www.fuelmate.com.au

[EgoFG]

Picked up a leaflet on this at the local mech the other day
http://www.fuelmate.com.au/

It seems to add tin in very small quantities to the fuel.

Claims to lubricate (LPG and leaded) and promote better burn

Also magnet stuff - I think this is more for the operation of the unit, than any effect it may have on the fuel

I am a snake oil cautious person, but I recall this concept on a show like 'landline' years ago.

Has anyone tried this ?

I would especially be interested in someone with a before and after fuel consumption or dyno on a new I6 (under 100,000)

Greg

[Yellow_Festiva]

These have been around for a while now. I think the original brand was called "Fuel Star".

Not to sure about LPG, but the mechanic for the car club I was a member of had fitted hundreds of these units to the older leaded cars, allowing the driver to pump straight premium into a tank witout any additives.

I had never heard anyhing bad about it.

Not a bad mod for the $200-$300 they cost.

Don't know why you would use one on a new I6 however, I was always under the impression they were a lubricant replacement for leaded engines running unleaded fuel.

[Darkr]

Hahaha, stay away from it. Look at the claims they make, its bull.

[geckoGT]

Lots of claims and theory but not one shred of scientific analysis floating on a sea of testimonials, got me convinced.

If it was so simple to get 25% improvement in fuel economy, wouldn't the manufacturers be using it. Think about it, Falcon XR8 with 270kw and fuel economy of 9L/100km, they would own the V8 market.

Snake oil!

[Ladiesman217]

I wouldn't touch it. It's asking for trouble..

[Hunter]

This is up there with things like Firepower, hiclone and all that nonsense. I often wonder why I am earning an honest living when I could be making stuff up and sell it as fact...

[asusdragon]

like said in every other thread like this that has been closed. If its was so great why dont car maker put it on there new cars would give them an avdantage over other manufactors

[EgoFG]

It is a shame that all the replies so far have less science than the webpage.

Looking at that brochure (the one on my desk) they are not actually claiming a 25% reduction, but rather around 7-12%.

A simple reason that a manufacturer may not install it, is it shortens the life of the engine (I am not saying that this is good, but the "manuf not using it" is not sufficient reason to say it is no good - otherwise there would be no point to ANY of the aftermarket mods members have done)

A product being sold by testimonial is not always "snake oil" - it is just not a "good" indicator.

The shreds of science they present may be valid - can anyone offer an informed opinion on this ?
Has anyone tried it ?

[plext]

Originally Posted by EgoFG

... A simple reason that a manufacturer may not install it, is it shortens the life of the engine ...

They actually claim that it prolongs engine life along with a raft of other dubious claims.

There's a fairly sound assessment of these devices here.

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by EgoFG

Has anyone tried it ?

Personally, no. I used to own a worked 59 Bugeye and was thinking of getting one installed, but didn't do so because I knew I was going to not keep the car for long, and the use of a lead additive was more cost effective in the short term at the time.

The Sprite Club registrar at the time was also the club mechanic, servicing and repairing Sprites, Midgets and Mini's. He sells them, and when I had a chat about them in his workshop he told me he has installed "hundreds"...

His cars also have this device fitted.

The dozens of club members I spoke to that had one never had any problems.

I'm surprised that these things are advertised for modern cars... I was always under the impression that they were mainly a lead substitute for unleaded petrol.

I just found his site, and he is still selling and installing them today. Here is an extract from his site, addressing the "What to do now that there is no leaded available":

Fit an in-line tin-alloy fuel catalyst, then use unleaded fuel.
A good option, not cheap in the short term, but a "fit and forget" solution.

In-line tin-alloy catalysts have been used for over 50 years, and there are at least twenty different types on the world market. Their main claim is the catalytic action in breaking up the long-chain hydrocarbon molecules into short chain lengths. This apparently greatly increases the cetane (burning rate) of fuels, which results in more efficient combustion and an improvement in fuel economy. There is also less carbon deposited on cylinder heads and you engine oil stays cleaner. In addition, a minute quantity of tin is added to the fuel, which is deposited on the valve seat extending cylinder head and valve life.

Why are so many people knocking these things without personal experience????

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by EgoFG

It is a shame that all the replies so far have less science than the webpage.


Has anyone tried it ?

When they provide some hard evidence that is a result of independent testing rather than a whole heap of theory and testimonials, then I will try it.

Until then I will consider it snake oil and stick with methods that I know work in minimising fuel consumption.

But if you like it, buy it, run the figures and let us know how you go. I will even provide an excel spreadsheet that logs and calculates all your fuel consumption data so that you can get some quantifiable evidence on what it has achieved for you.

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

When they provide some hard evidence that is a result of independent testing rather than a whole heap of theory and testimonials, then I will try it.

Hey Gecko, this page may be of some interest to you. Seems to be some testing done both here in OZ and overseas:

http://www.fuelstar.co.nz/TestResults.asp

http://www.fuelstar.co.nz/FAQ.asp

Cheers.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Yellow_Festiva

Hey Gecko, this page may be of some interest to you. Seems to be some testing done both here in OZ and overseas:

http://www.fuelstar.co.nz/TestResults.asp

http://www.fuelstar.co.nz/FAQ.asp

Cheers.

Pollution Department, Thai Government – April 2000
This report shows that the Fuelstar reduced the emission of black smoke in a diesel locomotive by 50%

Great, I drive a diesel loco, Thai test, the best money can buy.

T James Sprott OBE MSc PhD FNZIC – Desktop Study 2001
This report reviewed all available reports and confirmed that Fuelstar fully met the claims made for it.

A desktop study, in other words he reviewed anecdotal evidence from the comfort of his chair, no statistical evidence from his own investigations.

California Environmental Engineering Lab – January 2003
This report confirmed that the product resulted in substantial reductions in emissions and fuel consumption by 27%

Another that refers to diesel emmisions, not relevent to petrol consumption.

Institute of Vocational Education, Tsing Ye, Hong Kong – Sep 2004
This test confirmed a substantial reduction in exhaust gas temperature and more than halved the emission of black smoke.

Yet another that refers to diesel emmisions and exhaust temps, again what is the relevance?

Vipac Engineers, Melbourne - 2005
This report confirmed that the Fuelstar more than halved the emission of black smoke from a Fire Brigade truck.

Title says it all really, not going to bother reading.

University of Kaohsiung, Taiwan – August 2007
This test confirmed the results of a trial on 3 Volvo trucks resulting in a fuel saving of 13.587% over the trial period of 9 months

Again, trucks (3 volvo's), any on petrol passenger cars? Can't comment on the text of this reference as my Thai is not too good.

Bored now.

In conclusion, it seems that there is reasonable evidence to conclude that at least some tin-based catalysts do affect fuel, and it is not implausible that some beneficial changes - most notably diesel soot reduction - occur as a result. What seems far less plausible is that these changes lead to a worthwile improvement in fuel consumption on modern car / light truck engines in good condition, and indeed no makers of such devices appear to have produced robust test data to support such claims.

I think this conclusion sums it up, it is from the reference that Plext provided, not a bad read.

Like I said, hard data from independent testing done by reputable sources and I will believe.

[asusdragon]

Originally Posted by EgoFG

A simple reason that a manufacturer may not install it, is it shortens the life of the engine (I am not saying that this is good, but the "manuf not using it" is not sufficient reason to say it is no good - otherwise there would be no point to ANY of the aftermarket mods members have done)

Yes but most people dont want a car with a noisey exhaust, cold air induction, 20inch rims, and drags on the ground (aftermarket mods) but i am yet to find a person who doesnt want better fuel ecomony

[redranga]

Have a read of this site:

http://www.fuelsaving.info/index.htm

It explains why all these gizmo's are crap.