Better gas mileage?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

JWade

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
3,273
197
106
www.heatware.com
I use acetone to clean alot of parts (nail polish remover is how i buy my acetone) and it comes in a plastic bottle.

Read some of the ingrediants on octane boosters and dry gas sold in stores.

What a friend of mine has used for like the last 25 years or so is adding moth balls to his gas tank, now he only added 2 per tank, it would incrase his octane and fuel economy and had no ill effects to his car/engine, he still does it to this day, now however, he did add a whole box of them to a beater car, and well the effects werent good, engine revved really really high, got super hot, then seized really bad.
 

vanionBB

Member
Jun 16, 2004
88
0
0
Originally posted by: Condor
Originally posted by: snowdogg187
you are an idiot if you try this, and tell me why again this is in hot deals?

moron

Just to get the thoughtful, reflective thinking of posters like you! Don't you have to check in at P&N or lose attendance points?

ROFLMAO
 

marsluna

Junior Member
Oct 18, 2004
8
0
0
I think another reason it's a bad idea is that you don't want as much volatility (ease of evaporation) as possible. If gas is too volatile, it can evaporate when not wanted (more likely in hot weather) and cause vapor lock or even cause more harmful emissions. They talk about it here: (Ctrl-F search for "volatility" to get to the part)

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/autos/gasoline-faq/part2/

I completed a 2 year program in aviation mechanics in 2001, where I remember that too much volatility in the fuel of aircraft piston engines (which use the same basics as car engines) was a serious problem. Obviously, way more of a danger than in car engines because if vapor lock occurs in an airplane in the sky, the engine is suddenly starved of fuel and stops working. However, it can still cause a car engine to stop working, but with less drastic consequences. All I'm saying is more volatility in gas is not always a good thing, which seems to be the basis of selling this idea.
 

CrispyFried

Golden Member
May 3, 2005
1,122
0
0
Ive been doing this for about a month in my 90 caddy deville, 4.5 liter PFI V8, it has a digital realtime mpg readout. Using 2 oz per 10 gals. mpg has gone from 18-20 to 19-22 country driving. So its hard to tell really as thats with the margin of error to me. I can now use 87 octane instead of 91 though (hi compression engine) with no ping so there is that.

If it blows up or melts down Ill let you know
 

mikeford

Diamond Member
Jan 27, 2001
5,671
160
106
The basis of this thing is amateur experimental error combined with insufficient oxygen during birth.

It works just like splitfire spark plugs, Slick50, and Marvel Mystery Oil, entirely in the minds of the users.
 

C'DaleRider

Guest
Jan 13, 2000
3,048
0
0
Originally posted by: wchou
In japan, v4 engine are numerous as gas are expensive compared to here. Americans need to learn from the japanese to solve their oil consumption problems. oil spill is disasterous, in the future we will all have to pay a price for this and that could mean the end of the world as we know it.


But to blindly compare what's going on in Japan to here in the U.S. without the appropriate background information, which you left out, is silly.

Gasoline is indeed much more expensive in Japan and the whole of Europe. This is in spite of the fact that EVERYONE pay s the SAME price for oil....Japan and Europe aren't mysteriously charged more for oil than the U.S. is.....so why does gas cost so much more in those regions of the world as compared to here?

The answer is simple.....the various governments TAX the gas much more than we do here. This is done to promote lower usage by consumers. You have to remember, while we imort around half of our oil we use for gasoline, Japan in particular imports 100% of the oil it uses for gasoline. Japan's natural resources aren't nearly as plentiful as the U.S's........fortunate for us, unfortunate for them. This fact has led to conflict in the past (after all, we, the United States, were trying to "persuade" Japan to stop its aggression against China among others in the early 1940's by essentially cutting off their supplies of natural rubber and oil.)

So the gov'ts. tax the crap out of gas which provides an incentive to buy very fuel efficient vehicles. Add to that policy the policies that various countries use to "encourage" production of fuel efficient cars......taxting the crap out of engines over certain sizes, like Italy does with engines over 1 liter in size, and Japan does the same, but allows a larger engine before the taxing starts, you have car manufacturers that must produce small engined and high mileage vehicles because of consumer demand and government influence.....something we have none of here. Heck, the U.S. government can rarely get the damned CAFE standards raised a gallon-per-mile for the fleet without holy hell being raised by the auto industry. Imagine the outcry form consumers and industry if the government suddenly putting into place a major engine-size tax.

We are lucky in this country. We are blessed with abundant natural resources, space, and the like. Imagine our population crammed into the state of NY or Texas......like Japan is.

Now, you want to help our country with its pollution and fuel problems? Encourage a few things......

First, it's been shown that over 80% of exhaust pollution comes from less than 10% of the vehicles on the road.....the old cars that are still out there chugging around. this comes from California's CARB research over several decades......and this fact still hasn't changed. So instead of constantly putting stricter and more expensive controls on new cars, which aren't the major pollution problem any longer, get the old cars that are the problem off the road. It's been said that it'd be cheaper in the long run, in fuel economy and pollution, to just give everyone who drives an old clunker a new efficient car and trash the old beater. In teh long run, the initial cost of replacing the crappy cars would be outweighed by the decrease in both pollution output at the tailpipe and the increase in fuel economy.

Also, why not investigate converting our power generating plants that use oil and natural gas over to coal? I know coal can be dirty, but current technology is there to scrub the output form coal-burning plants to be as clean as any other fossil-fuel burning plant. As we in this country are blessed with enough coal to satisfy our needs for centuries, this would seem to be a logical tact. Yet, no one will just do it. Getting our energy porduction out of burning oil would, it seems, dramatically reduce our need for importing some oil.

Also, investigate rebuilding our rail infrastructure. It would seem that a train hauling 200 trailers across the country would be infinitely more efficient than 200 diesel-engined semis hauling those same individual trailers. But the trucking industry hates that idea.

Oh well, we're fated to what our leaders will do.....and that seems to be precious little these days, outside of our government providing the major oil companies government tax breaks and subsidies to continue the same behavior instead of truly addressing the root problems.



 

BigLar

Senior member
Jun 22, 2003
683
0
76
Originally posted by: Kogan
Lower in the article is says they went from 48mpg to 30mpg by taking the acetone out. That's just unbelievable And why would they have to use some scanguage to measure mileage? And why are they measuring gas mileage while the car is moving at 50mph? Recording the number of miles you get each tank should be much easier and more accurate. Seems fishy to me that they've got to all of this work and don't have any real-world tests and results..

If this information is actually useful, we probably would have heard more about it by now (this was posted in march?).

I'll just wait a few more years for consumer hydrogen-electric cars $3/gallon isn't that bad anyway.

1. Hmmm. mileage change of 18 mpg with addition of acetone.

2. Laws of thermodynamics:
1st law: You can't win.
2nd. law: You can't break even.
3rd law: You can't quit the game.

Conclusion: The energy required to move ANY car makes it unlikely that addition of a magic fluid will really improve mileage.

3. Also, ditto on the action of acetone on gaskets and seals.

WOW, what a really bad idea.
 

imported_Condor

Diamond Member
Sep 22, 2004
5,425
0
0
Originally posted by: C'DaleRider
Originally posted by: wchou
In japan, v4 engine are numerous as gas are expensive compared to here. Americans need to learn from the japanese to solve their oil consumption problems. oil spill is disasterous, in the future we will all have to pay a price for this and that could mean the end of the world as we know it.


But to blindly compare what's going on in Japan to here in the U.S. without the appropriate background information, which you left out, is silly.

Gasoline is indeed much more expensive in Japan and the whole of Europe. This is in spite of the fact that EVERYONE pay s the SAME price for oil....Japan and Europe aren't mysteriously charged more for oil than the U.S. is.....so why does gas cost so much more in those regions of the world as compared to here?

The answer is simple.....the various governments TAX the gas much more than we do here. This is done to promote lower usage by consumers. You have to remember, while we imort around half of our oil we use for gasoline, Japan in particular imports 100% of the oil it uses for gasoline. Japan's natural resources aren't nearly as plentiful as the U.S's........fortunate for us, unfortunate for them. This fact has led to conflict in the past (after all, we, the United States, were trying to "persuade" Japan to stop its aggression against China among others in the early 1940's by essentially cutting off their supplies of natural rubber and oil.)

So the gov'ts. tax the crap out of gas which provides an incentive to buy very fuel efficient vehicles. Add to that policy the policies that various countries use to "encourage" production of fuel efficient cars......taxting the crap out of engines over certain sizes, like Italy does with engines over 1 liter in size, and Japan does the same, but allows a larger engine before the taxing starts, you have car manufacturers that must produce small engined and high mileage vehicles because of consumer demand and government influence.....something we have none of here. Heck, the U.S. government can rarely get the damned CAFE standards raised a gallon-per-mile for the fleet without holy hell being raised by the auto industry. Imagine the outcry form consumers and industry if the government suddenly putting into place a major engine-size tax.

We are lucky in this country. We are blessed with abundant natural resources, space, and the like. Imagine our population crammed into the state of NY or Texas......like Japan is.

Now, you want to help our country with its pollution and fuel problems? Encourage a few things......

First, it's been shown that over 80% of exhaust pollution comes from less than 10% of the vehicles on the road.....the old cars that are still out there chugging around. this comes from California's CARB research over several decades......and this fact still hasn't changed. So instead of constantly putting stricter and more expensive controls on new cars, which aren't the major pollution problem any longer, get the old cars that are the problem off the road. It's been said that it'd be cheaper in the long run, in fuel economy and pollution, to just give everyone who drives an old clunker a new efficient car and trash the old beater. In teh long run, the initial cost of replacing the crappy cars would be outweighed by the decrease in both pollution output at the tailpipe and the increase in fuel economy.

Also, why not investigate converting our power generating plants that use oil and natural gas over to coal? I know coal can be dirty, but current technology is there to scrub the output form coal-burning plants to be as clean as any other fossil-fuel burning plant. As we in this country are blessed with enough coal to satisfy our needs for centuries, this would seem to be a logical tact. Yet, no one will just do it. Getting our energy porduction out of burning oil would, it seems, dramatically reduce our need for importing some oil.

Also, investigate rebuilding our rail infrastructure. It would seem that a train hauling 200 trailers across the country would be infinitely more efficient than 200 diesel-engined semis hauling those same individual trailers. But the trucking industry hates that idea.

Oh well, we're fated to what our leaders will do.....and that seems to be precious little these days, outside of our government providing the major oil companies government tax breaks and subsidies to continue the same behavior instead of truly addressing the root problems.

On the rail thing, it isn't just the trucking industry that hates the idea. Every administration is held to task on employment in this country. One way they all have had to make those numbers look good is through trucking. The 200 car train would only employ six people at most. The 200 trucks would employ something between 200 and 400! It is just another way to fake out the voters. I'm ashamed that Bush hasn't tried to fix at least that. A Democrat never will.

 

imported_Condor

Diamond Member
Sep 22, 2004
5,425
0
0
Originally posted by: marsluna
I think another reason it's a bad idea is that you don't want as much volatility (ease of evaporation) as possible. If gas is too volatile, it can evaporate when not wanted (more likely in hot weather) and cause vapor lock or even cause more harmful emissions. They talk about it here: (Ctrl-F search for "volatility" to get to the part)

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/autos/gasoline-faq/part2/

I completed a 2 year program in aviation mechanics in 2001, where I remember that too much volatility in the fuel of aircraft piston engines (which use the same basics as car engines) was a serious problem. Obviously, way more of a danger than in car engines because if vapor lock occurs in an airplane in the sky, the engine is suddenly starved of fuel and stops working. However, it can still cause a car engine to stop working, but with less drastic consequences. All I'm saying is more volatility in gas is not always a good thing, which seems to be the basis of selling this idea.

Very good point that hadn't occured to me.

 

desy

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2000
5,446
214
106
Its probably been said already but I looked it and Acetone is used in fuel injector cleaners additives, its a hydroxil 25-50 % in certain brands of cleaners 'MSDS sheets' so what you are getting is a cleaner fuel system not a magic vibrating chemical reaction.
It also bonds to water too, so any water in the fuel filter and gas tank are absorbed.

So the bottom line, use it if you want as an occasional fuel system cleaner but thats about the extent of it. Your better off to put the money in a tune-up instead of every tank.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,389
8,547
126
Originally posted by: C'DaleRider
Also, why not investigate converting our power generating plants that use oil and natural gas over to coal? I know coal can be dirty, but current technology is there to scrub the output form coal-burning plants to be as clean as any other fossil-fuel burning plant. As we in this country are blessed with enough coal to satisfy our needs for centuries, this would seem to be a logical tact. Yet, no one will just do it. Getting our energy porduction out of burning oil would, it seems, dramatically reduce our need for importing some oil.

coal can't be used for peaking power like gas generators can. coal, however, is great for baseline power. given the cost structures involved (coal has a high initial cost but low variable cost, while gas has a low fixed cost and high variable cost), the industry would have to be heavily price regulated in order to ensure that the companies can make a profit (which entices them to enter in the first place). of course, then there would be overbuilding so you'd have to regulate the number of plants. not that any of this doesn't happen already, just some considerations.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |