Gas saving device

[Auto_Xer]

Parati daw down internet nila diba?
Meron namang prepaid internet card diba?

[OTEP]

To all PExers:

Check out what this Khaos dealer has to say. hehehehe. It's a laugh a minute riot.

http://www.pinoyexchange.com/forums/...70#post5948270

[ghosthunter]

the KHAOS device will never pass EPA tests because it needs servicing very 5000 to 10,000km to clean the filter.

[mazdamazda]

here's my reply there...

Originally posted by Ischaramoochie
...and look!

(Exhaust Emissions Test Report)
Automotive Research and Testing Center,
Taiwan, R.O.C.
Model: CMC FR2.03H5A 2.0L A4 5D (Mitsubishi Freeca) 4G63R075178
Laboratory: Environmental Protection & Energy Consumption Lab

by weight:
CO: 7.85 g/km
NHMC: 1.076 g/km
NOx: 3.04 g/km

by concentration:
CO: 0.1%
THC: 157/184 ppm

...it appears that the device was tested for NOx after all...

yes... and it failed miserably...

here's the EPA's standards for emmissions (courtesy of ghosthunter):

EPA Federal Certification Exhaust Emission Standards
for light duty vehicles (passenger cars) and Light Light-Duty Trucks:
(Feb 2000)
CO: 2.11 g/km (3.4 g/mile)
NMHC: 0.211 g/km (0.34 g/mile)
NOx: 0.62 g/km (1.0 g/mile)

*note: vehicles under 8500 pounds are "light-duty" vehicles.

btw, try to understand this simple explanation why you perceive that the KSTC "works":

lean-burn engines will normally result in a slightly better fuel consumption and HC & CO emmission. however, this will drastically reduce the catalytic converter's efficiency in lowering NOx emmission.

plus, what do i have to shell out 6K just to have a lean-burning engine when I can lean out my engine in only around 30 minutes of tinkering? heck, any mechanic can do that age old trick.

the side effects of NOx? kindly do a quick check on the severity of lung-related problems in our country. heck, just try looking at manila from a high-rise to see the nice smog enveloping us.

[mazdamazda]

and another one... i feel good... :D

Originally posted by Ischaramoochie
while the KSTC has been tested but has not yet been found to raise NOx levels....then why assume that KSTC raises an engine's NOx emmision?

because of negligence, but because their benefits far outweigh their detriments. as has been said earlier, if indeed the device is proven to aggravate NOx emmision, then technicians would be willing to work on it and rectify this. in other words, the burden of proof lies on those who assume that the device will cause an excessive output of the "toxic" gas.

here is a list of some devices that is SIMILAR IF NOT THE SAME as your KSTC that have been tested by the EPA since the early 1970s:

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/consumer/reports.htm

try browsing a few reports and it will all sound the same! no adverse effects gained! and here's the catch: CAN BE REPRODUCED BY SIMPLY ADJUSTING THE AIR FLOW VALVE!!!

it's kinda funny that the KSTC was also "invented" in the early 70s. the same as those other devices.

does a lean-burning engine's detriments outweigh its benefits? of course. that is why we have the EURO emission standards.

here's the position paper for Ford USA wherein they stressing that the EPA is focusing on NOx emmission standards. now tell me that NOx isn't such a big deal.

• The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s federal Tier2 and California's LEVII emissions regulations significantly reduce the level of exhaust emissions that vehicles are allowed to emit. The standards limit the levels of several pollutants, but focus on Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) and Hydrocarbons (HC), which are believed to have the greatest impact on improving air quality. Both of these programs begin phasing-in during the 2004 model year.
• The EPA's NOx-focused Tier2 program was finalized in December 1999, and contains significantly lower emissions standards. It also requires that passenger-carrying trucks meet the same low emissions levels as cars.
• California LEV2 emissions were finalized in November 1998 and also require that trucks and cars meet the same low standards. California's program, however, is more focused on reducing hydrocarbons.
• Because the EPA's program provides greater NOx benefits—a key focus of a state's air quality requirements, we believe states should continue with the federal program vs. adopting LEVII. In addition, the federal program allows for more flexibility in regards to fuel advancements, such as improved diesel technology.

OWNED!

[yebo]

eto hindi na kelangan pa ng maraming arguments kung bakit hindi ko ilalagay sa engine ko yan khaos na yan...

lagyan mo ng khaos ang engine mo then floor the gas pedal, like say +5000 rpm (and don't say you will never drive your engine at +5000 rpm, paano kung hinahabol ka ng carnapper?) i guarantee katok yan, instant engine knocking due to too lean a/f ratio. so kung gusto mo mag-palit ng engine in the near future, go ahead, knock your head!

just imagine may carnapper na kursunada car mo at hinahabol ka, tapos floor mo gas pedal then "tok! tok! tok! kablagadagagdag!" bigla ang engine mo kasi yung connecting rod e tumagos na sa side ng engine block! well at least di na ma-carnap, palit ka na lang ng engine hehehe!

[ghosthunter]

Wow! after 284 messages in this thread alone (not to mention a few other spin off and related threads) we have reached a conclusion. ;)

[the_wildthing]

And as I said early in this darn thread...

This product is CRAP! Crap! Crap! Crap! Crap!





And some guy is selling Fuel Max in the classifieds section... Hehe.

[ericp]

Someone posted this in our research lab:

"it seems unfair that God limited man's intellect...but not his stupidity...."

[niky]

Finally, an answer to the NOx question!

and the HC and CO question... the KSTC failed all three miserably. :D :D :D

This is the vaunted "Taiwan Testing"? hehe...

Good one mazdamazda!!!

[ericp]

the same FUel Max that settled the charges in the US?
from the US Federal Trade Commission....

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news/fuelmax.html

the manufacturer settled the charges instead of proving their critics wrong.

WASHINGTON, Nov. 9, 2001 -- The marketers of the Super FuelMAX automotive fuel-line magnet, advertised as providing dramatic fuel-saving and emissions-reducing benefits, have agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that their claims were unsubstantiated.


IT'S "FUEL SAVER" SEASON!

Originally posted by the_wildthing
And as I said early in this darn thread...

........
And some guy is selling Fuel Max in the classifieds section... Hehe.

[ghosthunter]

http://www.pinoyexchange.com/forums/...0&pagenumber=2

Ischaramoochie said

well then, i'll just have to ask about that in the office. yes, the term "turbo" in the KSTC was not meant to be taken in its strict definition.

actually totally out of definition...

definitions for turbo:

This device uses exhaust gas to boost engine power. A small, lightweight turbine inserted into the exhaust manifold spins as exhaust gas goes speeding past. On the other side of the turbine shaft, fresh air is then compressed into the intake manifold. The more air that goes into the engine, the more power it can make. Unlike other forms of boosting intake pressure, the turbo used a virtually "free" source of energy in the form of waste gas. The knock on early "turbos" was a "lag," caused by the delay while the turbo came up to operating speed every time you floored the accelerator. Materials and technology advances have virtually eliminated this deficiency. Used judiciously, a turbo can actually improve fuel economy.

Ischaramoochie said

that fact may be true. however, the test conducted was not about mileage per se, but a comparison of mileage with and without the device installed. this means that city driving with and without the device would still exhibit roughly the same marginal difference in terms of mileage.

based on the sales material its mentioned "brings toxic carbon monoxide levels down to zero". Another parts mentions, "other pollutants like carbon dioxide & hydrocarbon were likewise brought down to the minimum".

But based on the test data vs the EPA standards, its shown that the hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide levels are very much above EPA limits. It cannot even qualify as a clean-air vehicle.

You have shown your test data. Are you saying there is something wrong with your own test data? Why do you not accept your own results/data that its exceeds the allowable limits for pollutiing gasses?

Ischaramoochie said

as has been said earlier, the installation of the device will not have an effect on NOx emissions since it does not lean out the a/f mixture above that obtained when stepping fully on the accelerator. given this information, NOx levels should not exceed those derived from normal operation. so much for the NOx issue. btw, what a/f ratio do you consider as "lean?"

what are your basis and support on your statements above? Are you an engineer? Are you the one who developed the device? What is your definition of "normal operation".

You thought simply by posting the test report data you can end this discussion?

btw, in the test report its mentioned that the TESTING CATEGORY was "Non-regulation". So where is your rigid testing? A demo done on some local government head's car?

Ischaramoochie said

and yes, you can obtain the same results by adjusting the air flow valve. however, this would cause above average ratios given full accelerator use. why shell out 6500? because you didn't think of it first. haven't you ever wondered why technicians charge a fortune just for replacing a screw?

well, then don't have them replace the screw. Just ask them how its done and do it yourself. Some people aren't stupid.

Ischaramoochie said

i'm aware of that. that's also why i said that there are many oxides of nitrogen; some are toxic and some are not. see my previous posts. now, if people would be more specific as to which particular NOx we are talking about, then the discussion can go on a bit more smoothly.

Farts are mostly methane gas, not NOx gas. And since we are talking about engine exhaust, I think we can safely assume we are talking NOx emissions from the muffler, not from biological sources.

Kindly keep to the topic and avoid diverting the discussion. You are just making yourself look more stupid.

[Tiny]

I got lost there, who's replying to who?

Hope the results for the exhaust emissions test report get posted everywhere, in newspapers, magazines, TV.

Shame to those who did a section in their show for their piece of crap.

[20vanda01]

I never considered putting any kind of gas saving device in my ride, not because I don't trust the testing or review, but I simply i don't get the ROI of it.

Imagine imbes na ipambili mo ng gas saving device, ibili mo na lang ng fuel mo.

Haay naku, the most effective way to save gas, is don't use the car,

[ghosthunter]

Originally posted by Tiny
I got lost there, who's replying to who?

basically I just have to comment on Ischaramoochie's responses.

[Tiny]

Iscaramochie is in PinoyExchange right? Don't have access to the site.

Hope we get to debunk the EGO and the other device in the workshop forums, 1 down 2 to go.

[Auto_Xer]

My reply at HCP to a member with regards to why/how the device works.

Wala O2 sensor ang older cars.

Usually they will be taking idle fuel delivery based on TPS, MAP/MAF, ECT & IAT & reference it to a preprogrammed map which is programmed to ensure sustainable combustion under the worst conditions(hardly ever tuned up engine in cold weather with a clogged air filter for example) that would normally mean the idle mix is richer than neccessary.
Which is also why it's very effective on vehicle with "primitive" fuel metering systems.
That being the case a bypass like that would save fuel at idling but as mentioned at the expense of increased NOx levels.

Someone mentioned that there was an adjustment knob.
That would be neccessary to make the unit universal.
Let it too much air thru the device & it's like having a vacuum leak in your intake system.
We all know a big enough vacuum leak is detrimental to your engine's operation.

Device's like that work only if you spend a lot of time idling, like when your stuck in traffic.....
Are we getting ideas yet? ;)

Try using that on a vehicle equipped with 02 sensors & on the open road & see what happens.

I know I won't be getting any miracle fuel saving device anytime soon.
I've been around too long. :P

[Auto_Xer]

Regarding the EGO.
This will explain partially what it does.

http://www.supertrapp.com/disc_techn...technology.htm

But that's not to say that it doesn't have it's own disadvantages.....

[pissword]

lahat iconsolidate na dito, at pag may nagtanong sa kung saan saang forum link this thread nalang nang matauhan at d na magtanong hehe

[luckytruck]

finally saw one in person kahapon. ang liit pala nya

andy