The Stovebolt Site Forums The Shop Area General Truck Talk Weird Fuel Economy Idea??

I heard an interesting idea to increase a vehicles fuel economy on the radio the other night. The host suggested that adding 2.5oz of Acetone per 10gal of gasoline could increase your fuel economy by up to 20% This sounds like a load of crap to me...come on Acetone in your gas. I am not willing to try it to see if it works. Has nayone heard of this trick before and if so does it work? More importantly is it OK to mix Acetone into gasoline? Will it hurt the vehicle in the long run? I am not saying that I am gonna do it, but that is a bold claim about fuel economy increase. Thoughts...

I had this site recommended to me. DOn't know anything about the outfit, though.
http://www.lubedev.com/smartgas/additive.htm

Sounds harmless enough to me ... and worth a try.

No?

Go for it.. let us know the results.

If I do, I'll definitely post.

I Don't know about those people that say "THEY DON"T WANT YOU TO KNOW" its kind of like a movie back in the early 80s called the FORMULA. This movie was about Big petrol. Companies hiding a synthetic fuel. If there was truly an additive or any thing else that could save on fuel(other than driving slower), we would have known about it in the 70s. I am sure there are Bolters out there that took a few more hours in chemistry than I did. What do you think?


Cliff59

I *do* believe that making money is more of a concern to all corporations than anything else, including making a better product, etc. ... but yes! Let's here from someone who knows the chemistry-facts!

Hey Alan Is that photo you or your very smart Grandfather Al ?

Cliff59

conspiracy theories aside this sounds like it might actually be a viable thing to do then? i wish that someone had direct experience. i am not going to try it on a whim...espescially on my old truck because who cares about the mileage. but i was thinking that in a econo-box application this could be a good idea. anyway...just food for thought.

If you have a fiberglas repair on your gas tank I wouldn't use it. Other than polyester resins, I don't know what other materials acetone would affect. Maybe that wouldn't a problem with it diluted that much unless it sat for long periods.

Once fiberglass has cured acetone does nothing to it. Acetone only eats resins when it's in it's liquid form. You can run an engine off straight acetone I've done it works.The problem with burning straight acetone in the engine is that acetone burns very clean and dry so there no lubrication in it at all but mixing with gas I would'nt see much of a problem. It may eat away at the gaskets in the carb or the fuel pump. putting in 2.5oz of acetone per 10gal would do nothing it would evaporate before it even gets down into your gas tank! The price of acetone is way more than the price of gas so it does'nt make any sense to even start to play around with that.

Hey, Cliff ... that's my Uncle Albert! We even look a whole lot alike, only I can ride a two-wheeler, no problem.

Thanks, Highwayman ... I haven't seen the price on Acetone so thanks for the heads up. It's not like I care much about mileage anyway ... for the most part, I'm getting 15-16 mpg which is sweet for a 350 sbc with a 4bbl 600cfm Edelbrock carb. Guess I'll skip the Acetone test afterall.

I read this stuff about 6 months ago on another website.So I gave it a try in my 96 Jeep Cherokee for several tanks of fuel,mixed it exactly as described above.
The results? no change in fuel mileage I could see,no change in performance either,good or bad.

Thanks, Tony!

I, too, have read about using acetone but have not tried it. The article I read did specify that it needed to be what is considered "pure" acetone, not just any.

I believe this is the article on acetone that I read.
www.pureenergysystems.com/news/2005/03/17/6900069_Acetone/

Here is an interesting article on cutting a simple groove in the head portion of a combustion chamber to improve performance and fuel economy.
http://somender-singh.com/component/option,com_frontpage/Itemid,1/

The groove cutting does make some sense and is simple enough to do with basic shop tools. Anyone willing to sacrafice a head in case it doesn't work?

It's no secret that big oil has done its part to make sure you keep using alot of it.

It's no secret that OIL COMPANIES own hundreds of carburator and engine patents.. not that they licence these designs or build them for sale.. they buy them and shelve them.

Engines are what? Something like 30% efficient? So something like 70% of the fuel you dump in the gas tank, you might as well dump on the ground.

Internal combustion engines were designed back when gas was cheaper than dirt.. and oil companies have clearly done what they could to keep engines inefficient in a effort to keep demand for their product high, while limiting supply.. which drives the price higher.

But the oil companies aren't the only people using such practices to keep their profits fat.. the DeBeers people pull several TONS of diamonds out of south africa every DAY, but they horde the diamonds in a vault, keeping supply way way low.. which inflates the price.

geez Frank!! folks tryin to make a profit?!?!?
I knew there was some conspireing goin on! no wonder we had to get beyond carburation to make the infernal combustion engine more efficient! guess that's why the price of gold is shootin up so much, someone's hoarding it - next thing ya know it'll be land, heck they've even quit makin that!

I think I'll go with electric vehicles, that'll teach them oil companies to hoard carburators - of course someone's prolly shelvin all the best battery patents too

Bill

I have been using acetone in my 83' Toyota Camry since August when my job was a 75 mile round trip at 65 mph. It has just under 200,000 miles on it. I followed the authors instructions about using different gas brands and did find a difference of two miles/gal. Esso gave the best. I then changed the brand of oil from Castrol GTX 10/40 to PetroCan Duron 10/30 heavy duty deisel and gas engine oil and started using acetone, 3 ounces for every 10 gallons. My mileage went from 37 to 42 miles/gal and the oil now stays clean with no oil consumption. When the weather started to cool down, mileage went down to 40/gal. It does work for me in my 4cyl daily driver, I haven't tried it yet on a V8 vehicle.

Brian

Yes, let us shed a tear for the struggling diamond and oil companies.. how ever will they feed their families?

I'm all for folks making a profit, altho I don't know I like it to happen at the cost of making us dependent on raghead whackos on the other side of the globe.

Of course, efficient electric vehicle designs have been around for decades, too.. but you'll have to ask the oil companies who own alot of THOSE patents, extra nice to let you use them. (i.e. grab your ankles and/or get out the knee pads)

Don't [censored] on my head and tell me it's raining.

Making a profit is fine.. maybe they should sell $4 bottles of water to the folks affected by the hurricanes, or sell 10 penny nails for $1.25 a piece to the people rebuilding their homes.. I mean, come on.. the nail companies need to eat, too.. right?

I you try the acetone don't have any rubber anywhere
Because the acetone will eat it.

yes Frank, you should be buying stock in water - gonna be the next big scarce commodity, and I guess you'll be switching to biodiesel w/ all the corn you guy's over there are giving away? or maybe you should just build yer own carb using all the expired "oil company" patents that this guy will sell ya for only 10$ - he started out wanting to build the 200mpg carb too, but I guess he's gonna finance it sellin folks plans so they can compete w/ him

the government must be involved in the poor mileage conspiricy too, considering the "low" mileage mandates they've been setting - must be because of Cheney - or maybe because petro dollars keep the US economy afloat

the 'supply and demand' world is a little more complex than you give it credit for

Bill

Well, having made a dollar or two myself on the principle, I can tell you this about supply and demand.

If supply exceeds demand, the price goes down.

If demand is greater than supply, the price goes up.

DeBeers is pulling TONS of diamonds out of a mine in South Africa and only releases a small fraction of that a year. If they released it as they pulled it out, diamonds would be worth less than apples.

Gasoline demand rises sharply in the summer, as U.S. families take to the roads on vacations, or just driving around town in the nice weather, yet in alot of cases oil production actually goes down. Thats because they can work less, and make the same money when demand is at its peak.

So in a world of technology, where we can put billions of books on a microchip the size of a pin head, and send full color digital video across the globe, we're expected to believe that its just too hard to make an engine thats 80% efficient?

Sure they can.. there just isn't any incentive to the powers that be to do so.. and it certianly isnt in the oil companies best interest to have a car that would get 80mpg.

But they can justify it to the masses with fuzzy math, retheroic, and passing the blame.

Preston Tucker learned years ago that the only way a large company is interested in anything remotely benificial to the public is if it fattens their profit margin.. with all his "fuel injection, saftey glass and seatbelt" crazy talk.

Maybe it'll get you good enough mileage you can drive on out here to AZ & buy some of this real nice ocean view property i've been hoarding! Good luck :rolleyes:

My dad and I once worked out a formula we are convinced would stop the aging process. We couldn't get FDA approval to sell it because the primary ingredient was arsenic.

I took chemistry about 30 years ago so I can't claim to be a current expert. But if my memory is correct, Diesel has about twice the calories gasoline does, and gasoline has a great deal more than propane.

You can get much better mileage burning Diesel than gas, but it comes at a cost. Propane is much cleaner than either the others, but using it also comes at a cost.

I think a 20% increase in fuel economy based on a small amount of added chemical is unlikely. There would either have to be a tremendous amount of energy in that additive or it would need to have some catalytic impact that could be huge.

I can make a 20%+ improvement in fuel economy by adjusting my attitude when I climb behind the wheel. My current daily gets 8 mpg if I have fun and 10 if I drive like an old lady.

I saw gas at $1.89/gallon last week in Portland, and bought a tank at $1.95/gallon. I suspect interest in fuel economy will go down as gas prices have returned to the level we've been used to.

yes it is bizarre how profit is the primary engine of the corporate capitalist economy - and also strange that supply so closely follows demand, as long as it's profitable ... until the demand outstrips the supply - you'd think that something so plentiful as petroleum would be pumped full bore alla time, tho suprisingly enough virtually every oil field in the US is producing less every year now :confused:

and an internal combustion [heat] engine 80% efficient? last I heard the \'theoretical\' max is 40% , and that's at a set rpm and ideal fuel and exhaust temperatures - have to find some new principles of thermodynamics first - have you ever thought about just how much energy it takes to make those pinhead-sized chips? prolly lots more than printing the billion books!

there are however, folks working on improving the dinosaurs that push our vehicles around, and there are even other ways to go about making good use of thermal energy

fortunately, there's likely to be more profit in finding non-fossil fuel forms of energy to move us around considering the bleak outlook for petro resources, but you could always tag onto the profit stream and reap some of it for yerself

Bill

mine runs on left over ham-burger grease

If you want more hints on fuel effiency go to www.cartalk.com

I've heard talk of 200 MPG carb patents being bought by oil companies for over 50 years. Maybe that's the reason gasoline costs so much; the engineers at the oil companies never knew about stoichiometric mixtures and paid good money for useless inventions. I think not. Those patents would have run out by now, so where are these non-existant carbs? On the grassy knoll?

I think the 200mpg carb story is just some B.S. cooked up by some scam artist looking to sell the bogus plans or some conspiracy theory book.

Simular to the "$50 BMW's at goverment auctions!" books they sell.. yes, i've seen BMW's sell at goverment auction for $10, but they're usually 30 years old, been rolled three times, and had any usable parts picked off them before the sale.

I've never claimed these "miracle carbs" got 200mpg.. but lets consider the facts:

1. Oil Companies have spent millions buying up fuel delivery system patents only to mothball them.

2. a U.S. Patent provides exclusive rights to make, use, import, sell and offer for sale the invention for up to 20 years to the patent holder.

Why would you buy a patent for a device you're just going to shelve?

So lets say Jo Bob came up with a carb 20 years ago that would give you 10 more miles per gallon.. oil company swoops in and buys that patent, nobody can build it for 20 years.. in that 20 years the natural SLOW evolution of the auto mfg's reach that level of efficiency.

The oil company might have paid a few million for that patent to keep it off the market, but they make up for it with billions of dollars in sold fuel over those 20 years.

Big buisnesses only do things when they have a financial incentive to do them, or they're forced to do it by state or federal law.

What other financial incentive would an oil company have for buying a patent to a fuel delivery system if all they do is put it in a crate in a warehouse?

Frank, that 'scam artist' is offering you all those expired patents you think would save you big enuff gas $$ that the oil companies were willing to spend millions to keep away from you!?!?

of course you have the list of all these patents they've 'shelved'? why do major companies who go bankrupt do the things they do? did they think goin down the tube would make'em rich?

considering the immense array of carbs that have always been on the market, and carb companies that're always tryin to make their product a bit more profitable than the next guy's I find it really hard to believe that multibillion $$ corporations would be too concerned about something that might not have any effect at all on their business - most folks that get more fuel efficient vehicles just wind up driving more anyway, so use the same amount of fuel - at least that's the way it's been up til now

Bill

US PATENT NUMBER: 3,987,773
INVENTORS: Harrow; Geoffrey A. (Wirral, EN); Mills; Walter D. (Mold, EN); Wilson; John L. (East Kilbride, Glasgow, SC); Finlay; Ian C. (Newton Mearns, Glasgow, SC)
ASIGNEE: Shell Oil Company (Houston, TX)

The conventional spark-ignition gasoline engine relies on a carburetter to mix a desired proportion of a volatile fuel with the inlet air. For complete combustion of the fuel-air mixture the fuel needs to be uniformly dispersed in the air. Such a uniform mixture is seldom if ever obtained in practice with a conventional carburetter, and manifold fuel injection offers only marginal improvement.

In the fuel-air mixtures obtained with these conventional techniques the fuel is at least partly present in the form of small liquid droplets, and as a film of liquid on the walls of the manifold.

It has been proposed to supply, with the aid of a heat pipe, at a substantially constant temperature sufficient heat to vaporize the entire liquid fuel charge prior to mixing it with the major part of the combustion air, in order to obtain a uniform mixture of fuel and air. Backflowing of evaporated fuel in the air supply ducts, and condensation of the evaporated fuel in the air supply ducts was experienced in a number of cases. This is considered to be a drawback of the said method, because in the said cases no uniform air-fuel mixture will be achieved.

The invention provides a device in which the said drawback has been overcome.

Ignore the man behind the curtian.

yes Frank, that's part of the stuff the "scam artist" I linked above is selling
Filed: January 15, 1980 so available for anyone to carry on - funny no ones doing anything in today's climate of scarce oil and high prices

the vapor carb idea - never came to anything because it ain't worth the cost of the elaborate systems they come up w/ - instead the mfgr's designed the whole engine to improve the 'vaporizing'

so you really think Shell has succeeded in being more profitable by owning that patent? funny that they're the company today who's reserves are closest to being depleted w/ no new finds coming onstream - might have stretched things out if they'd helped improve mileage

just goes to show what's really useful

Bill

Actually, according to uspto.gov that patent was filed September 29, 1975.. which would have prevented anyone from making, using, or selling it untill 1995 or so.

Why would an oil company purchase a patent for a device that would increase fuel effiecency?

If you really want to believe that it took 50 years of non stop research and development to get a V8 to go from around 10MPG to close to 30MPG, go ahead and believe it.

Forget the 200MPG mumbo jumbo, my argument isn't that 200MPG engines ever exsisted, nor is it my belief that they ever really could exsist.

My argument is that there is strong evidence to suggest oil companies have in the past purchased patents to prevent better or more efficient designs from comming to market.

The device mentioned in that patent probably was NOT a super 200MPG design, or even a 75MPG design.. but what if it were a 35MPG design?

How many gallons of gas less would Shell have sold in the last 20 years if it were adopted and mass produced?

They obviously had to have SOME reason for buying the patent.. or maybe some executive at Shell just wanted a unique gift for his mother in law? Yea. Thats it.

So if fumblin is right, what's the real problem here- the fact that Shell bought patents on more efficient engines, or the fact that the Government allows patenting, thereby retarding the process of innovation? My 2 cents.

This is SNAKE OIL.
Cliff59

Assuming the 200 mpg carb, better atomization, etc, was the thing to do, other methods could be had, but the real question is why isn't fuel injection therefore able to achieve 200 mpg since the best engines are now all fuel injected. And whaddabout fuel injected (namely mostly all of em) diesels? (assuming 200 mpg was achievable)

I have a nearly surefire way to increase your gas mileage by up to 17%...

just lift your foot off the gas pedal...

I keep my rpms at or below 2000 when accelerating, and try and coast over the crests of hills, watch the turn signals, and try to keep rolling...

I get about 2 mpg better fuel economy when i take it easy... city driving kills me tho...

Wow, old thread.

Better gas milage is achievable now- at the cost of emissions. One of the killers of fuel economy is that engines have to run a bit richer and lower compression than they should to lower NOx emissions and keep the catalytic converters lasting the life of the vehicle. You could probably gain about 5 mpg on most vehicles by running them lean.

They did this on Myth Busters with no change in mileage also tried about ten other snake oil ideas and some actually made mileage worse. No conspiracy theories we in the good old USA have the lowest gas prices with the exception of The United Arab Emerance than anywhere else in the world. People here call foul on the oil companies and our Government. Fact is that since China has come in to its own we have lost a big part of our bargaining chip, when it comes to oil. People also seem to think that our Government needs to put more regulation on the oil companies, like they are all US based NOT most of them are foreign. And something is wrong when we have heart failure at the pump pointing our fingers at the oil companies, our Government and anyone else that may get to close. Then we walk in side to pay picking up a bottle of water on our way to the cashier and pay what amounts to seven dollars a gallon for water without blinking an eye. I know that I am most likely going to get chastised for talking this way I think gas prices suck too. But the rest of the world pays five to seven dollars a gallon for it.

Back in the middle '30's my dad worked with a guy that invented a carburetor that made a great improvement in mileage. I don't know what kind of mileage he claimed but it was real. When he patented it Standard Oil Co. approached him with an offer that was enough he retired with "plenty of money" My dad told me he actually saw the patent papers from the U.S. Bureau of Patents.