Acetone

[zpiloto]

If you can't do the all the testing in the same day it probably not going to be very good. That protocole will take most of the day and the weather conditions could change quite a bit from begining to end with temperature and winds. I think that would need to drive a little after adding the acetone to make sure it's mixed. Then there the problem of the ECU taking time to readjust for the acetone.

You could just have 2 containers of gas. One clean and one with acetone. Then run the car out of gas fill 2-3 gallons run the experiment run it out of gas and then add 5 gallons pure gas. Hard on the fuel pump though.

[GasSavers_Phoenix]

Originally Posted by zpiloto

If you can't do the all the testing in the same day it probably not going to be very good. That protocole will take most of the day and the weather conditions could change quite a bit from begining to end with temperature and winds.

I agree about the same day thing, I was actually budgeting about 3-4 hours for the whole test (11 5.2mile runs, 67.2 miles, with four stops to add acetone and then a short break after each 2.6 miles segment to record data) and as far as wind and temp I would definitely try to do this on a day with fairly consistent weather, and in the afternoon, where the temperature is relatively stable at the top of the daily curve. (also the run is surrounded by temperature stabilizing ponds and trees, and a wind reducing cliff and again the trees)

Originally Posted by zpiloto

I think that would need to drive a little after adding the acetone to make sure it's mixed.

A little extra pre-segment driving after adding any acetone seems like a good idea, but how much do you think is necessary? (Peakster's test seemed to indicate that very little time was needed)

Originally Posted by zpiloto

Then there the problem of the ECU taking time to readjust for the acetone.

Yeah, that really complicates things as far as trying prove that acetone does make an change. If the test does initially show improvement in FE, then the final ECU adjustment should just show even better FE, right? (And then merit further long term testing?)

Originally Posted by zpiloto

You could just have 2 containers of gas. One clean and one with acetone. Then run the car out of gas fill 2-3 gallons run the experiment run it out of gas and then add 5 gallons pure gas. Hard on the fuel pump though.

Yeah, but I thought the unknown amount of fuel in the tank, even after "running out", would pose a problem by being a relatively much larger amount in relation to the acetone/fuel being added and unpredictably skew the concentration.

As for the the fuel pump comment... how hard? Like don't do it?

[trebuchet03]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

Yeah, that really complicates things as far as trying prove that acetone does make an change. If the test does initially show improvement in FE, then the final ECU adjustment should just show even better FE, right? (And then merit further long term testing?)

You'd need something better than the scan gauge... Pretty much a laptop connection so you can see short term and long term fuel trim. If the ECU adjusts for long term (which takes a bit of time) - that would be an positive indicator...

I wonder if resetting the ECU before each test would compensate for that...

[zpiloto]

Originally Posted by trebuchet03

You'd need something better than the scan gauge... Pretty much a laptop connection so you can see short term and long term fuel trim. If the ECU adjusts for long term (which takes a bit of time) - that would be an positive indicator...

I wonder if resetting the ECU before each test would compensate for that...

I've reset the ECU all the time and it can take serval cycles before it smooths out. This is just one of those factors that makes it interesting.

I don't think running it out of gas a half dozen times is going to kill your fuel pump but maybe someone with more experience will chime in.

In reality just run your test. The folks that have had success with this stuff say they get huge gains in the range of 5-10%. Any less than that and it's probably just noise.

Then if you do have success you need to try blind testing. I did that with several tanks on unkowning cars. To see the effect it had with folks that don't know it in there.

[JanGeo]

I don't know the exact mechanical setup for the fuel pump it is a hig pressure pump for Fuel Injected cars and running it out is definately a NO NO! It runs under load normally and that limits the RPM and cools it - no fuel going through it could cause excessive speed and friction and heat and POW! Also getting air in the fuel system is not good either causing all sorts of irratic fuel flow when an air bubble hits the injectors and surges the fuel in the lines then hammers it when the air is gone.

[kwtorbe]

ELF"This is why acetone has a lot of negative feedback IMO , people try it once and that particular tank ends up as less mpg. One tank either up or down would not be proof that something is or is not working. Beside that fact that every tank your mpg will vary. The point is they try it once and come to there own conclusion that its not working, instead of trying another tank, or try a different amount or even a different brand of acetone."

My problem with trying acetone once and having my cars mpg fall 2 mpg is that before that tank I got for 2 months consistent 45mpg tanks. Then on the tank I add acetone, it fell. I wouldn't be so against it if my mpg remained at 45. I think I get more consistent average mpg tanks because I pretty much drive to and from work on the highway going 65mph. Maybe now I should try some more and see if it falls again....I honestly do not like having my average fall though.....

[lunarhighway]

this thread renewed my intrest in acetone. i'm on my second tank with the stuff now.
my first tank with the stuff was a little less but still good hard to blame the difference on the acetone. i've added a little more to see it that that will do.

i did notice some classic things people attribute to acetone. smoother idle and less engine noise (even at high revs). there might however he a slight loss of power but it's hard to tell... the car still runs fine, so perhaps its the lack of noise that makes me think so. at the low revs it actually seems to have more power, but once again that's just a "feeling".

this got me thinking what is the acetone actually doing under the hood?
what causes engine noise and what would reduce it how does combustion at the low revs differs from the high revs. and what would pormore better startup?

my car is carburated, so no electronics adjusting for anything.

[milesgallon.com]

The acetone discussion sound to exactly like those on vortex devices, for some there is a significant improvment (using semi-scientific tests) for others there is marginal or no improvment, for some it affects mpg negative.

I'm starting to think it's actually not improving the fuel economy, BUT making it less bad. That is if you have an old car where the engine was not optimally designed for fuel economy from the beginning and where there is definetly parts of the engine that is not properly tuned anymore these fuel economy additives might change something that neutralizes the flaws of that engine.

A scientific test on one single engine is no good. I would like to have a scientific test several of the cars/engines where the driver has allready proven through their own semi-scientific tests that the fuel economy improves.

That way it would be possible to catc the improvment even though it's only visible in sertaing combinations of cars/engines/driving habits.

Something to consider in lab tests is that even if 99% of fuel is burnt in a warm well tuned engine, many engines are run half of their lifetime below normal operation temperature. Especially in cold climates and with below 10mile commuting distance.

I have never had a car that burns 100% of fuel when the engine is cold, that's proven with the "smell test".

Still a 35% improvment sounds a bit over optimistic, in that case the engine have to be in pretty bad shape before adding acetone and tuning it up might give a 15-25% inprovment without acetone.

Those saying acetone can't do any good seems to have good scientific arguments, but if someone say they have tested it and it work, and it works every time, and they have a habit of monitoring their fuel economy it just feels like they can't be all wrong.

It would really be interesting if any of you who have had above 10% improvements with acetone could do some end-all scientific test on your vehicle with the same driving habits and enviroment where you usually get the improvment.

A data analysis test would be to list every vehicle that has been tested with parameters like carburator/injection, age, engine size, driving habits, fuel type and see if the improved mpg only shows up with specific parameters.

Now that was a long post, excuse me for that, It just intrigues me how the results can be so different. With other mph mods, like tires, people tend to accept that every vehicle gets different results but with engine mods it seems like there is a belief that is has to work for everyone on every engine or it can't be true.

Does anyone know if acetone can be added to diesel and if it's supposed to help?

Simon

[GasSavers_Red]

Going to give acetone a shot on this tank. Using a 2oz/10gallon dose. We'll see what happens

[kitcar]

Very interesting thread. I started down the Acetone road to fabulous savings a couple of years ago with some interesting results. Smoother idle for one - but only after several miles so that's probably the cleaning effect in the injectors.

If I use Speedway gas (10% alcohol) - a Marathon company - I see little or no change at my usual 4 oz per 10 gallons. Maybe 1 mpg but that's noise so I stopped using the Acetone and started getting 20.5 city, 22.5 highway average even with my silly short shifting and coasting downhill.

Then I switched to Meijer gas (a large superstore chain in the mid west) which apparently doesn't have alcohol in it - no pump labels and it doesn't carry that alcohol smell - my mileage went up to 22.5 city and 23.5 highway even with my silly short shifting and coasting downhill. Okay. So I start adding Acetone again and I get 24.5 highway on long trips, the exact same 22.5 in the city.

I know that's poorly explained but I see virtually no difference in the city and enough to make it worthwhile at highway speeds. Plus from what I've seen (and think about this) the more efficient an engine is, the less effect it will have.

That's probably why people with something like a Ford cargo van see giant leaps and folks with already efficient vehicles see no change. As far as the chemical change goes there really isn't one. It's a surface tension thing that is supposed to occur at the molecular level by exciting the molecules in the fuel, what "they" call molecular vibration. Gasoline has "X" surface tension which affects the atomization of the fuel in the combustion chamber and supposedly there is leftover fuel that is just blown out the tailpipe. Acetone is supposed to reduce the surface tension and that is supposed to allow the gasoline that you're spraying in the cylinder to burn more completely because the droplets are smaller thus allowing you to use less fuel to do the work and that's what gets the better mileage. Whether or not an individual vehicle will get better gas mileage is debatable. However, if you live in a smog test state, get your tailpipe sniffed, go home and add the Acetone and then go back for a re-sniff. That'll tell you right there that it does something in the engine.

On paper it makes sense. In real life, who knows. Conducting tests in a laboratory (in my opinion) is pointless (unless you happen to have a whole bunch of engines from different manufacturers) because different engines in different vehicles in different environments with different drivers driving on different road surfaces with different tires will net different results.