'Fuel-saver' devices will not save you fuel

[IDemo]

Forget studies and testimonials — to save money, keep up car and slow down

Like the sun rising in the east or Donald Trump embarrassing himself, rising gas prices inevitably bring out a clutch of hucksters selling gizmos that magically boost fuel efficiency. They're scams, yet people still get suckered by the bushel.

Whether they plug into your cigarette lighter or wrap around your fuel line, black-magic gas sipping devices always involve the same trope of some secret piece of technology withheld by auto execs after a pleasurable evening under satin sheets with Big Oil. The real professionals include not just studies showing how effective their product can be, but several testimonials from people who gave them a try, and gosh darn if it didn't save so much gas they'd recommended it to all their spouse-cousins.

The current leading purveyor in this field is Fuel Doctor, a California company that's hawking its $59.99 dongle in Best Buy stores and sponsors a NASCAR truck team. The FD-47 supposedly "conditions" electrical current from an older vehicle's cigarette lighter, smoothing the flow, something something unicorns and bingo — fuel saved. Or in its own words:

Conditioned and clean power allows the vehicle's electronic control unit (ECU), fuel injection and engine timing equipment to operate more efficiently. When the vehicle's engine runs more efficiently it will require less fuel, produce more power and have reduced exhaust emissions (reduced CO2).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43143345/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/

[TreasonousBastard]

1. Anyone else remember the Pogue carbureter-- 200 MPG if only the evil...

bastids in Detroit would let us use it...

[Warpy]

2. Mythbusters had a lot of fun with those

and as I recall, one or two did produce measurably better performance. The problem was that you'd have to drive across the country every week to see even a penny in real savings.

Just because you can measure something doesn't automatically mean that it's a good deal.

And yes, many of the products made fuel economy worse, not better.

[bvar22]

4. Did you see the one about putting "golfball dimples"...

..on the exterior of your car?
That one worked.

The only device I've ever used that really saved a bunch of gasoline is a combination of a light tube frame, 2 light weight spoke wheels, two pedals, a chain, handlebars, and a seat.
:hippie:

[AtheistCrusader]

19. If it was laboratory savings of fuel did they

calculate the fuel cost in carrying the weight of the 'fuel saving device' with on that trip across the country?

[TheWraith]

3. Kicked and recommended. Debunking conspiracy theories is always a good thing.

Some people are always light on scientific reason.

[lemonnn]

5. Got a magnet on my fuel injection port.

Gets me 30% more mileage.

[hunter]

7. I have a magnet sewn into my pants.

Gets me 30% more mileage with the ladies.

[lemonnn]

8. The magnet inside my engine is 50 pounds of solid lead...works like a charm... NT

[AtheistCrusader]

20. 50 pounds per fuel injection port?

As your car has 4, 6, or 8. (Or more rarely, 3 or 5)

Do tell how lead can be used as a magnet?

[muriel_volestrangler]

23. Alas, the poster now has a tombstone

Lead poisoning, perhaps?

[Codeine]

13. 60% of the time it works every time. nt

[HysteryDiagnosis]

6. Such a wide brush.

www.Blutipower.com

[bhikkhu]

9. Hydrogen injection. The laws of physics intervene:

As you have to use more energy to separate hydrogen from whatever molecule used (usually water) than you gain by burning it, you have a net negative. The process has enough steps and complications that its easy to find somewhere to hide the little problem.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

10. Mmmmm guess again. Your first attempt was completely wrong and shows that you didn't

even look at the material.

[bhikkhu]

14. Ah - dueling condescension!

"The Hy-Drive HGS® is a hydrogen generator system that injects small amounts of hydrogen gas, on demand, into the combustion chamber of a vehicle’s engine. The enriched air/fuel mixture burns more efficiently, extracting more clean energy from the fuel while reducing harmful greenhouse gas emissions"

and:

"The blutip AUC2 was developed when careful analysis determined that diesel engine controls were inadequate for realizing the full potential of hydrogen enrichment. The system was designed and built to intercept and adjust signals used to quantify key engine parameters, such as angular position and speed, boost pressure and temperature."

My guess is that the AUC2 is more or less an "efficiency" chip, which are a dime a dozen on the diesel market. The "con" part would be the absurdly expensive hydrogen generator.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

15. Even a moran can make his own absurdly inexpensive hydrogen generator as did some

prescient school children.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlyjcT7zeCM

[bhikkhu]

16. As said in the first place, its a net negative on energy

it costs more energy to separate hydrogen from a molecule than you gain by burning it. Kids can do it, and crackpots can spin webs of obfustication around it and drum up large amounts of investment dollars, but the laws of physics intervene in the real world.

...so it doesn't work (at least "as-sold"), it solves nothing, and its hardly worth the effort to argue over, yet again.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

17. As said at Blutip, and as observed by myself, manufacturers are spending trillions of dollars

on emissions systems that may not be necessary and it is about burning the fuel more efficiently and NOT ABOUT stealing energy from the universe.

[bhikkhu]

18. They probably should stick with the mod-chip

Its simple and it works reasonably well.

Perhaps the whole hydrogen generation add-on scheme is just to differentiate themselves in a pretty packed market, but anyone who has been around a bit would recognize the waste.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

21. Let's try something different, I'll put up some text and you read it, I mean read three

paragraphs and see if it sinks in.

http://www.damninteresting.com/hydrogen-injection-proven-in-real-world-usage

As early as the 1970s, auto researchers have known that adding hydrogen to the ignition phase in a combustion engine dramatically increases the efficiency of the reaction, while also reducing pollution. But until recently, there was no safe, reliable means to provide a steady supply of hydrogen to an engine. Now, a company called Canadian Hydrogen Energy is marketing their Hydrogen Fuel Injection (HFI) system to North American shipping companies, and the system is proving useful.

The HFI system is a bolt-on apparatus which includes an electrolysis unit, and a water reservoir. It uses power from the engine’s alternator to electrolyze distilled water, and produce hydrogen on demand. The hundreds of semi trucks in North America which are now using this system enjoy improved horsepower, and emit about half of the particulates they did before the unit was added.

Sherwin Fast, the president of Great Plains Trucking, reports that their four HFI-equipped trucks have saved them $700 a month in fuel. With the units about $14,000 each, it will take some time to recoup the expense; but in the meantime they’re also helping to save the environment. Instant Karma… just add water.

http://www.wired.com/news/autotech/0,2554,69529,00.html

[bhikkhu]

30. Just with a chip you generally get four parameters to play with:

Torque, horsepower, mileage, and emissions. Its more or less a zero-sum equation, though, where torque + horsepower + milage + emissions = 0, so if you want better horsepower, you pay in torque, or if you want better emissions, you pay in mileage - that sort of thing.

The factory settings for diesel engine controls are usually middle of the road to suit most conditions "ok", so for any specific application, a mod-chip (as they are called) can be set up for a 5-7% improvement. If you want a little more, the "paying" part can become more noticeable.

I do get that the company you talk about claims better performance and better emissions because of the hydrogen injection. That is conceivable enough, but what I would say is that just about any decent mod-chip would give you 90% of that improvement for $200-300. The last 10% of improvement (or so) apparently costs $14,000. I'm familiar enough with the industry to remain unimpressed.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

29. Something is missing in the translation here..... so I'll spell it out for you.

Which part of this drawing do you NOT understand?????

[TheMadMonk]

24. Actually cracking it loose from hydrocarbons isn't that expensive...

...energetically in the presence of the right catalysts, thus it is perfectly possible for hydrogen injection to be a nett positive gain.

And either which way cleaner burning diesel could well be worth paying a small premium for.


A similar improvement in both economy and pollutant output can be achieved by mixing a small amount of water with the diesel.

[wtmusic]

25. All of the "run your car on water" schemes have given it a bad rap.

"These sources suggest fuel efficiency increases as well as reduced emissions through the addition of hydrogen to conventional fuels."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_fuel_enhancement

Do efficiency gains overcome the electrolysis energy debt? I'm skeptical.

[TheMadMonk]

28. Guess what mate. Hydrogen IS NOT PRODUCED BY ELECTROLYSIS.

Except in high scool chemistry labs and a few very limited and specialised applications.

Hydrogen is made by catalytically reforming fossil fuels, a process which is quite cheap energetically.

[wtmusic]

32. Really, mate?

Are you going to ask car owners to fill up with liquid hydrogen AND gasoline at the pump?

What's the energy price of pressurizing and carting H2 to the pump?

We're going backwards.

[TheMadMonk]

33. No different to the urea injection systems used on some Mercs.

If you'd actually read the article, you'd find it was being reformed from the truck's (or ship's) own fuel.

For smaller vehicles, gaseous hydrogen stored under pressure is more than sufficient, and little enough is used that a refill would only be every several fills of the fuel tank just as it is with the Merc's urea injection system.


Personally I'd love to see the end of the Infernal Combustion Engine. Failing that, I'd like to see they were as clean as possible.

[One_Life_To_Give]

27. $2Million per year for Emma Maersk and her sisters?

Emma Maersk and her sister container ships using the record holding efficient Wartsilla Diesel would save $2Million per ship every year in fuel costs. Combined with all the free publicity of taking the worlds most efficient Internal Combustion Engine and setting a new Efficiency record by adding your product to it. That would make serious global news. Sadly while companies like Maersk will pay for the most efficient engine ever built by man. They don't ever seem to use the stuff spouted about in customer testimonials.

[GliderGuider]

11. I know for a fact that there's one thing that works to save fuel

Not driving...

[madokie]

12. Thats what I do a lot of

and you're right it sure does save a lot of fuel

[Nihil]

22. No, no, no! That's *not* the way to do it!

Giving the truth away for free isn't going to get you *any* money at all!

First, you've got to set up a web site (complete with quotes from a tame
"professor" or two) and really stress the "sticking it to Big Oil" aspect.

Next, you (and your friends & relatives) hype the sh*t out of your website
to make it seem as if someone has really tested your product and that it
somehow works as stated (more or less).

Finally, you cash in and run away for a little while ... then go back
to step #1 for the next "funding cycle".

Just giving the "secret" away to all & sundry without any charge whatsoever
simply isn't going to hit the profit button that is so dear to all good citizens
of ConsumerLand.

:P

[IDemo]

26. Here's what I get out of what I've read on this topic

If I'm correct, this isn't so much about a violation of the laws of thermodynamics as it is an increase in efficiency of the terribly inefficient internal combustion engine. They're not actually adding a quantity of fuel to the tank per se but allowing the engine to burn leaner, which itself is where the net energy savings come from. Anyone who has followed EV vs. ICE efficiency debates here is aware that gasoline-burning engines are only around 25 to 30 percent efficient, the rest being wasted as heat or sent through the tailpipe unburned.

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/vehicles/how-a-hydrogen-boosted-gasoline-engine-works1.htm

According to experts at ArvinMeritor, and executive engineers Rudy Smaling and Jens Beister at IAV, the facts about a hydrogen-boosted gasoline engine and its advantages are clear.

A small amount of hydrogen made on-board by the reformer is added to the normal intake air and gasoline mixture. This greatly improves overall combustion quality by allowing nearly twice as much air for a given amount of fuel introduced into the combustion chamber. This is more energy efficient because it saves energy by reducing the amount of engine pumping needed.

Fuel efficiency is also gained through the use of higher engine compression ratios made possible by the hydrogen-rich charge characteristics. A hydrogen-boosted fuel system also saves energy because of the remarkably low amount of electrical energy needed to power the reformer. According to the developers, it needs less than 75 watts, which is less than the electric needs of one standard headlight.

An industry-accepted virtual vehicle analysis based on engine test data indicated the potential for a 20 percent to 30 percent improvement in fuel economy for a turbocharged downsized version of the hydrogen-boosted engine when compared with conventional gasoline engines.

[Kaleva]

31. The pickup powered by a wood burning stove actually worked.

"Wood Gas! Wood Gasification Powers This Truck"

"1,500 miles of alternative, free-fuel driving, and there's a lot more where that came from: We were pleased to report in Homemade Motor Fuel ... From Firewood that our experiments concerning the use of wood scraps for vehicle motor fuel showed promise. But little did we realize, at that time, just how well the unlikely form of "solid" energy would work in a "liquid" world.


In short, for a total cost of about $125 — and a fair amount of cutting and welding — we've come up with an alternative fuel power system that not only moves our rig down the road as smoothly and reliably as any conventionally powered automobile, but does so at zero fuel cost!"

http://www.motherearthnews.com/Green-Transportation/1981-05-01/Wood-Gas-Truck.aspx