Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Have you recently tried to purchase a new vehicle after being out of the market for a while and found that prices were much higher than you expected? A reporter would like to talk to you; please reach out to [email protected] by 1/20 for more details.
Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Gas Saving Gizmos & Gadgets



  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    "First of all, potential changes in the volume of intake air required to compensate for a free flowing exhaust are not great enough to cause a loss of 6 miles per gallon IF THE AIR/FUEL RATIO IS KEPT AT THE MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDED SPECIFICATION."

    I'm not exactly sure I agree with that statement. Many engine makers use a technique called "valve overlap" to enhance cylinder scavenging. Reduce the back pressure well below that of the factory exhaust and too much of the intake charge flows out the exhaust valve before it closes. Needless to say, that condition will of course results in a measurable reduction in fuel economy even if the Air/Fuel ratio is bang on. The only way to counteract that problem for most engines is to change the cam(s) to reduce the amount of overlap commensurate with the new exhaust system. That said, many of the new VW & Audi engines use direct injection of the fuel into the cylinder, and as long as the exhaust valve is closed before the injector fires, even a long duration of valve overlap coupled with zero back pressure won't negatively affect the fuel economy.

    Best Regards,
  • 0patience0patience Oregon CoastPosts: 1,712
    Ok, first let me address that article. The author is an expert. He is published in many automotive mechanic trade magazines and is a leading professional in driveability and emissions.
    So you can disagree all you want, but his credentials are above repraoch. That being said, my rep ain't no slouch either.
    As for his claim, it was in response to a question, had you read it correctly. The guy asked why he lost 6 mpg when he bolted on stuff and the author, replied why.

    First of all, potential changes in the volume of intake air required to compensate for a free flowing exhaust are not great enough to cause a loss of 6 miles per gallon IF THE AIR/FUEL RATIO IS KEPT AT THE MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDED SPECIFICATION. As long as the mixture is correct, you can vary the total volume within that kind of range and not see much change in economy.
    Wrong. You contradicted yourself.
    If you open the exhaust flow, the air/fuel mixture will not be kept at the manufacturer's specs, because the computer will be trying to compensate for the flow.

    Increasing the total mixture volume while holding the air/fuel ratio constant will just result in needing to use a smaller throttle opening at a given speed.
    Sorry, still trying to make sense of that statement.

    Fuel injection computers are designed with a limited capability to adjust the mixture. They work fine, as long as the engine is kept stock.
    There is a reason for that. The govt specs what is allowable. Most bolt ons put those outside that range, then people have problems. The put these bolt ons on the vehicle with no reprogramming, then wonder why they have problems.

    I'm not gonna get into a debate about theory and all that, cause quite frankly it is a waste of my time.
    You can agree with me or not. Don't care one way or another.
  • 0patience0patience Oregon CoastPosts: 1,712
    Many engine makers use a technique called "valve overlap" to enhance cylinder scavenging. Reduce the back pressure well below that of the factory exhaust and too much of the intake charge flows out the exhaust valve before it closes.

  • zaken1zaken1 Posts: 556
    I hope this doesn't reopen the Pandora's box. There are plenty of engines out there with high overlap cams, which also use low restriction exhaust systems; and still get good gas mileage. I've owned several myself. The critical factor affecting whether or not the mileage is hurt is not so much the restriction or lack of restriction in the exhaust system; but rather the resonant behavior of the exhaust system. If the length of the exhaust system is poorly chosen (or not considered) it can cause reflected pressure pulses to travel back up the system and reach the open exhaust valve during overlap; those waves will then flow backwards through the cylinder and continue out through the open intake valve. And the resultant exhaust dilution of the intake charge will raise all kinds of havoc with the fuel mixture and volumetric efficiency at that particular RPM. On the other hand, properly tuned exhaust systems are designed so that a portion of the exhaust pressure pulses reaching the outlet end will reflect and travel back through the exhaust system to the engine, with the pipe length chosen so that the pulse strikes the closed exhaust valve and bounces back just before the valve opens. This second reflection of the pressure wave travels again through the exhaust system to the outlet end, drawing a lower pressure area behind it. The lower pressure behind the outgoing pulse helps to scavenge the exiting gas after the exhaust valve opens.

    Since the length of time between exhaust valve openings is halved as engine RPM doubles, while the speed of the reflected exhaust pulses changes relatively little; the exhaust reversion will go into and out of harmony with the valve timing as engine speed changes. A well designed tuned exhaust has an effective range of resonance which closely matches the engine's torque curve.

    As long as the exhaust resonance is harmonious with the valve timing, the carburetion will work like it was intended to do, and there will be good potential for torque and fuel economy. But when a mismatched exhaust system creates pressure waves that upset the intake flow; the carburetion becomes unstable, and it becomes impossible to tune the engine to run efficiently. And that's when and why the mileage falls off.
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    No argument to any of the above. In my simplistic statement I written above I was too lazy to drill too deep. Glad you did. ;-)

    Best Regards,
  • zaken1zaken1 Posts: 556
    WOW, what a pleasant surprise to see your reasoned, positive response. I was beginning to feel like I was on the wrong planet, and was just about ready to quit posting on this site.

  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    A "one chip fits all cars" device, yikes, I wouldn't plug that thing into a dead skunk much less one of my cars. :P
  • gunga64gunga64 Posts: 271
    I would switch to syntheic oil and make sure my tires are inflated properly to get better MPG. Also keep off the brakes and coast to a stop when possible and don't put the pedal down so fast when driving.

    I really don't think running the AC effects MPG as much as many think. You may get 1/2 MPG more but watched mythbusters and it wasn't all that much to drive in the heat.
  • zaken1zaken1 Posts: 556
    I agree with the points you raised, but many people already use synthetic oil, drive conservatively, and keep their tires inflated. Here are a few things those people, and everybody else, can do to get better mileage.

    1> Don't warm your car up by idling for long periods when you first start the engine. Tests have shown that over 95% of engine wear takes place in the first 5 minutes of running. Much of that wear is caused by excessive fuel from rich cold starting mixtures washing the lubrication off cylinder walls. The rich fuel mixtures used during cold running also cause a huge drop in fuel economy. The sooner you get the engine up to normal speed, the quicker it will warm up. The higher engine speed and earlier warm up both enable the air/fuel mixture to lean out faster. The best technique is to let the engine run for 15 to 30 seconds after a cold start, and then drive gently, at moderate speed, until the temperature comes up.

    The practice of letting the engine idle for long periods when cold was common in the days before cars used multigrade oil, when engine tolerances were much looser than they are today. But the tighter tolerances in modern engines, along with thinner, more effective oils, have now made that practice unnecessary.

    2> Many late model cars have a built in design feature that wise owners can use to improve their mileage. It is called a detonation sensor, or knock sensor. The way these devices work is to automatically advance the engine's ignition timing as far as possible, until it begins to ping or knock. The more spark advance an engine has, the better its fuel economy will be. However, prolonged knocking can lead to engine damage, so the timing cannot be safely advanced beyond the point where the engine knocks.

    In a car equipped with a knock sensor; using premium fuel will permit the timing to advance further than it can with regular fuel, before the engine begins to knock. This will improve the fuel economy over what it was on regular. The difference will vary between fuel brands, car models, and type of driving; but sometimes it can be quite significant. So even on cars where the manual recommends regular, premium fuel can often give better fuel economy, and more power as well.

    3> In my 27 year career as a performance tuning specialist, I quickly found that the better an engine runs, the more differently it responds to various brands of spark plugs. If you change brands of plugs in an engine that is not in good mechanical condition, or is not sharply tuned; it often doesn't make much difference. But a sharply tuned engine will frequently show definite preferences in spark plug brands. And often, the brand of plug that runs best, and gives best fuel economy, is not the brand the vehicle manufacturer recommended. I've seen many engines run best with Champions, which is why that has become my favorite brand. But my fiance's BMW would not run well on anything except Bosch. And one client's Mazda ran best on NGK. Each brand of plug works best under a certain set of conditions. If you are willing to invest the time and effort, your mileage and performance may be improved by changing plug brands. Spark plug manufacturers frequently offer optional plug designs which have premium features. Champion makes a line of 'Platinum Power' plugs, which I've found work better in Toyota V-6 engines. Bosch 'Fusion' (with iridium/platinum electrodes) work better in my Geo Metro than any of the dozens of plug types I've used in that engine during the last 15 years. And plain ordinary nickel electrode Autolites work best in my heavily modified small block Mopar.
  • vchiuvchiu PARIS, FRANCEPosts: 564
    Not sure if this already posted or not.

    This web site claims to have the solution to increase Fuel mileage by X.

    Simply looking at the figures let me think that it is a scam.
    Moreover, the principle of EGR (Exhaust Gas Recycling) is already known. Would this be so great, I can't believe car manufacturers would have been so dumb as to overlook this.

    Any thoughts ? I did not find any thing about this on the EPA web site.
  • texasestexases Posts: 8,996
    Yep, it's a major scam, I'm dealing with it here, if you're interested:
    Discussion in Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    Device promises to save 60% at the pump (

    Maybe Tex's link is already doing that? I don't follow the hydrogen/hybrid boards.
  • texasestexases Posts: 8,996
    Pretty hard to believe. It takes as much or more energy to do the electrolysis as you get when you burn it, and the car would have to generate that energy, so why would it work? If this did work, we could create perpetual motion machines.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    The part that bugged me was the baseline - why didn't they check the mileage driving around town for a month, then do the dyno, then do the oil change, then do the gizmo, and then do another dyno, another oil change, and another month around town without the gizmo?

    Dyno's have a reputation for tweakability.
  • texasestexases Posts: 8,996
    Yes, same concerns here. Also, they reported '61%' improvement...using their numbers, it's more like 147%!!! But (suspiciously) the web site talks of up to 60%, so you wonder....
  • texasestexases Posts: 8,996
    I just heard back from the reporter. Here's how they did the 'dyno' part of the test:

    "Here's how we did it. We filled up our tank and let the pump shut off automatically. We then put it on the dyno with a starting milage on the odometer of 125,691. We ran it 20 minutes at 55mph and put 21 miles on. We then topped the tank off, and put 2.216 gallons in our tank. Divde 21 by 2.216 and you get 9.4. We then repeated the test a month later. We filled up, and started the dyno at 126,566. We ran the machine for 20 minutes at 55mph. We put twenty miles on. We then filled up again, and put .862 gallons in our tank. Divide 20 by .862 and you get 23.2mpg.
    Now take the difference between the amount of gas that we put into each tank. 2.216 minus .862 equals 1.3. Take the 1.3 and divide it 2.216, which was the original amount of gas we put into the tank. That equals 61-percent."

    So their number is based on less than a gallon used - major potential for error.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    Sounds bogus to me.

    Nice job tracking down the source. I hope you invited him to join in here. :-)
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    Some of this math is HIGHLY suspect. Many of the problems have already been identified, and here's one more example:

    "We ran it 20 minutes at 55mph and put 21 miles on."

    Ummm, last time I checked, 55 mph was less than a mile per minute, however, they managed more than that. So, either they ran @ 55 longer than 20 minutes (more like 22 minutes 54 seconds), or they ran at a higher speed than 55 (more like 63), or they ran it for less than the 21 miles they reported (more like 18.3).

    As is often said on other web sites, "I call shenanigans." :P

    Best Regards,
  • texasestexases Posts: 8,996
    "I call shenanigans."

    I just have a picture of these guys "helping" this reporter run this test - fiddle with the dyno, fiddle with filling the tank, and then it gets broadcast as 'the truth' :confuse: :sick:
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    Whad'ya reckon the reporter is getting as a kick back? :confuse:

    Best Regards,
  • nortsr1nortsr1 Posts: 1,060
    "If it's too good to be true.....It is too good to be true"!!!! I feel this way about the above. If it was such a gas saving device and that cheap and easily installable....The manufacturers would have bought up that patent and immediately made that a OEM item in the vehicle.
    I googled it and there were "several" of those same type items for sale by different sources!!!!!!
    Seriously, don't you think GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, BMW or some big company would have grabbed that "gas saving device" immediately????
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,444
    When an automaker will go to great lengths to beat the competitions mileage, you can bet they would be on a device that would change the course of the automotive industry. My belief is a product that is not available in any mainstream outlet, is a scam. I include Amway......
  • nortsr1nortsr1 Posts: 1,060
    Exactly, I wholeheartedly agree. I really don't know anything about Amway, as I have never used any of their products.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    Amsoil will sell you oil and digestive enzymes.

    The enzymes are for you, not your crankcase. :P

    If Exxon/Mobile started selling multivitamins too, I'd start to wonder if they've gone MLM. Maybe they'll come out with a magic pill for the gas tank.
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,444
    I switched from Puritan Pride to Swanson. Not sure who has the best vitamins. I am not into anything sold by a MLM scheme. Too many con artists involved. I am sure there are good products sold by companies like Watkins and Tupperware. I just don't want to get involved in any cult like sales meetings.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    Vitamins 'may shorten your life' (BBC)

    Just like some of the junk you can stick in your engine and ruin it...
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    "If BP (BP) could add something to its gasoline that made cars go farther on a gallon, cars would be lining up at the company's pumps.

    If General Motors could make its cars go significantly farther on a gallon simply by putting a device into the fuel line, don't think for a second it wouldn't be doing that. GM's car sales would go through the roof.

    "There are a number of these gas-saving devices that are generally useless," says Champion.

    But drivers who try them will swear they work. In reality, it's probably an automotive placebo effect, says Reed. Buy one of these devices or additives, and you're like to pay extreme attention to your fuel economy and how you drive."

  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    The placebo effect is alive and well, of that I have no doubt. Why? Subconsciously at least, folks have to justify to themselves that their hard earned money was put to good use, and as such, they need some numbers to support the justification,

    Funny thing though, last summer I took our older Dodge Grand Caravan on a 2,000+ mile road trip, and decided to see just how much mileage I could squeeze out of it 3.8 liter mill. Prior to that trip, the best mileage I'd ever gotten in it was 25.9 mpg (although more typical highway mileage is something like 23.5), however, this time I had a straight 800 mile shot on relatively flat roads and I managed an astounding (for that van) 28.2 mpg. Funny thing though, I could have gotten over thirty. How/why? I believe that had I been able to avoid the two international toll booths with long queues, two internal Customs inspections, also with long queues, and one ten mile/one hour long traffic jam I crawled through, my mileage would have been over thirty.

    Now, had I just spent $1.200 on one of these Rube Goldberg devices, I might well have been inclined to claim that it was the device and not my highly altered driving style that had allowed such impressive mileage.

    Best Regards,
  • fezofezo Manahawkin, NJPosts: 10,376
    It is amazing what placebos can do. I happen to be on a really obscure "orphan drug" right now (this is not the way you want to be unique, BTW) and I got to read all through this stuff about it. They list the side effects with the medication vs with a placebo. Some were identical percentages, some looked to actually be related to use of the drug and in some cases those with the placebos were reporting more side effects that those taking the actual medication!

    Strange thing the human mind.
    2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    the Vitron Plasma Converter ?

    These guys guarantee 300% to 500% increase in mileage

    From their FAQ page:

    How easy is it to install?

    Any qualified mechanic who has experience working with standard fuel intake and exhaust systems can easily install the Vitron-Plasma Catalytic Converter in under four hours. Or, if you live in Colorado or are planning on visiting Colorado, our certified technicians can install it for you by appointment.

    Will it work on my diesel engine?

    Will it work on my motor home / RV / boat?

    Will it work on my hybrid / alternate fuel vehicle?

    Unfortunately, no. The Vitron-Plasma Catalytic Converter is only designed to work with petroleum based fuels.

    Is it legal?

    Federal and State laws exist to prohibit you from removing or disabling emissions systems. However, there is no law that prohibits you from installing or replacing your catalytic converter with one that has a higher efficiency rating.

    In addition to dramatically improving gas mileage, our Vitron-Plasma Catalytic Converters offer substantially reduced toxic emissions regulated by EPA standards. In fact, the only exhaust products produced are Oxygen, Water Vapor, and trace amounts of Carbon Dioxide. The exhaust is clean enough to comfortably breathe without any ill effects. Imagine trying to do that with your current exhaust!

    Is it safe?

    Yes! Even though plasma can reach exceedingly high temperatures, the production of plasma requires a vacuum environment. In the event of any damage to your Vitron-Plasma Catalytic Converter, the vacuum seal is automatically broken and the fuel delivery system is shut down preventing any possibility of pre-combustion. Other safety features include check valves and flash-back arrestors to prevent an engine back fire from reaching the fuel supply.

    What kind of warranty do you offer?

    We offer a 100% 90 day money back guarantee if you are not completely satisfied with the Vitron-Plasma Catalytic Converter. In addition, all of our products come with a standard two-year warranty against defects. Some exclusions and limitations apply.
  • texasestexases Posts: 8,996
    Thanks for the laughs, larsb - these guys are like cockroaches, coming out with high prices. Not a single correct statement to be found anywhere on that web site :sick: :sick:
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,444
    Since when did hybrids not use petroleum based fuel? Could you find an address to return this device if not completely satisfied? It is just another of 100s of scams of which most are MLMs hoping to get you to invest in ripping others off.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    It makes you wonder where the state AGs are ... the one's who aren't in jail that is. :P
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,444
    It seems some states are more tolerant of these blatant snake oil ponzi schemes. The most amazing thing to me is how many Americans get sucked into them. Have I told you about Bioastin. It is all the rage in Hawaii. Cures everything and prevents getting sunburned. Made from algae right on the Big Island. We bought a bottle and my wife's arthritis is cured and I feel 25 years old again.
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    I e-mailed them the question "why not hybrids" and I got this response:

    Hi Lars,

    Technically it would. We just haven't done sufficient testing on the hybrids to be able to stand behind it both technically and financially. If one of our devices were to have an adverse effect on a vehicle we can't substantiate that we've tested it properly, which would present too much exposure in a courtroom.

    Unfortunate, but that's where we're at currently.

    Surprised a human is really there. I offered him my hybrid as a guinea pig if he would install it for free I would be his first testimonial. I'll see what he comes back with.
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    This guy seems sincere in his belief in his product.

    Hi Lars,

    I would be happy to accept that challenge. I can't do it this coming weekend though because I will be out of town. Can we look at the following weekend?

    As to the other concerns, I understand your skepticism. I don't have an answer to that other than we have about 1000 of them on the road, all with positive results. We have been working on independent tests but have not finished compiling the results. We've been working closely with the Air Force labs for IVT information. If the oil companies try to take me out, well... if they're really determined to 'take me out' there's not a lot I can do about it. I do have a condition in my will that upon my death the patent (pending) automatically becomes public domain, so I don't think it would be in their best interest to do so.

    I appreciate a skeptical mind and look forward to the opportunity to show you that this really works. I'll up the anti a little though. I will give you a full refund (or just let you keep the device) if you don't see at least 105 Mpg. In other words, if you only get 75 Mpg, congratulations! It's free! This is of course assuming that you are getting 35 Mpg currently while running on regular gasoline.


    So what do you think guys? Should I drive to Colorado from Phoenix and let him install this thing for me? He seems serious enough to take me up on my offer......
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,444
    You could be the first guy with a Camry that gets 105 MPG...
  • nortsr1nortsr1 Posts: 1,060
    Can you imagine the mpg a Honda Civic will get with that baby installed. Go ahead Larsb, go for it!!! (But make sure you report back to us!!! By the way, what is the price of this gas saving product.
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    It's $995 for the one for my Camry, and $1345 for a larger SUV/Truck.

    My boss actually found this device - one of his cousin's kids just signed up with them as a "dealer" and my boss has a younger brother who is a "shadetree mechanic" who is contacting the guy by phone to get more information and decide if he thinks it will work. If the brother thinks it will work, he will come out here to Phoenix for us and install them on his car and our vehicles too.

    The gadget guy is willing to send us one "free" and let us try it and then pay him once we get the results on our own car.

    We might do this....I will OF COURSE keep this forum posted. If he's willing to give it to me free of charge and try it, I can't see the downside.

    P.S. My boss has an Avalanche, and if he can cut his monthly gasoline charges by 75%, he will have the gadget paid off in about 7 months. Might take me about a year, but after that it's gravy.......
  • nortsr1nortsr1 Posts: 1,060
    Well Larsb, If it works, it seems to me that some bigtime auto manufacturer will grab hold of that patent for a hefty price and start making it a "standard" installed item. Still ......... . "If it sounds too good to be true.....It is too good to be true"!!!!!!
    I eagerly await the outcome of this "astounding:" gas saving device!!!!!
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,444
    Better hold off Larsb: This is the guy behind the high priced HHO scheme..

    “Dennis Lee has repeatedly tried to defraud Washington consumers by promoting products that, in order to perform as he claims, would have to defy the laws of physics,” Attorney General Rob McKenna said. “He’s snubbed government regulators during his road shows and blatantly disregarded a court order that forbids him from selling items or business opportunities in Washington.”

    this basic technology has been around since the 60's Dr. William Rhodes Inventor. University of Arizona.

    Here is a good source on the whole idea of hydrogen powered cars etc.
  • Karen_SKaren_S Posts: 5,092
    A reporter would like to talk with anyone who recently have used aftermarket products that provide better fuel economy, such as the Tornado Fuel Saver and fuel-line modifications like air bleeders and magnets. The reporter would also like to hear from people who have tried oil and fuel additives or exhaust-system modifications as well. Please respond to [email protected] with your daytime contact information and what you used no later than Tuesday, June 3rd.
  • vitronvitron Posts: 9
    Hi gagrice,

    I'm the owner of the company and the developer of the product. I'm also the person "Larsb" has been communicating with via email. I can assure you that I am not Dennis Lee nor have I ever had any association with him!

    Furthermore I'm not in the HHO industry! My company experimented with that technology for a short time before abandoning it completely because... well... we couldn't get it to work very well!

    With all due respect please check your facts before posting something that could significantly damage another person's reputation. It's not only unfair to the target of your misinformation (i.e. me and my company) but also to the rest of the forum members.

    Forgive my bluntness, but I would ask you to consider how you would feel if someone publicly misidentified you as a criminal.


    Chris Ream, CEO
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,444
    First welcome to the forum,

    Let me tell you that my first thoughts on any gizmo that will give significant gains to any internal combustion engine is skepticism. I have tried a few name brand products such as K&N filters and was always disappointed. If your device is some new and amazing discovery that will indeed save us a lot of fossil fuel. Then please forgive my statements to larsb. It did seem odd that you were selling your product for the same $995 that was stated for the device being sold on a MLM promotion from Dennis Lee. I am still skeptical of anyone that is claiming to triple my mileage. My advice to you would be to sell your product to GM. That would put them back in the lead selling cars, trucks and SUVs and save 1000s of American jobs.

    If you are selling your product through any kind of Multi level marketing scheme, I would not trust you. And in that case my advice to larsb would be the same, BEWARE!

    I do like your website.
  • vitronvitron Posts: 9
    Hi gagrice,

    Thanks for the welcome! Yes, I know our biggest hurdle is skepticism and that's only natural given the amount of "run your car on water..." and other such "products" out there.

    The only way I've been able to successfully market this is to offer a full refund if it doesn't do what I claim. Even then, the sales cycle is still usually about 10 emails exchanged back and forth. With a lot of q/a.

    Customer testimonials don't really work that well either because as we all know, they can be faked and are faked on a routine basis on some websites. We all know this and yet unfortunately it leaves a lot of people short changed by several hundred, to several thousand dollars regularly.

    The dishonesty in the fuel saving industry runs rampant. Gas prices are killing our economy and hurting the average American's quality of life. I get ******-off at these people who are preying on the average consumer's pain. It's also difficult to be automatically lumped into that category because I personally stand behind my claims and will never hide from an honest question or public demonstration.

    To address the question regarding selling this technology to GM or another car manufacturer; I'm not opposed to the idea however, I would need a guarantee that it would actually be used! I'm not a big conspiracy theorist however I am concerned that it's not in an automobile manufacturer's best interest to incorporate this system into their new designs. The federal government is throwing billions of dollars at the automotive industry for alternative fuel research and development. My technology still uses fossil fuel's (it just uses them dramatically better). My product is better suited for vehicles already on the road and in situations where someone doesn't want to get rid of their vehicle any time soon.

    I also realize that the fossil fuel industry eventually will be a thing of the past. I think my company really only has about a 15-20 year viable lifespan. I'm okay with that as long as it helps fill the gap while we develop better technology. Think of my product as a stop-gap rather than the magic bullet (like the water/hydrogen claims make).

    I hope this helps to clarify my position and intentions with my product and business!

    I enjoy answering questions so if you have any "fire away"!

  • texasestexases Posts: 8,996
    Well, we'll ignore any of Gary's issues, so let's start off with your opening web page, and the whopper lie "Did you know that on average out of every dollar you spend on gas, 82 cents is wasted as pollution?" This is nonsense. Practically all the gasoline (far more than 90%) is burned. Any claim to triple mileage using an internal combustion engine is nonsense, pure and simple.
  • nortsr1nortsr1 Posts: 1,060
    VITRO: If your product has only a "15-20 year viable lifespan" ....let's be sensible here....GM, Ford or Chrysler,. Toyota or whomever would JUMP at the opportunity to use your product with the mileage increase claims you make...They would give you MILLIONS for a product like yours (IF IT WORKED!!!)... Why don't you contact Consumers Report and let them "road test" your product???????
    I simply cannot believe that if you are sitting on a gold mine that you haven't offered it to GM, FORD or again, whomever!!!! And please...don't tell me they wouldn't purchase it!!!!!
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 26,686
    Well, just to head off the argument. He already stated that he believes they would buy it and bury it.

    However, I contend this to be untrue. They will be spending millions upon millions to meet the new CAFE regulations. If a shortcut product was available, yes, I agree they would jump on it AND USE IT without hesitation.

    '19 Ioniq plug-in, '10 Equinox LS; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '14 Town&Country Limited; '18 BMW X2. 50-car history and counting!

  • vitronvitron Posts: 9
    Hi Texases,

    I would have to respectfully disagree for the following reasons; If that were the case there would be no need for catalytic converters in vehicles because the only byproducts of petrolium combustion would be H2O and CO2 -- Water and Carbon Dioxide!

    While you're correct that over 90% of the fuel molecules (hydrocarbons) do participate in the combustion process, only 18-25% of the hydrocarbons are fully reduced to lowest possible energy states of H20 and CO2. The other 75-80% are broken down into smaller hydrocarbons (which is of course still a fuel). Granted, they release some of their energy when they break down, but not all of it.

    A good point of reference for understanding this would be to google "NASA Microgravity flame spread research"... Nasa has done extensive research in microgravity environments with petrolium and other fuels and their findings are facinating and relate directly to our research.

    In essense, our product breaks the majority of the heavier hydrocarbons found in gasoline into smaller HC structures. This ensures that the majority of HC's entering the combustion chamber are then reduced to H2O and CO2. In fact, the exhaust coming from our modified vehicles is almost entirely water vapor and CO2.

    Does this help?

    Oh! One more thing... a vitron-plasma modified vehicle will pass emissions even with the catalytic converter removed. Of course, it's illegal to remove it permenantly but you technically COULD.

This discussion has been closed.