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!

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

123457

Comments

  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 26,443
    thanks for entertaining my curiosity.

    zaken - your mention of smoothness is why I've never tried one of these myself. I have read (possibly just rumors) that the difference in pulleys' weight/balance could be detrimental to the life of the bearings, as well.

    '10 Equinox LS; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '14 Town&Country Limited; '18 BMW X2. 49-car history and counting!

  • texasestexases Posts: 8,976
    Now that the HHO thread is (rightfully) gone, I figure this is the best place to post this link. It describes how the FTC has required Dennis Lee to stop making any claims regarding HHO.
    They froze his assets, too
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,443
    Guys like that pitch their Ponzi schemes on church goers that have trust in man kind to be honest. Think Amway. Bottom line is man is not honest by nature.

    For a better understanding of man's deceptive nature, read Mark Twain's "What is Man".
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    Your link dates back to 2006 - not much breaking news about this latest home built scam kit is there?

    This Turkish homemade student kit gets amazing mpg. Of course it's also cost $170,000, so far. :shades: (popsci.com)
  • zaken1zaken1 Posts: 556
    Here's another one for you skeptics and iconoclasts: There is now a gadget called the FD-47 Fuel Doctor; which is being sold online, and also in the Heartland America catalog. It plugs into the cigarette lighter socket; and claims to increase engine and transmission efficiency and fuel economy 15-25% by "improving firing and reducing friction" through electronically filtering and regulating current in the car's electrical system. Their website states that the use of this product "will reduce your car's toxic emissions by over 1,000 pounds per year." They have a list of impressive testimonials, and they sponsor a race car (which doesn't seem to be doing well). The main product sells for $79.95; and comes with the standard FTC required 30 day money back guarantee.

    I would be interested in feedback from anyone who has ACTUALLY USED IT. Speculation and theories don't move me. And I'm not going to risk my money to see if they honor their warranty. If this thing works; lets get some credible proof; and if it is a scam; they ought to be shut down.

    www.fuel-doctor.com
  • texasestexases Posts: 8,976
    I would trust no posted comment that said it works (which it can't, there is no interaction between the 12v system and the engine managment computer). You'll either get the scammer operating under some other name to claim how well it worked for them, or some sucker who paid $80 and changed their driving habits, and can now claim it works (the placebo effect). If something can't work, why do you need proof? This thing is just like the thing you plug into your exhaust tip, claiming major benefits. Hogwash.
  • zaken1zaken1 Posts: 556
    I expect you probably are right. But there are two reasons I want proof: One is that, if this thing is a scam; I want to see these people prosecuted and the ad taken off the internet and removed from the Heartland America catalog (where it sells for $10 less, and comes with one of the "extras" that the promoter charges money for).

    The second reason I want proof is that there are too many people on this site who have been educated in science; and who as a result claim that what they have learned is absolutely infallable. Such people refuse to question their education; in light of the fact that scientific beliefs are constantly being revised and changed to account for new discoveries; and overlook the inconvenient fact that sometimes "laws of science" which used to be accepted as gospel have subsequently been overturned. When you go to the doctor; do you request that they only treat you with the original protocols which were first used to treat a condition? Many established medical treatment protocols have been invalidated or even reversed; when the original studies have been proven to be based on false premises or inaccurate observations. The ideal scientist is one who is always open to considering new information or possibilities; regardless of how unlikely they seem. The ideal lay person is one who does not treat the findings of science as if they were infallable religious beliefs which came from God; but is open to the sometimes uncomfortable possibility that what they have been believing can still be proved wrong. And the real limits of science include not only technological limitations; but also the consequences of human error and arrogance.
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    A few points:

    1) With no study at all, even a semi-learned person can see that this thing is a scam and will never work.
    2) Please do not confuse technological advancement with overturning "laws of science". There is (and always will be) a great divide between "learning" and/or "state of the art technology", and the "physical laws of nature" such as the "second law of thermodynamics" and the "law of conservation of energy". Those two "laws" have never changed and will most likely never-ever change regardless of how far state of the art technology is advanced. This device appears to infringe greatly on one or both of the above laws.
    3) Common sense, if something sounds too good to be true, then the odds of it being "true" are stacked hugely (as in millions or even billions to one) against it.
    4) It is often difficult to prove a negative, and in this case even if test after test after test result in a conclusion of zero efficacy, it is unlikely that its advocates will admit that it doesn't work. That said, I'll lay odds and cash money that no verifiable scientific test will ever show this device is anything other than a scam.

    Best regards,
    Shipo
  • texasestexases Posts: 8,976
    In addition to Shipo's excellent comments, the only tests I will believe are documented 3rd-party tests, such as by the EPA or periodicals such as Popular Mechanics. I have reviewed all I can find, and have found none, zero, nada reviews of any add-ons that improved milage. So, for this to be the first such device to ever work, I will required a very high level of proof. Not a comment from a satisfied user, heartfelt as it may be. I will need a documented test by an independent and authoritative source.
  • oregonboyoregonboy Posts: 1,653
    If one of these third-party, fuel saving devices actually worked to the tune of 10-20% savings (or more), it would be big news... REALLY BIG NEWS. It would be documented by respected publications and reported by all the major news outlets.

    The inventor would undoubtedly negotiate deals with ALL the major auto manufacturers and it would become standard equipment within a couple of years. :)
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    Nah, the inventors of these devices are all too altruistic for that; they simply want to give the magic away for a few bucks so as to save the Earth. :P
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    Here's a new one, sold by "Always Over-Priced" HAMMACHER & SCHLEMMER:

    The Current Regulating Fuel Efficiency Booster.

    This is the device that improves a car's fuel efficiency by up to 18%. An independent automotive testing service showed the unit increased an automobile's average fuel efficiency from 23.8 to 28.1 miles per gallon in two weeks. The device simply plugs into a car's DC outlet and stabilizes the electrical current flowing to the electrical control unit (ECU)--the computer that controls the engine's fuel injection and ignition systems--to improve gas mileage. The device mitigates electrical interference from the stereo, lights, air conditioning, and more that can negatively affect the ECU's ability to optimize fuel injection and fuel efficiency. Includes an adapter with two DC outlets that accommodate the fuel efficiency booster and another device. For use with automobiles that are at least two years old and have 12 or 24-volt systems; not for use with hybrid cars. 4" L x 1 1/2" W x 1" D. (4 oz.)

    Oh, but not for use by Hybrid Cars. Foiled Again Am I !!!
  • texasestexases Posts: 8,976
    Ugh. Let's see if they respond to this message I sent them:
    "I'm amazed you're selling a worthless product. The "Current Regulating Fuel Efficiency Booster", item 78387, cannot possibly work. Things like this are sold by scammers - why are you selling it? The EPA has tested dozens of such devices, found them all to be worthless. I'm very disappointed you would put your good name behind such a product."
  • What production car has a 24 volt electrical system? Some of the high end cars probably need 24 volt systems but none of them have them yet.
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    "Oh, but not for use by Hybrid Cars. Foiled Again Am I !!!"

    Are you serious? I mean, you actually sound as if you believe the BS in that ad. Say it isn't so. :confuse:
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    Um, yeah, that was sarcasm.....:)
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    Thanks, that's good to know. :)
  • 0patience0patience Oregon CoastPosts: 1,712
    edited February 2010
    Yeah, your car already has one of those, it's called a voltage regulator. ;)
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 13,901
    lars, people here just aren't used to you being humorous.
    me likey. :)
    2017 Ford Fusion SE 2017 Ford F-150 Limited
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    This is a good development. Just a lab gizmo until they figure out how to put it into production vehicles.

    Ultra-Efficient Gas Engine Passes Test - A novel fuel-injection system achieves 64 miles per gallon.

    Transonic Combustion, a startup based in Camarillo, CA, has developed a fuel-injection system it says can improve the efficiency of gasoline engines by more than 50 percent. A test vehicle equipped with the technology gets 64 miles per gallon in highway driving, which is far better than more costly gas-electric hybrids, such as the Prius, which gets 48 miles per gallon on the highway.
    Efficient exotic: Transonic Combustion put its new fuel-injection technology into this sports car, which weighs about as much as a Toyota Prius hybrid and has similar aerodynamics. It’s not a hybrid, but it gets better gas mileage than a Prius.

    The key is heating and pressurizing gasoline before injecting it into the combustion chamber, says Mike Rocke, Transonic's vice president of business development. This puts it into a supercritical state that allows for very fast and clean combustion, which in turn decreases the amount of fuel needed to propel a vehicle. The company also treats the gasoline with a catalyst that "activates" it, partially oxidizing it to enhance combustion.

    The technology is one of many being developed to squeeze more efficiency out of existing engines to meet new fuel economy standards and other regulations--without making vehicles more expensive. "It's a time of renaissance for internal combustion engines," says William Green, a professor of chemical engineering at MIT. Improvements include smaller engines boosted with turbocharging, improved valve timing, and direct injection, in which fuel is injected directly into the combustion chamber rather than into an adjacent port. He says Transonic's approach "may be a promising way to improve on conventional direct injection."
  • texasestexases Posts: 8,976
    Interesting. Certainly in a reputable publication. I'll file this under "I'll believe it when I see it tested by others while meeting all pollution regs." I struggle to understand how it would get 50% increases in economy without addressing the major thermal losses that cause IC engines to get poor energy outputs for the energy released by the burning gas. It's not like 1/3 of the gas leaves the combustion chamber is unburnt.
  • zaken1zaken1 Posts: 556
    edited March 2010
    Sounds super high tech; doesn't it. But the thing is that Smokey Unick did essentially the same thing to a 4 cylinder Pontiac about 25 years ago, and got the same 50% mileage increase; when he installed a supercharger, a smaller radiator, and a heat exchanger on that motor. The supercharger was used to pressurize the air fuel mixture; and the heat exchanger recycled the normally spent heat from the radiator to more thoroughly vaporize the fuel mixture after it was compressed. He subsequently put the system up for sale; but no major company ended up buying it. Interesting how all the sidewalk superintendents are quick to praise a genius like Smokey; who so rightly earned a reputation for repeatedly outperforming the leading experts by coming up with innovations which were outside the traditional box; but when he went so far as to upset the commonly accepted belief (in 1985) that a 2.5 liter engine cannot possibly get 45 miles per gallon and produce 250 HP; these same people suddenly decided that they all knew more than Smokey. It is also curious that, when I taught engine theory at the highly respected Motorcycle Mechanics Institute in 2001, it was accepted that internal combustion engines only burn the relatively small portion of the fuel which is in a vapor state at the time the fuel enters the combustion chamber; and the typically incomplete vaporization of fuel is one of the factors which result in the fact that internal combustion engines only achieve less than 50% of the efficiency which is in their fuel. So I would like to know where Texases got his figures about it being impossible to waste 30% of the fuel in an engine. Better call Shipo for backup on that one!!!
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 26,443
    Not to dispute or confirm any statements, but just to make a point that is sort of related.

    Any possible magic devices from the past, if they worked, would have been passed up because it was seen as an added cost that consumers wouldn't pay for. Given the upcoming CAFE regs, all of that is changing. Costly updates will become a necessity rather than a curiosity.

    '10 Equinox LS; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '14 Town&Country Limited; '18 BMW X2. 49-car history and counting!

  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 26,443
    Could be interesting, but that article leaves alot of open questions.

    We know the weight of their vehicle and its fuel efficiency. Great. But what else? How much power is that engine putting out? What other fuel efficiency devices are being employed on the vehicle?

    50% improvement? Based on what? It says at the bottom they are currently testing it in existing engines. So, if that is underway, what was previously done to come up with this 50% number?

    I'm sure the list goes on.

    '10 Equinox LS; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '14 Town&Country Limited; '18 BMW X2. 49-car history and counting!

  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    edited March 2010
    - Smokey's experiment, while a success, was onerous from a manufacturing perspective.

    - Smokey's 50% increase in fuel economy was compared to engines of the mid 1980s, not exactly a golden age of fuel economy. Said another way, I dare say that the 2.0T currently in the VW GTI would very nearly match (if not exceed) the performance and economy of Smokey's engine without all of the extremely complex plumbing.

    - From the perspective of this "New technology" being worked on by Transonic, nothing even remotely new, and like texases said, I'm thinking that the thermal losses are a much larger hurdle than more efficiently burning the gasoline. Think about it this way, I recently read a very detailed dissertation on the state of the art of combustion technology, and we find that very little of the gasoline that is injected into a combustion chamber (ala. the VW engine I mentioned before) is actually wasted. Is the combustion as efficient as what is derived in a Perfectly Stirred Reactor (PSR)? No. Is it over 90% as efficient? Yes.

    - So, if modern combustion science is able to atomize fuel to a level that is approaching the PSR, then where does Transonic think they're getting this 50% gain?

    - With the above in mind I'm going to go out on a limb here (in my mind a very short and strong one) and say that what the folks at Transonic are touting is bordering on a scam.

    As a fellow member (markcincinnati) is known to say from time to time, "I'm often wrong but never uncertain." That's my story and I'm sticking to it. ;)

    Best regards,
    Shipo
  • oregonboyoregonboy Posts: 1,653
    Good post, however, I am not usually wrong but generally uncertain. :P

    To quote the late Michael Crichton, (Author of Jurassic Park, among others):
    "I am certain there is too much certainty in the world."
  • Hi, I know this is an old post, but was interested in it. I have heard only of a few things on the market that changes your mpg's so I am sure many of you know more than I know so I won't argue with any of you without knowing what I am talking about!! Anyway I have come across a product just a few months ago & tested it on my own car & my husbands 18 wheeler. On my car I have a 1998 Chevy Lumina over 200,000 miles on it. I got a baseline of 18mpg in town driving & 22mpg highway. So I started testing it while my car needed repairs on it (husband didn't want to change anything on it) It needed spark plugs, fuel filter, oil change, air filter etc. All of the normal things that needs to be cared for. So I used the product for 2 fill ups, first thing I noticed was increased horse power. Could pass cars without being scared!! Then I noticed that there was a decrease in mpgs down to 17-16mpg Then by the second tank it went up to 20mpg town & 24 highway. Then we changed the spark plugs etc & ran the car without any treatment in it for 2 tanks. Even with all the new spark plugs we dropped back down to where we were before & no horsepower again. So then I started using it again & we are now up to 21 in town & 26 highway. Oh & I also forgot to mention I have something wrong with the cadilliac(SP) converter. We are planning on replacing it. So I feel like it's worth it to have this product in my car. I can buy 4 packets for 17.95 & save about 80.00 a month because I fill up less. I dropped about 2 to 3 tanks a month. I was filling up 9 times & now I am down to 6 to 7 depending on the month. Then we got my husbands 18 wheeler no big detailed letter there, but he went from 4.8 to 6.1mpg loaded & 5.5 to 8mpg empty & increased horsepower. So there are products out there that does save on fuel. :D
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    "So there are products out there that does save on fuel."

    Ummm, yeah, you have me convinced. NOT!

    Sorry, there is absolutely zero chance that the miracle product you "tested" did anything but waste money.
  • You know what I am just telling you what happened to my car & my husbands rig. I believe it cause I am the one driving the car daily. I'm not claiming it to be a miracle product, but I am guessing by your reply you think it sounds to good to be true. Everyone that I have talked to that has tried it (cause I told a few friends about it) they all have simulair results. I have been using it 3 months & I haven't wasted any money on it. But hey I'm not trying to convince you, just help save people on fuel cost.
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    Let me repeat what has been said before:

    There
    Has
    Never
    Been
    A
    "Gas-Saving"
    Product
    Which
    Has
    Been
    Proven
    To
    Work.
    Ever.
    Never.
    Ever.

    So you can understand our cynicism I hope.

    If there ever IS something that works, it won't be "you and a few friends" using it. It will be about 90% of the world's drivers using it. In today's instant communication world, something that works will be on a million Twitter accounts within hours of being proven true.
  • Well it's not all over it, but I just looked at my twitter account & it's on there. Well then while you are waiting for it to become wide spread I will be saving on gas. I totally understand being a skeptic as I was too, but now I believe it & use it. When you see it popping up on there remember you heard it here first!!
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    Directing people to another site to learn about your miracle pill looks like soliciting and that's not permitted on our site.
  • 1. you are the one that wanted to see it on twitter, 2. It's not a pill. I have heard about that pill. Don't know much about it, but that it didn't work. Something about moth balls.
    Well let's just explain this product. Yes it will make someone money if you buy it. But since I can't even send you to the site to buy it well then I guess this will end our talk. I was just letting people know about something that I KNOW works! If you want to buy it, buy it, if not don't! Makes no difference to me!! Didn't come here to argue with anyone. Just was trying to help others. So I know not to come back here anymore. Have a great day & God Bless!
  • zaken1zaken1 Posts: 556
    It is naive to use the word "never" with respect to technological innovation. It is also foolish and unrealistic to claim that a gas saving product has never been proven to work. In order to believe that; you would have to bury your head in the sand and deny the validity and worth of the hundreds of gas saving improvements which have been adopted and made standard over the years by major automobile manufacturers. Some of these improvements (which you apparently haven't noticed) are high energy electronic ignition systems; electronic spark advance circuits, detonation sensors with automatic capability of varying the ignition timing adjustment to get the most fuel economy and greatest performance from widely varying fuel octane qualities; copper core spark plugs, iridium electrode spark plugs, multiple electrode spark plugs, extra projected tip spark plugs, wide gap spark plugs, closed loop feedback air/fuel ratio monitoring by oxygen sensors in the exhaust system, lock up torque converters, equal length tuned intake and exhaust systems, anti-reversion mufflers, multi-point fuel injection, fuel pressure regulators which vary the fuel pressure according to engine load, electronically or mechanically variable valve timing, multi-valve cylinder heads, variable length intake manifolds which use multiple throttles that are activated under different speed and load conditions, water heated intake manifolds, exhaust heated intake manifolds, reverse flow cooling systems, overhead camshafts; etc, etc, etc, etc, ad infinitum.

    Many, many, many of those proven, accepted improvements began as some backyard inventor's brainchild; were initially sold as a gas saving product, and were eventually bought by the auto manufacturers when they couldn't deny their value. Others were developed in auto manufacturer's research labs. But every single one of them increased gas mileage.

    Have you been sleeping for all these years??? During the 1950s, in the good old days when cars were simple and anybody could fix them with a screwdriver and a crescent wrench; the average fuel economy of a 6 cylinder motor was about 20 miles per gallon on the freeway. Today, most 6s get 25 to 32 miles per gallon on the freeway. It is a new day today: Please wake up!!!
  • texasestexases Posts: 8,976
    "Many, many, many of those proven, accepted improvements began as some backyard inventor's brainchild; were initially sold as a gas saving product, and were eventually bought by the auto manufacturers when they couldn't deny their value. "

    Please name some. I can't think of any. The major contributors to fuel economy, compared to, say, 1930, are: Overhead valves; high compression engines; high octane gas; fuel injection; computer engine controls (injection and ignition); exhaust gas sensors hooked into the computer controls. None of these sound like 'backyard inventors' products. Larsb is right that none of the 'gizmos and gadgets' that we read about here and elsewhere have been proven to improve mpgs.

    And the starting point of this recent discussion is starting to sound just like one of those.
  • So dumb this down for me. I am just a mom of 5 that wanted to spread the word of something I have found. I did not know I couldn't send people to another website ( I am new to the site) This is a new product to the market, but it has been being used by big companies for 20yrs. PAMA is one of the companies. They are the largest mining company out there! Anyways they just releases this product to the public & it's not widespread known. I was lucky enough to hear about it early on. Give it about another year to 6 months & I am sure you will hear about it too. Although you have already heard it here. Would tell you more about it, but the website would explain it more & well I can't tell you that. Maybe you can find me on another board or site!
  • texasestexases Posts: 8,976
    Perhaps you misunderstood me. Your claims and product sound just like dozens of scams that have made their way across this and other discussion boards. I doubt you are who you say you are, that's the result of all the prior scams being pushed by folks who try to make money by misleading others.
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    Even if you are who you say you are and not a scammer trying to rip people off, and even if you believe you've found something that improves fuel economy as much as you claim, I can tell you with absolute certainty that what you believe and what you claim is complete fantasy.

    The truth of the matter is, if this little pet product of yours is so great then it would have been proven out in lab after lab after lab worldwide and be in common use today (said another way, it would have near universal application). The fact that it isn't is quite simply such a preponderance of evidence that says you're wrong that nothing you say will even remotely pique the interest of anybody schooled in the arts of combustion science.

    Do I care that you have your fantasy? No. Do I care if you are trying to mislead folks into buying a product that provides no more efficacy than a bottle of snake oil? You bet'cha.
  • Well I am who I say I am. I guess I will live with my family in my fantasy world then. I am on Facebook & I have a few friends now using this product. They have only used it in the big industries until recently. Man I don't really care if you believe me or not. I don't know you & you don't know me. I am done with this. I am not a scammer & well there really isn't no way to prove it to you. Let me ask you this. Have you heard of Lucas Oil? Have you used it? What do you think about it? Man I wish my fantasies were better than just saving on gas!! I would love to have like those awesome dreams that well nevermind. I will keep that one to myself. Thing is you don't have an interest but yet you keep replying, so stop replying & I'll leave it alone to. You believe or don't I have many more people that do!! I have told people where to get it from & let others use mine, so unless they are all lying to me & are in my fantasy too well I believe it works! So again Have a great night & I think I will just leave this forum, or maybe just see where it will take me one da. I would like to see your face when you do hear about the product & know that I was not a spammer/scammer. Tell me what is a scammer? What do they do? The scam that I have heard about is the old envelope scam. Send me 50 dollars & I will send you what you need to make tons of money & when you get it, it has directions to do the same as what he just did to you. So if you say bought the product, tested it & seen if it worked or not then what are you out maybe 20 bucks Man I am an awesome scammer!! I mean the money goes to the company & not me so what did I get???? Wow I really do need to look into another way of scaming people don't I? I would be broke! Have a great night!!
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    edited October 2010
    Lucas Oil? They make additives and when you add their "oil stabilizer" additive to your engine, you'll foam the oil. Not recommended. See The Story With Additives (Bob is the Oil Guy).

    I dunno, is Lucas yet another one of those MLM companies where all that's really being sold is the right to sell other shares to others? Do they also sell "male enhancement" pills like the Amsoil folks do?

    If someone invented something that works in their basement workshop, they'll patent it and license it to the majors, they won't try selling it on the Home Shopping Network. Not if they want to be taken seriously.
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    I submit that "being taken seriously" has nothing to do with it. They don't sell through the majors because they don't want to get found out that their idea is a sham founded upon junk science.

    skywatcher1973, you can post all of the anecdotal evidence you want, only those that know no better (i.e. those with non-scientifically trained minds that want to believe) will pay attention. For the rest of us, we'll wait for the real scientific break throughs to be presented to the market at large before we spend our hard earned money.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    edited October 2010
    Or they saw Tucker or Flash of Genius and don't trust the majors. :shades:

    What's funny is that buying some of this junk can help your mpg.

    Gas-saving Gizmos and the Placebo Effect: Why People Claim Real Gas Savings From Methods That Can’t Possibly Work (Technology for World)
  • You really have never heard of Lucas Oil? I see that I can put a link on here so he is the link for the Lucas Oil. As you will see it is from a well known auto parts store! So no Lucas is not a MLM company!! So for someone that "knows" so much you really don't have a clue as to what's on the market today!! I think my point has been proven, so thank you very much!! Wow I was the one having trouble reading what was typed earlier, asked to have it dumbed down & then this happens. Man I feel GREAT NOW!!

    http://www.autozone.com/autozone/accessories/Lucas-Oil-5-25-oz-fuel-injector-cle- aner/_/N-262d?counter=0&filterByKeyWord=lucas&fromString=search&itemIdentifier=3- 69511_0_0_
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    edited October 2010
    Perhaps you are just trying to sidetrack the issue, but yeah, I know what Lucas is. I also know that the only additive I'll put into my car is Techron, and that's only when I happen to buy Chevron gas. The rest of it gets categorized under snake oil until proven. I don't even believe that synthetic oil is worth it and it's "proven" to help fuel economy. Just not enough to justify the extra expense in my book.

    I'm sorry none of us regulars are excited to read about your experiences but we've been kicking this stuff around for just about a decade now and have yet to see anything worthwhile come down the pike.
  • We have a saying in my house when we disagree. It's "do you want to be right or do you want to be happy?"
    So my reply to you is I want to be Happy!!!
    Have a good time bye!
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    The next question is, "Do you want to look like a fool when you advocate products that are nothing better than snake oil (your miracle fuel economy additive and Lucas products among them), or do you want to advocate products that actually work?"
  • I am advocating a product that really works. Those #'s are real #'s! You believe what you want. My question is: How can you tell me that this product doesn't even work? You don't know what it is! You haven't used it before! So why run your mouth on something that you haven't ever heard of?? You may know alot, but you don't know anything about this product or anything about me!! I will stand strong in what I believe in!
    Oh & I haven't replied back because I stopped receiving updates on this, just thought I would check in to see what you were downing me on this time!
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,148
    I am advocating a product that really works. Those #'s are real #'s!

    No, sorry, by definition your numbers are anecdotal and as such are anything but real.

    My question is: How can you tell me that this product doesn't even work? You don't know what it is! You haven't used it before! So why run your mouth on something that you haven't ever heard of??

    Ummm, I don't have to eat a dog poo-pie to know very well that, A) it won't taste as good as my pumpkin pie, and B) it won't be healthy for me. So why do I run my mouth, errr, fingers? Because after the billions of dollars (yes, billions with a big honking "B" in front of it) the world's automakers have spent on improving fuel economy, there is an absolute zero percent chance the product you're advocating is what you say it is. Why? Because if it was, said automakers would have long since lined up and paid big money to test it and to build engines that could take the greatest possible advantage of it. Said another way, it would be in near universal use world wide right this very minute.

    The above said, I do know what the product is, I've looked it up and Bobbie Smith should be thanking you for getting me to go even that far. The thing is, the internet hype around this product is straight out of the MLM/Snake-Oil marketing handbook, so much so that any studying of this product will generate more questions than answers and further convince anyone of any intelligence that this is just the latest in a long-long line of fuel economy scams to be visited on the motoring public.

    You may know alot, but you don't know anything about this product or anything about me!! I will stand strong in what I believe in!

    In many ways this world we live in is divided into two; a part that has religion and will believe blindly, and those that are atheistic and can only be convinced when incontrovertible evidence is presented to them, evidence that is verified by multiple non-aligned third parties. Long story short, if you want to believe this product works, you can easily make yourself believe. For my part I call “shenanigans” on your claims.
  • So my post is not here anymore the one where I asked what the name of the product was & who is Bobbie Smith? So why not answer those questions?
This discussion has been closed.