10 years ago with a bike and they told me "yes the rules do say any fuel addatives many be used, but that doesn't mean used as the fuel. We run gasoline here and we can't measure any in your tank"
I've tried a preliminary test over 600 miles in a 1.8 litre petrol Ford Focus First 200m returned 27.9 mpg - base line including some motorway work An ounce or so per tankfull added 2nd 200m returned 33.61 mpg - mostly countryside touring 3rd 200m returned 33.86 mpg - as last plus including some motorway work We will see what happens with rather more controlled tests before making any claim at all.. A friend of mine is also trying it out with a weak addition, 10cc per tankful. His wife quite innocently asked "What have you done to the car, its seems a lot livelier" She had no idea that we had been messing about Of course the suppliers dont talk about it, they would all be looking at reduced utilisation of refineries etc
If anyone really wants to pursue this there is a very qualified lab in Maryland that would be more than happy to test any vehicle you want in exchange for US$. Environmental Research & Dev Corp. 9607 Doctor Perry Rd, Ijamsville, MD 21754 They are an independent testing facillity that has done the EPA testing for Calloway on his twin turbo vettes and for Gruman on US Postal Vehicles among others. The have all the equipment and specialize in this type of automotive testing. They use EPA Fuel and a certified chassis dyno and operate under controlled conditions that meet all SAE and EPA regs for testing vehicles. They are not a performance shop! They will not tweak your tuner car! They will be able to document any increase in fuel mileage and emissions under very controlled conditions. They can also do the "Shed" tests to test for emissions when the vehicle is parked. From what I'm told the average car sits parked for more than 23 hours a day and gives off more total emissions parked than the short time it is run. Proably won't be able to tell you of any damage to the vehicle other than the emissions system. As a racer I would be very reluctant to put anything in my fuel or oil as much as I have searched for any advantage I can find. Especially on any newer car with a cat converter and computer controlled injection. I run Cam2 only in my high compression race engines. In my mid compression F2000 and FF race engines I ran 100 Low Lead aviation fuel since it was cheaper than Cam2 and got equal performance to the Cam2 as dyno tested by Quicksilver race engines. I run racing oil in my race engines, motorcycle oil in my bikes and SAE 10-30 in my street cars. They have different additive packages specific for the use. I have a friend that put Mobile One(for cars) in a small fleet motorcycles and had to replace the clutches in each of the motors after two days. If you put motorcycle oil or racing oil in your car the higher content of Zinc in the additive package may give you some added lubrication but the small increase is not worth what it will do to your cat and O2 sensors over the long haul. I have no opinion or experience with the acetone other than what I saw on Myth Busters but I'd rather let someone else try it on their car. I've often wondered if the NASCAR guys that were sponsored by Slick 50 or STP actually ran more than a drop or two in their race engines? I won't put it in any of my engines(unless they want give me $$$,$$$ in sponsorship money).
