Chemically modify the gasoline.

[GasSavers_Erik]

Gasolene,

I may be a little slow, but I still don't understand exactly what you are selling.

The best I can tell is that you are selling instructions for making a chemical that can be added to your gas tank that will slow combustion so that ignition timing can be advanced (without detonation) and thus efficiency might be increased on OBD2 vehicles (so you are implying that persons with carbed vehicles and OBD 0/1 vehicles would be best not to purchase this info)

Is this a correct assessment of what you are offering? If not, please correct me.

[IndyFetch]

I just skimmed this thread, but I think I have the feel of it. To slow down the "flame front" all you need is higher octane fuel. The octane rating is the fuel's resistance to combustion. When the flame front moves too quickly or the combustion chamber is too hot (as in high-compression or forced induction, where the mixture may explode prior to the spark), higher octane fuel is required. Modern engines can adjust timing to run on regular fuel at the expense of power and mileage.

If the fuel additive this guy is selling costs more than the 10c per gallon of higher-octane fuel, it is not worth it. Save yourself the money and run what the manufacturer recommends for your vehicle.

[tradosaurus]

This is what the OP sent me on a PM:

Hi, Bob -

So, at this point I can say I have walked into a method of decreasing gasoline consumption ... for a given load... which might not be apparent to someone looking at the conventional methods of conserving (hypermiling, slowing down, drafting that truck rather than passing), and jotting down mileage whenever filling one's gas tank.

My documentation is not the string of numbers / dates / routes (which is not conclusive at all) but ScanGauge ll data points over time / routes. After many, many miles of this monitoring, a trend makes itself obvious. The average MPG mode on the SG ll is a powerful indicator: I have noted (without the instantaneous MPG mode ... which is useless) several "identical" trips back-and-forth between the same points A & B averaging the same ballpark numbers.

What are these numbers? Using EPA test numbers for this make & model car's mileage (which, as you know, "may vary"... lol) as a baseline : 28 - 34 MPG, city & hwy ... I have repeatedly noted an average MPG reading of 41 - 46 MPG over this same A & B route. My best reading ever on this route (trips are even better) was 51 MPG (I really squeezed this "perfect" test run). A favorite showing was "many fours" (44.4 MPG Av.), which happened over & over again.

Plug these numbers into a calculator and get a really big MPG (average) number! Most trips are in the low 40s.

At this point, I will say the oxygen sensor is the main modification - without even touching it! It advances the timing continuously as the engine load varies ... and the modified gasoline "behaves" differently (less prone to knocking), so ... more advance means more efficiency! EPA would love me!!! lol Even tho' no modifications to the engine are permitted, not a word about changing this "stuff" they call pump gas.... Sobeit.

Documentation? Who would believe nos. like these? Credibility is not here, no matter what the methodology. All engines are different, all terrain is different, all temps are different, all traffic is different. This is the real world. Computerized ignition systems can be hacked, too! I have done this....

[Gasalene]

Originally Posted by Erik

Gasolene,

I may be a little slow, but I still don't understand exactly what you are selling.

The best I can tell is that you are selling instructions for making a chemical that can be added to your gas tank that will slow combustion so that ignition timing can be advanced (without detonation) and thus efficiency might be increased on OBD2 vehicles (so you are implying that persons with carbed vehicles and OBD 0/1 vehicles would be best not to purchase this info)

Is this a correct assessment of what you are offering? If not, please correct me.

First, I am not "making" a chemical; I'm merely using a chemical compound intended for another purpose entirely. This chemical slows the flame front of the gasoline used when added to the tank; not the combustion, per se.
No, I am not implying carbed / OBD l engines cannot use this concept. The pre-emission era (1968, 69) was when I first started investigating this concept. Power timing (listening for the "ping" under load) was the means by which I found the "new" timing advance point with this modified gas. Very awkward, very clumsy & I had to include detailed instructions (in the concept package) as to how to safely power time an Otto engine. This was on yesteryear's gas, too! Not the stuff sold today. OBD ll will not be power timed.
OK?

[Gasalene]

Originally Posted by Fetch

I just skimmed this thread, but I think I have the feel of it. To slow down the "flame front" all you need is higher octane fuel. The octane rating is the fuel's resistance to combustion. When the flame front moves too quickly or the combustion chamber is too hot (as in high-compression or forced induction, where the mixture may explode prior to the spark), higher octane fuel is required. Modern engines can adjust timing to run on regular fuel at the expense of power and mileage.

If the fuel additive this guy is selling costs more than the 10c per gallon of higher-octane fuel, it is not worth it. Save yourself the money and run what the manufacturer recommends for your vehicle.

You are missing the whole point, Fetch. First, the combustion of today's gasoline is not efficient. You ain't gonna get good gas mileage on whichever octane gas you run. Higher octane gas is not gonna slow the flame front or give you better MPG. It may give more detonation resistance... but so what? If 10 cents per gallon gave more MPG, everyone would be running this 92 octane stuff. But it won't / can't. As long as OBD ll is retarding the timing (and that is all it does) the engine in question is not gonna be as efficient as it can be. It will, however, be quiet. No knock, no "ping", no roughness. No power, either. And power is what makes good MPG... (horse)power being torque per unit time.
If you are gonna criticize my explanation of what goes on in the mod. gas combustion process, you might brush up on basic gasoline combustion theory. The auto manufacturer is only trying to sell product - it's the fuel for this product the "pump people" promote... with such glowing words as "cleaner"! Nobody talks power or MPG, anymore. There ain't much to talk about.

[tradosaurus]

So after all these words I'm still confused on the chemical compound you are using but that is the "secret" isn't it?

Again, how much?

[IndyFetch]

" I played around with several substances before I hit on a chemical which slowed the combustion down (sluggish) - then, I could advance the initial (spark) timing to wake the engine up, again. "

Slowing combustion down...Sounds like an increase in octane rating to me...
Gasoline is not the most efficient fuel out there. But it is what my car is designed to run on.... what exactly are you proposing that we put into our engines? Warning: You will have a hard time convincing anyone to do it if it costs more than you would save by using it...

Also, with all other factors thrown out, higher octane fuel will slow the flame front. That is what it is DESIGNED to do. Higher octane fuel will save gas in vehicles DESIGNED TO RUN HIGHER OCTANE FUEL. If you run 87 in a newer car designed to run 91 or above, the timing will be adjusted and it will make less power. If you run 87 in an older engine (no variable timing) designed to run 91 or above, it just runs like crap. There are several tests in Car and Driver magazine over the years to support this fact.

You said that if 92 would give better mpg, everyone would be running it. My counter-argument: If 92 DIDN'T give better MPG, barely anyone would be running it. Why would an auto manufacturer recommend it?

[GasSavers_Erik]

Gasolene- how does your system/idea compare to water injection/water vapor systems? It seems that water injection/vapor would do the same thing you are describing (allowing the timing to be advanced for more power without ping/damage).

[Gasalene]

Originally Posted by Erik

Gasolene- how does your system/idea compare to water injection/water vapor systems? It seems that water injection/vapor would do the same thing you are describing (allowing the timing to be advanced for more power without ping/damage).

Hi, Eric -

Interesting question (H2O injection / vapor systems)! You may be interested to know I started these gas engine mods many years ago by adding water vapor (altho' "injecting" implies squirting minute amounts of either liquid water or vapor) to the combustion process ; as this became cluttered with pumps, tubing, reservoirs, anti-freeze problems, corrosion problems ... and so forth. I ended up with a means of supersaturating air with much more water vapor content than air could hold normally. The next step was to run a test engine on this very damp air. I even hold 2 US Patents on this mod.
Long story short, the engine (on an engine dyno) ran fine! But, simple the system was not! So I had to rethink my entire approach.
To modify the combustion process, something had to be changed. If not changing the air (supersaturation with H2O), change the fuel. One thing led to another... and I finally isolated this search to one compound.
After focusing upon this compound IN the gasoline (& playing with A/F ratios in the 2-bbl carb, ignition advance curves, air temps ... all the variables which would be encountered in the "real world") I finally (!) had the solution to these problems of poor mileage, legality (auto inspection programs don't like extra hardware), pre-ignition woes and the like. In the gas tank is out of sight. Emissions are no problem, either.
The introduction of OBD ll to the solid state ignition systems eliminated all the hassles encountered on the road. This alone opened the doors which held me prisoner in this world of change. A variable ignition advance curve is ideal.

[Gasalene]

Originally Posted by Fetch

" I played around with several substances before I hit on a chemical which slowed the combustion down (sluggish) - then, I could advance the initial (spark) timing to wake the engine up, again. "

Slowing combustion down...Sounds like an increase in octane rating to me...

.... what exactly are you proposing that we put into our engines? Warning: You will have a hard time convincing anyone to do it if it costs more than you would save by using it...

Also, with all other factors thrown out, higher octane fuel will slow the flame front. That is what it is DESIGNED to do.

You said that if 92 would give better mpg, everyone would be running it. My counter-argument: If 92 DIDN'T give better MPG, barely anyone would be running it. Why would an auto manufacturer recommend it?

Hi, again "Fetch"!

The octane rating is exactly that ... a rating. It is a ratio which indicates the relative resistance to knock (pre-ignition) of this gas to 100 octane test gas. It does not slow gasoline's combustion. 92 octane is recommended for cars with high compression ratios... in their desperate search for EPA's higher MPG nos. the gas mixture is being squeezed more, raising the BMEP. To avoid engine damage, pre-ignition is avoided by using higher octane gas.

You are assuming my compound costs more than it saves at the pump. Wrong. This would be a deal-breaker. Please drop this 97-octane-expense-to-gain-more-MPG thing. Fact: All gasoline is the same stuff. The various octane steps are due to the addition of octane boosters (used to be tetraethyl lead); these additions cost more. 2-2-4 Trimethylpentane (gasoline) comes from oil.
You've been listening to gas company ads. They want you to buy their BRAND of gasoline. It's all gasoline. Different additives? Perhaps. Different amounts? Hmmm....

I put up with the trouble & expense of modding my gas because I can travel lots more miles - because I do this. With the price of a gallon of 87 octane being what it is (high!) I can well afford to add my 260ish cents of "stuff" to the 4 gallons of gas I pump - because I'm gonna go much further on these 4 gallons. Mix it while refueling ... easy.