Has anyone tried this???

tw1st3d_cl0wn · Post by **tw1st3d_cl0wn** » May 19th, 2005, 8:06 am

Ok well, last week I bought some fuel injector cleaner, and used it when I filled up. Now, usually I can't go for a full week without having to put more gas in my tank (usually get about 220 miles out of a full tank), but it's been a full week and I still have 1/4 tank left! I drove the same distances I normally do. I even drove my car a little harder than usual. Also, I filled up with Shell, which in my previous post I said that when I use Shell I seem to run out of gas faster.

So I guess this fuel injector cleaner stuff really helped me out. I will post my official mileage when I need to fill up again. But I am really excited about this. Probably means I need a life if getting more mileage out of a tank of gas gets me excited.

How's it coming along with the Acetone experiment, Tunes?

Tunes67 · Post by **Tunes67** » May 19th, 2005, 10:44 am

Well on my last tank of gas I got 355 miles.. but I did a LOT more freeway driving that usual so I didnt really consider that tank to be part of my experiment. I will point out that a bit over 35mpg is actually better mileage for my car than what Mazda advertised the car as able to get. My current tank of gas is just the opposit.. lots of city driving this tank and I have been trecking to the junkyard a lot (the reason this effects mileage is from the 2 tool boxes I take with me weighing in at over 100lbs) On the plus side.. at least I am getting some exercise

But I will be surprised if I hit 290 this tank. I am going to keep running it till I am out of Acetone. Then I will fill up without it for a couple of tank fulls and do a reverse comparison just to make sure its not some kind of placebo effect (I do want better mileage pretty badly LOL) I guess all I can really say is that it seems to work.. but no where near as well as the article claims it would. 2-3 mpg at best increase. Cheers

Tunes67

reaper of souls · Post by **reaper of souls** » May 22nd, 2005, 3:14 am

cool tunes i think that i'll start trying this out now my engine is quite dirty so it may take a while to see anything but what the hell and i'll try my best at converting my finding over to gallons but can promise anything eh

Tunes67 · Post by **Tunes67** » June 13th, 2005, 11:57 am

Ok.. here is the final tally on this experiment.. I have now gone through 2 tanks of gas without the addition of acetone.. I have averaged about 285 miles per tank without the acetone. With the acetone I averaged right on 300 miles to the tank. a 15 mile per tank increase in mileage, or 1.5 additional miles per gallon roughly. For me.. eh.. its not worth the hassle. But I honestly think that a MTX car would show better gains than my ATX car. How much better I cant say.. yet

I plan to do the ATX to MTX swap before the summer is over.. then I will start this experiment all over again

Best of luck.

Tunes67

billzie · Post by **billzie** » June 27th, 2005, 3:21 pm

I have heard of acetone used in carburated cars, maybe they benefit the most b/c atomization is much less in a non-FI application.
Bill.

MX3-Freak · Post by **MX3-Freak** » June 27th, 2005, 5:55 pm

I hate to jump in late, but I have to point something out. . .

The acetone is going to do this regardless of what octane gas you run. Now.. we know that the higher the octane reading.. supposedly this indicates that the gas is more flammable right? That with a higher octane reading.. gasoline will burn hotter, cleaner & faster. Now.. when you add the acetone too it.. supposedly.. this means that it will also ignite easier... This will allow the gasoline to atomize more completely and evenly in your cylinders prior to compression. And this is where you are supposedly gaining horsepower and as a result.. increased mileage.

You seem to be a little confused about the octane rating and what it means. when you say, "we know that the higher the octane reading.. supposedly this indicates that the gas is more flammable right?". Wrong. The reason you use a high octane gas in a high compression engine isn't because it's of higher quality, or because it ignites easier. You use high octane fuel because it is harder to ignite. If you use 87, the compression will ignite the fuel (like a desiel engine) prematurely. . .not good. Which is why I believe that the acetone would be better suited in a low compression engine. Since acetone's vaporization pressure is higher then gasoline's, somewhere around 40 KpA(if my memory serves me right), it will ignite quicker under pressure. Thus, when you add it to a high octane fuel, you are actually reducing the fuel effectiveness.

However, in a lower compression engine, where the fuel will certainly not prematurely ignite, a high vapor pressure could potenially help vaporize the fuel sooner. Still, at the amounts we are adding it, and how far it is from a homogenious solution, I doubt any real benefit will be had.

I'm also going to disagree with you on the point that 93 octane is a better fuel then 87 when mazda recomends 87. . . but I won't delve into why, since it has been discussed to many times before. [/b]

Tunes67 · Post by **Tunes67** » June 27th, 2005, 6:00 pm

Actually.. if you read a bit further.. you will see that I corrected that post

I did a bit of follow up research after making that post and found my error. Cheers

Tunes67

MX3-Freak · Post by **MX3-Freak** » June 28th, 2005, 2:33 am

lol . . . sorry about that. Looks like I got exciting about knowing something so I stopped reading. O well, in that case I'll go bed and laugh at my haste.