Magnets, apple corers and other fuel saving devices

Popular Mechanics (for years one of the worst ways to spend a few bucks on a
magazine) must
have some new management. There are actually some articles that are worth
reading , rather than
the magazine just being a buyers look at new products.

Anyway, they did dyno testing in Houston on several of the 'wonder' products
including the
ubiquitous magnetic devices, the Tornado apple corer and fuel saver, vapor
induction, etc
and as we all might have suspected, none of these idiots delights did
anything positive. Total
waste of money.

Maybe if we urged them, they would actually test oil and air filters and
give a more or less scientific
opinion.

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 12:10:47 +0000, HLS wrote:

> Popular Mechanics (for years one of the worst ways to spend a few bucks on a
> magazine) must
> have some new management. There are actually some articles that are worth
> reading , rather than
> the magazine just being a buyers look at new products.
>
> Anyway, they did dyno testing in Houston on several of the 'wonder' products

Could you please tell us the issue, volume, page number and some
more info on the 'Popular Mechanics' (ISSN would be nice too)
about where to find that article?

thanks,
shakiro


> including the
> ubiquitous magnetic devices, the Tornado apple corer and fuel saver, vapor
> induction, etc
> and as we all might have suspected, none of these idiots delights did
> anything positive. Total
> waste of money.
>
> Maybe if we urged them, they would actually test oil and air filters and
> give a more or less scientific
> opinion.

"shakiro" > wrote in message
...

> Could you please tell us the issue, volume, page number and some
> more info on the 'Popular Mechanics' (ISSN would be nice too)
> about where to find that article?
>
> thanks,
> shakiro


This is the September, 2005, copy, Shakiro. ISSN 0032-4558
The story, 'Looking for Miracles', starts on page 104.

Apparently the work was performed at Universal Technical Institute
in Houston, and the particular items tested a

Fuel Saver/Fuel Optimiser (magnetic crappola, $20-22)
Intake Twister (Cheap Ebay version of Tornado Fuel Saver, $20)
Tornado Fuel Saver (Expensive version of an apple corer, $70)
Electronic Engine Ionizer Fuel Saver (B&G Electronics, $80)
Fuel Atomizer 2000 (Wyoming Instruments.com, ca $200)
AquaTune (Aquatune.com, ca $399)

wrote:

> Tornado Fuel Saver (Expensive version of an apple corer, $70)

I would love to see the results of a red delicious getting sucked into
the intake of this test vehicle.

Toyota MDT in MO

This reminds me to get my onion blossomer dynoed...

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005, Comboverfish wrote:

> > Tornado Fuel Saver (Expensive version of an apple corer, $70)
>
> I would love to see the results of a red delicious getting sucked into
> the intake of this test vehicle.

You should've been over on rec.autos.makers.chrysler early last week. Some
ignorant dip**** calling himself "Whoever" was arguing that restricted air
filters don't reduce fuel economy. He dug himself a hole most of the way
to China, making all kinds of hilarious claims regarding having formerly
designed EFI system, talking about how the O2 sensor controls the fuel
injectors' pulsewidth during open-loop operation, etc.

Daniel J. Stern wrote:

> You should've been over on rec.autos.makers.chrysler early last week. Some
> ignorant dip**** calling himself "Whoever" was arguing that restricted air
> filters don't reduce fuel economy. He dug himself a hole most of the way
> to China, making all kinds of hilarious claims regarding having formerly
> designed EFI system, talking about how the O2 sensor controls the fuel
> injectors' pulsewidth during open-loop operation, etc.

I don't know if there's a joke hidden in your statement, but yeah,
I replied to him as well. I tried to explain what I think he was
missing in his argument. Maybe he worked for Ford in their EEC III
division.

My favorite poster this week "*" interjected incorrect info into a P/S
system discussion, then said that so many people in NGs don't know what
they are talking about that he now choses to 'mess with them' 'cause
it's fun.

Toyota MDT in MO

> wrote in message
...
>
> "shakiro" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Could you please tell us the issue, volume, page number and some
> > more info on the 'Popular Mechanics' (ISSN would be nice too)
> > about where to find that article?
> >
> > thanks,
> > shakiro
>
>
> This is the September, 2005, copy, Shakiro. ISSN 0032-4558
> The story, 'Looking for Miracles', starts on page 104.
>
> Apparently the work was performed at Universal Technical Institute
> in Houston, and the particular items tested a
>
> Fuel Saver/Fuel Optimiser (magnetic crappola, $20-22)
> Intake Twister (Cheap Ebay version of Tornado Fuel Saver, $20)
> Tornado Fuel Saver (Expensive version of an apple corer, $70)
> Electronic Engine Ionizer Fuel Saver (B&G Electronics, $80)
> Fuel Atomizer 2000 (Wyoming Instruments.com, ca $200)
> AquaTune (Aquatune.com, ca $399)
>
>
>

I liked the engine fire they had because of the B&G Ionizer. Looking at
the picture it appears to be some cheap wire with wire nuts every few
inches covered with plastic dip coating. Did you notice the HP drop on
just about every device as well. That Fuel atomizer looks neat, kind of
like a small still attached to the engine....And the Aqua Tune hype
"Aqua Tune is like no other water injection system in that it is, in
actuality, a fuel cell hydrogen processor> It produces hydrogen rich
bubbles before being introduced into the engine draft" I have to agree
with PM when they ask anyone to explain how it works.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Steve W." > wrote in message
...
It produces hydrogen rich
> bubbles before being introduced into the engine draft" I have to agree
> with PM when they ask anyone to explain how it works.

Hundred percent agree. Many scam artists in a lot of fields use enough
scientific buzzwords to
impress and amaze the uneducated. There ought to be a law...

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 15:15:26 +0000, HLS wrote:

I got it, thanks a lot!

shakiro


>
> "shakiro" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Could you please tell us the issue, volume, page number and some
>> more info on the 'Popular Mechanics' (ISSN would be nice too)
>> about where to find that article?
>>
>> thanks,
>> shakiro
>
>
> This is the September, 2005, copy, Shakiro. ISSN 0032-4558
> The story, 'Looking for Miracles', starts on page 104.
>
> Apparently the work was performed at Universal Technical Institute
> in Houston, and the particular items tested a
>
> Fuel Saver/Fuel Optimiser (magnetic crappola, $20-22)
> Intake Twister (Cheap Ebay version of Tornado Fuel Saver, $20)
> Tornado Fuel Saver (Expensive version of an apple corer, $70)
> Electronic Engine Ionizer Fuel Saver (B&G Electronics, $80)
> Fuel Atomizer 2000 (Wyoming Instruments.com, ca $200)
> AquaTune (Aquatune.com, ca $399)

wrote:
> "Steve W." > wrote in message
> ...
> It produces hydrogen rich
>
>>bubbles before being introduced into the engine draft" I have to agree
>>with PM when they ask anyone to explain how it works.
>
>
> Hundred percent agree. Many scam artists in a lot of fields use enough
> scientific buzzwords to
> impress and amaze the uneducated. There ought to be a law...
>
>

One of the biggest myths uses the fact that only about 1/3 of the energy
in the fuel goes into producing useful work propelling the car. There
is a false believe that this means only 1/3 of the fuel is burned- the
rest goes out the tailpipe as raw gasoline. This is, of course, not
true- almost all the fuel is burned. Another part of the myth is that
the fuel does not vaporize well. So many of the gadgets perport to help
vaporize the fuel. Others claim to "energize" the fuel so that it burns
more efficiently. Again, in modern engine the fuel burns fine enough-
it is other, almost unavoidable losses that are the problem, and no easy
solution to these problems exist. Only solutions- hard- are to greatly
increase the operating temp of engine, and make long stroke, slow
turning engines, which are big and heavy, and while a bit more fuel
efficient, raise the horsepower-needed requirement (self-defeating, of
course).