Saving fuel with some magic pill...

For the sceptics the results of the first scientific study performed by the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine.

Russian Doc: http://hexabyte.tripod.com/MOD-mpg-cap_test.pdf
English Doc: http://hexabyte.tripod.com/mpg_test.pdf

BUMP

Can't watch the videos, at work right now.

All I can say is it sounds like BS to me. Adding a pill or an additive to your gas tank will not increase mileage. The exception to that being additives meant to clean injectors, cylinder walls and ports from fuel deposits or carbon build up. These simply put efficieny near original levels.

Internal combustion engines are just oversized vacuum pumps with sensors. It monitors how much air is coming in and mixes fuel in the correct amounts to have the mixture as close to the stoichiometric point as possible. Once the engine is running the oxygen sensors monitor the exhaust gases and relay to the main computer (PCM) to increase or decrease fuel as needed for the amount of air being received. The Fuel injectors "pulse" a mist of fuel into the cylinder, more or less depending on the previous conditions and running of the engine (engine knock for example will retard the timing through the PCM and in most cases use more fuel.) Thats a quick basic rundown of how it works

So that being said, how does this pill supposedly work, increasing the oxygen levels of the fuel to burn cleaner and possibly have more oxygen in the exhaust gases? This is the only thing that comes to my mind.
Maybe it is an octane booster which would increase mileage slightly on maybe 50% of the cars and be detrimental to the other 50%.

If you can post more about its basis in science, labs, and fact I would love to read it.

The second website you posted
http://www.fuelsaving.info/ffi.htm

Made for pre-1973 cars initially to run on unleaded fuel.
Supposedly coats the cylinder walls with something to promote full combustion. What can withstand the immediate temperatures of the combustion to do this. Its not metal that would risk ring or wall wear. Teflon maybe, I think teflon is good to about 500 degrees F so it could work. I don't see this making enough of a difference to affect anything though.
It also increases the octane slightly like I guessed in the last post. That is probably the only increase in mileage people are noticing. Either way without more information I am pretty convinced against this product. By more information I mean lab tests by a third party.

Worried about gas mileage? Do your oil change regularly, tune up your car, make sure the sensors are within ideal ranges with a computer diagnostic, change your fuel filter, make sure your tires are not underinflated, don't carry more in your car then you have to, don't stomp the gas pedal down, get a high flow air filter (K&N are good ones for example.)

Scorpion said:

The second website you posted
http://www.fuelsaving.info/ffi.htm

Made for pre-1973 cars initially to run on unleaded fuel.
Supposedly coats the cylinder walls with something to promote full combustion. What can withstand the immediate temperatures of the combustion to do this. Its not metal that would risk ring or wall wear. Teflon maybe, I think teflon is good to about 500 degrees F so it could work. I don't see this making enough of a difference to affect anything though.
It also increases the octane slightly like I guessed in the last post. That is probably the only increase in mileage people are noticing. Either way without more information I am pretty convinced against this product. By more information I mean lab tests by a third party.

Worried about gas mileage? Do your oil change regularly, tune up your car, make sure the sensors are within ideal ranges with a computer diagnostic, change your fuel filter, make sure your tires are not underinflated, don't carry more in your car then you have to, don't stomp the gas pedal down, get a high flow air filter (K&N are good ones for example.)

Click to expand...

Have a look on the recent tests form the Ministry of Defense. Just form May 2007 tested in labs and new vehicles.

And really am as sceptical as I could be. So I'm willing to sponsor some tests. PM me if interested.
All I can say that i works on a 2005 - C 200 Merc and 1993 Volvo 460 as well as on a 2005 Jeep Cherokee. I have no more test resulst yet. I'm expecting my Lexus IS 250 to arrive soon, so I will report.

Some of my soc mates and ingame friends have agreed to test it so let's see what comes ot.

P.S. As you have noticed I'm just looking for a result so if it's BS it's a good result too.

cool, come whatever may and all that.

Hmm...sceptical too, thinking that if it really does increase the mileage, have there been any testing to the long term use? How will it affect the engines total mileage? If i get this right this magic additive is "cheating" the motor sensors to go on to a more thin mixture, so more air -> less fuel -> more mileage. Cant see how else this could work? , unless the pill itself burns like gas, thus saving gas! Well to continue, in my experience the too thin mixture makes the engine "not work too long" in other words, go bang. This happens in the long run, when the mixture is a bit wrong, naturally this happens due to a fault, like a leak in the intake for the engine, after the air-volume-meter. But i could see this happening with this additive too.

well yes, thought about the motors internal friction, This could actually increase the cost-effectiviness of the motor thus more mileage, yes its possible this way, still i am sceptical.

Rednexi said:

Hmm...sceptical too, thinking that if it really does increase the mileage, have there been any testing to the long term use? How will it affect the engines total mileage? If i get this right this magic additive is "cheating" the motor sensors to go on to a more thin mixture, so more air -> less fuel -> more mileage. Cant see how else this could work? , unless the pill itself burns like gas, thus saving gas! Well to continue, in my experience the too thin mixture makes the engine "not work too long" in other words, go bang. This happens in the long run, when the mixture is a bit wrong, naturally this happens due to a fault, like a leak in the intake for the engine, after the air-volume-meter. But i could see this happening with this additive too.

Click to expand...

Well it doesn't cheat sensors as it works on two stroke lawn mowers without any sensors. I guess that the increased octane/cetane rating is one of the keys. But increased octane rating is one thing, there is something there which creates a micro coating inside the chamber, the spark plugs are clean compared to the "pill free" mode (looked on the Volvo only).

Going bang is the least concern as the product is EPA certified not to harm the engine plus the company offers a six digit insurance is something happens. So it's either a placebo or they are damn sure about it's qualities. The PDF form the Ministry is a good read in this respect.

Anyway the FFi Saga continues...

i remember one of my friends trying the old "mothballs in the tank"
years ago and it seemd to run better "probably the naptha"

and i used to put octaine addative"probably banned now" lol
in my old mkII escort when i used to run track days
"but it used to run real hot if u stopped for a minuite"
so not realy practical unless you seriously upgrade the cooling system

i find the best way to improve the performance is a seriously
good synthetic oil "mobil 1" or some such
as moast pepole put cheap stuff in and u end up using
a couple of horsepower turning all the bearings
"and if u try turning the engine by hand u realy feel the difference"

Hello,

I got some of the pills from Bullet and will post the results later.

I have a Suziki Swift 95 1.3 Liter Manual car.

Best I had was 7L/100Km but it varies on my driving style, usually approx 8L/100Km

This was before the pills (I started yesterday)

The only way that I see it working is by increasing the amount of fuel which has injected that is actually burned before a certain amount of expansion of the engine chamber has taken place (creating therefore more useful power to make it move the wheels).
How would it make it burn faster, maybe it cause the tension of the liquid to get lower making the particles that are injected to become of smaller size and that will increase the area of the reaction and therefore increase the speed of it.
If this is the process then => it might not be good for the engine

Scorpion said:

Can't watch the videos, at work right now.

Click to expand...

Same here(bloody remote connections),
Why is saving fuel important ? surely it's all about money & the environment( by emmisions reduction) ?
IMHO That being the case, Biodiesel is the only realistic solution atm

Rowdoc said:

Same here(bloody remote connections),
Why is saving fuel important ? surely it's all about money & the environment( by emmisions reduction) ?
IMHO That being the case, Biodiesel is the only realistic solution atm

Click to expand...

With the upcoming finnish taxation law, the car is being payed yearly depending on the emission rate of which it produces, so the payment could be up to 600% with a high-emission car...i could see saving few bucks with this if it worked... again i think it will ultimately be tied to the CC of the engine, so could be that it doesnt change the payment at all...well will have to wait and see...

Rednexi said:

With the upcoming finnish taxation law, the car is being payed yearly depending on the emission rate of which it produces, so the payment could be up to 600% with a high-emission car...i could see saving few bucks with this if it worked... again i think it will ultimately be tied to the CC of the engine, so could be that it doesnt change the payment at all...well will have to wait and see...

Click to expand...

Isn't it unfair that the producers of over 50% of the global emissions completely discredit the Quito protocol,
I say that such tax is either a joke (if it based on that protocol) or it is just one more tax on "luxury" (which I'm against has a general idea since it puts a stop on a certain aspect of the drive of the economy that I take into deep regard)
USA is one of the richest countries of the world because the rich people that live there believe that their wealth is safe in that country, unlike many examples of 3rd world countries where the rich people take the money out to more safe locations making their countries in which they live less prosperous.
And another aspect, although the Queen of England isn't need for anything practical this days (compared with the past has no ruling powers) it still server a purpose which is to make people see that their situation can be improved and to set them goals for higher achievements. (That doesn't mean that I don't believe that taxation on certain luxuries isn't fair nor that taxation on property exchange isn't correct)

MG Mighty said:

Isn't it unfair that the producers of over 50% of the global emissions completely discredit the Quito protocol,
I say that such tax is either a joke (if it based on that protocol) or it is just one more tax on "luxury" (which I'm against has a general idea since it puts a stop on a certain aspect of the drive of the economy that I take into deep regard)
USA is one of the richest countries of the world because the rich people that live there believe that their wealth is safe in that country, unlike many examples of 3rd world countries where the rich people take the money out to more safe locations making their countries in which they live less prosperous.
And another aspect, although the Queen of England isn't need for anything practical this days (compared with the past has no ruling powers) it still server a purpose which is to make people see that their situation can be improved and to set them goals for higher achievements. (That doesn't mean that I don't believe that taxation on certain luxuries isn't fair nor that taxation on property exchange isn't correct)

Click to expand...

Hehehee! welcome to the world of crazy finnish legislation, its here designed to support the road-upkeep, and this new setting is to reduce the size of engines and -> thus reduce pollution, which isnt that bad already here in finland. Also there is a added tax to the diesel powered engines, because the diesel is cheaper to aquire, so the money has to be drain to somewhere. This is done here even if its known that it pollutes less. There is already a lot of resistance to the new law, well atleast i am against it anyway woot this is getting offtopic sry for the threadstarter if so....

hehe ive got an old 2.6 straight six ohc injection merk
just startin it up melts 2square km of ice cap
and makes an baby seal cry

im just gettin a bit numb from being force fed this
global warming guff on tv an raido

and sry to go off topic bullet

I'll stay on topic

First tank, 7.5L/100Km

According to the product its supposed to take affect after the third tank or so.

There's a much easier way to improve MPG that is guaranteed to work: stop buying heavy 2+tonne vehicles with 3+litre engines, and try walking, a push-bike or public transport instead of taking the car every time.

I already get 50MPG in my (diesel) vehicle, which is about twice that on the news articles even after the so called improvements, and I don't use it except when I need to. I think I'll manage without any magic pills!

Quite a lively discussion evolved out of my first post.

Rowdoc said:

IMHO That being the case, Biodiesel is the only realistic solution atm

Click to expand...

Certainly biodiesel is an interesting approach and is being hyped a lot at the moment. But there are several drawbacks with that technology at them moment. I don't want to go into details but it has to do with the quality of the oil and its "freshness" which makes logistics complicated. However there are a few methods dealing with "old" oils as well but a they bit more expensive. And you can't actually grow as much as you need to satisfy fuel demands. But if I'm getting to drive a diesel from time to time I usually go for biodiesel and some "funky" additives

MG Mighty said:

he only way that I see it working is by increasing the amount of fuel which has injected that is actually burned before a certain amount of expansion of the engine chamber has taken place (creating therefore more useful power to make it move the wheels).

Click to expand...

The way I see it working is by increasing octane or cetane rating of the actual fuel. But the increase is marginal compared to other fuel additives so it can't be the only reason. Then a coating appears inside the engine (I've been able to detect it on spark plugs) so therefore the friction is reduced. The third component is some catalyst which accelerates the burning process similar to NOx but not that aggressive. So it's octane, lubrication, burn catalyst.

10th Chemmotological Centre of the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine said:

In the course of application of MPG-Cap additive reduction of harmful exhaust gas emitted into atmosphere from 0.5 to 0.2 % took place and idle engine speed increased when measured with the help of a digital tachometer. When the combustion chamber was checked with the help of the device for adjustment of fuel supply to the combustion chamber the change of flame colour from light red to light blue was detected, which evidences of the acceleration of fuel combustion in the beginning of the compression stroke, as well as of the increase of engine power.

Click to expand...

Due to holidays at Universities I don't have access to labs so we could see what's inside, that has to wait until September.

I agree with Bedamax about usage of smaller vehicles, but the thing is that I don't want to use a small car and I don't want my wife be driving a small car and I guess many people don't like it as well. For me it's simply because it's not as safe and comfortable as a 2 something ton SUV or Saloon vit a V6, V8 or W12 engine. I had once an accident in a Fiat Punto, to hell with it.

I don't see the point of the argument here. This is not a sales presentation, I'm just a very curious person and want as many independent skeptics as I can get on board for testing that stuff Plus we are getting bombarded by so called branded fuels from Shell, BP, ESSO etc. Which is basically normal Benzine or Diesel with some additives. And I actually do more kilometers per tank on the more expensive V-Power benzine.

9.44 %

Some more testing results on MPG-Pills:

The testing vehicle is a 1993 Volvo 460 GLE, with 2.0L benzine engine that has been fed with the MPG-Caps for 3 tanks incl. conditioning now.

The tank's volume is 60 liters (15.85 Gal.). I have also figured out that I'm adding a bit less to the fuel than on the instruction but still the results are becoming visible.

The vehicle is only driven within the city limits (almost no highway),

prior to the MPG-CAPs the consumption was:
12.7L per 100 km - (3.35498 Gal. per 62.1371 Mi. [18.52 Mi. per Gal.])

after the 3 tank the consumption is:
11.5L per 100 km (3.03797 Gal. per 62.1371 Mi. [20.45 Mi. per Gal.] ).

Which gives a nice decrease in benzine consumption by 9.44%.

I have added the correct dose with this tank and will report when the tank is empty.

Hello Again

New reports!

Tank #2 : 7.7L/100km

Driving a little rough

Tank #3 : 7.26L/100km

Still driving rough, Normally I'm around 8L/100Kms as stated on my first post when this is my driving style

So far so good!

Tank #4 6.91L/100km

Still driving rough...

I noticed my car acctually used a little less power to go up hills, No need to downshift all the time!

Next tank I will try to drive slower, See if I save more !

Whoever says it doesn't work should give it a try. Excellent results JJ.

We are still expecting results from the Diesel Lupo, that's the toughest one because it's actual consumption is ultra low initially.

The ADAC, the German automobile club, europe's leading automotive society with over 15 million members scientifically tested dozens of fuel additives and motor attachements, including extraordinary fuel saving methods like "tachyon stimulation", including these MPG-Cap pills.

The test was regulated by the standards of the European Community directive 98/69/EC for the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC).
Tests were performed with various types of cars on a static laboratory test platform to eleminate side effects such as changing wind, road grip, wettness or human influences.


Test result:
NONE of the tested additives showed a positive effect on fuel consumption. In some cases the fuel comsumption even increased.

German article





My grandafther once told me the following:

Everyday a fool arrives at the station.
You just have to find him.

Click to expand...

Orion said:

test result:
none of the tested additives showed a positive effect on fuel consumption. in some cases the fuel consumption even increased.

german article

Click to expand...

Thanks Orion for digging out that study. That's an interesting outcome ADAC had. Hard to to argue with a club of that size about the outcomes of that particular study.

The remaining question is of course why the hell that product worked on my car, on JJ's car, in a driving school (where students knew nothing about it) and at a company delivery van where the driver thinks it's just to clean the injection system because of bad fuel in that particular region.

Is it a placebo effect? Well hard to say, I'm driving very sportive and always at higher revs. Therefore my fuel consumption is always higher than with a "normal" driving style. Adding that FFi stuff did not make me drive more "careful" with the gas pedal. Same with my wife, she drives how she drives.

Anyway my personal conclusion is:

If that's a placebo effect that drives down my consumption by 10% and costs USD 2, I'm willing to pay that 2 bucks.

'Tis pleasant purchasing our fellow-creatures;
And all are to be sold, if you consider
Their passions, and are dext'rous; some by features
Are brought up, others by a warlike leader;
Some by a place--as tend their years or natures;
The most by ready cash--but all have prices,
From crowns to kicks, according to their vices.

- Lord Byron (George Gordon Noel Byron),
Don Juan (canto V, st. 27)

Click to expand...

ADAC test

I have studied the ADAC test. They have tested all additives equally on a 800 km run. Thefore the FFi product (acc to the product manual) is not supposed to show any results as it "kicks in" around the 3-4 tank.

Maybe people get the placebo effect after driving 3 tanks Well anyway I'm happy so far...

the test explicitely mentions "placebo effects" having an influence on results of non-scientific tests, because people expect a decrease of fuel consumption, which leads them to subconciously change their driving.

thats not bad. but with conciously adjusting your driving style you can easily save up to 30% fuel. without extra costs for some pills.

many producers claim that their products "kick in" later, with various explanations, because they know that scientific tests become unaffordable beyond a certain time (3rd - 5th filling means several thousand test kilometers!).

since the test was performed over 800 km each test car had at least 2 fillings.
assuming that the pill's effect would increase over time, at least a slight fuel saving should have been measured.
but 0% effect measured.
at least the pills didnt block the carburetor.

i would trust your mentioned experiences more, if you wouldnt want to distribute those pills.

Orion said:

i would trust your mentioned experiences more, if you wouldnt want to distribute those pills.

Click to expand...

I think you have initially misunderstood my intentions about this product. I would love to distribute those only my in country of Belarus and only in case they actually work. I don't want to end up buried in a forest by 10k angry customers.

As I have mentioned earlier I want results from as many people as I can get and that's why I have set up this thread where I personally have invited ppl to buy a pack or to get a free pack (meaning paid out of my pocket) and tell me the results. So far I have handed out 10 packs to various people and businesses (2 driving schools, several heavy commuters, 2 car mechanics and a few regular drivers) and one was actually bought by JJ (aa840).

I would only start distribution if am 100% sure not to f*ck anybody up.

I also means that I can mail you one paid out of my pocket, so you can make your own opinion based on your own experience.

Good Looks like a more ecologic way to drive a car.

Blue Dragon said:

Good Looks like a more ecologic way to drive a car.

Click to expand...

Well emissions go down a lot, and that's not a placebo. Because computers don't know if the pill is inside or not.