Just how dangerous is this?

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/524517/double_your_gas_mileage_2x/

KBoom!

Just how dangerous is this?

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/524517/double_your_gas_mileage_2x/

That's very stupid for two reasons. First, yes - it's extremely dangerous. Beside that, acetone is MUCH more expensive than gasoline!! That's almost as smart as burning dollar bills to heat your house.

Beside that, acetone is MUCH more expensive than gasoline!!

Yes, but what is the cost per mile? Right now, I run about 15 cents per mile on regular unleaded. If the acetone trick works and I knock it down to 10 cents per mile, I don't think it matters how much I pay for acetone.

Good point. I always use the 87 Octane but I assume I would get better mileage with 93. Occasionally I add this carburator cleaner (it could be acetone as far as I know) and it increases the mileage by 2 mpg. It costs $1, so it is cheaper than buying Octane 93...

The less viscous gasoline is, the more fine the mist created by the injection. So my hypothesis is that it works, although I haven't tried it myself.

Good point. I always use the 87 Octane but I assume I would get better mileage with 93. Occasionally I add this carburator cleaner (it could be acetone as far as I know) and it increases the mileage by 2 mpg. It costs $1, so it is cheaper than buying Octane 93...

It's probably Ether based.

Yes, but what is the cost per mile? Right now, I run about 15 cents per mile on regular unleaded. If the acetone trick works and I knock it down to 10 cents per mile, I don't think it matters how much I pay for acetone.

Ahhh, but the trick in that statement is IF it knocked it down. Care to check the price of acetone and then recalculate? :D (Hint: not going to work out.)

Ahhh, but the trick in that statement is IF it knocked it down. Care to check the price of acetone and then recalculate? :D (Hint: not going to work out.)

Well, I found a bottle online. It's 4 ounces of pure acetone for $0.99. Let's say it's $1.

The gas prices around my house are $2.88 (2.879). RIght now, I get 24 miles per gallon with my truck. So, it costs me 12 cents per miles.

Now, I have a 16 gallon tank and I am supposed to add 2 ounces per 10 gallons. That means I add 3.2 ounces. This cost me 80 cents. If I fill up then this costs me 16*2.88 + 0.80 = $46.88.

$46.88/16 = $2.93 per gallon.

IF the acetone trick works and I get even 25 miles per gallon, then I pay 2.93/25 = 11.72 cents per mile

That's a savings of 0.28 cents per mile. Multiply that by a 1,000 miles and I save $2.80.

Of course, I was being modest with the MPG rating I would gain. According to one site I read (which had fancy graphs) I should gave 20%... meaning I can go from 24 MPG to 28.8 MPG. With that kind of difference, I save 2 cents per miles. Over 1,000 miles that is $20, which at this price would almost buy me a half tank of gasoline.

That's a savings of 0.28 cents per mile. Multiply that by a 1,000 miles and I save $2.80.



$0.28 * 1000 = $280

What about environmental impact?
Obviously more MPG is better, but what is the result of this?
How is the exhaust affected?

$0.28 * 1000 = $280

No, I said 0.28 CENTS per mile. That's $0.0028*1000 = $0.028 = 2.8 cents.

Anyway, I am thinking about trying this. My truck is probably near the end of it's life anyway (306,000 miles).

In the video thre acetone increased the mileage by 30% or so... Not by 1 gpm

No, I said 0.28 CENTS per mile. That's $0.0028*1000 = $0.028 = 2.8 cents.
Gotcha.

Anyway, I am thinking about trying this. My truck is probably near the end of it's life anyway (306,000 miles).
Please let us know!

In the video thre acetone increased the mileage by 30% or so... Not by 1 gpm

Yea, but I was going a "worst case scenario." At the bottom of my post I said the claim is generally 20% increase in MPG... which I gave numbers for that, too.

But this is all based off $1/4oz of pure acetone.

Also, what damage could it potentially do to your car?
I presume the greater mileage is due to greater compression ratios.
With standard valvestems, tappets, lifters, etc (as opposed to hight-performance) would they be able to withstand the greater combustion pressure and greater stresses?

Acetone (CH3COCH3) is a product that can be purchased inexpensively in most locations around the world, such as in the common hardware, auto parts, or drug store. Added to the fuel tank in tiny amounts, acetone aids in the vaporization of the gasoline or diesel, increasing fuel efficiency, engine longevity, and performance -- as well as reducing hydrocarbon emissions.

In addition to increased mileage acetone added to fuel boasts other benefits such as increased power, engine life, and performance. Less unburned fuel going past the rings keeps the rings and engine oil in far better condition.

I have soaked carburetor parts in acetone for months and even years to see if there is any deterioration. Any parts made to run with gasoline will work with acetone just fine. I presently have parts soaking in 1, 2, 5, and 10 % acetone/gasoline mixes as well as just gasoline. That is 20 to 200 times too much just to be sure. The 30R7 rated parts are in perfect condition. All my tests have been run with Texaco gasoline. I tested the gas stations in my area to FIRST find the best gasoline BEFORE putting acetone in the tank.

Add in tiny amounts from about one part per 5000 to one part per 3000, depending on the vehicle -- just a few ounces per ten gallons of gas. This comes to between 0.0003 % to 0.0025 % acetone maximum or approximately 1/15th of one-percent. Note that is around .78 cc per liter or one ounce per 10 gallons. Not more than three oz. per 10 gallons.

Source (http://www.pureenergysystems.com/news/2005/03/17/6900069_Acetone/)

I think I'm going to try it in my 2005 Magnum RT for a few tanks.
I currently waver between 18 and 21 MPG.
It's a 19 gallon tank.
I'm going to fill it up with plus (my usual) and put 4 ounces of acetone in and see what happens.
Then do the same with 3 ounces.
I'll post my results.

Also, what damage could it potentially do to your car?
I presume the greater mileage is due to greater compression ratios.
With standard valvestems, tappets, lifters, etc (as opposed to hight-performance) would they be able to withstand the greater combustion pressure and greater stresses?

I think that mileage gains would come from greater conversion of the fuel to vapor, which isn't so easy to do in a fuel-injected system. A lot of the old systems required carburetted engines. There isn't much that you can do with a fuel-injected system to vaporize your gasoline using a turbocharger or a vortex.

Using acetone doesn't increase your compression ratio. That can only be done by mechanically altering the engine.

Using acetone doesn't increase your compression ratio. That can only be done by mechanically altering the engine.

Or by burning a more explosive fuel, no?
Such as Nitrous Oxide injections?

Here is a good website:

http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2598

There should be a HUGE boost from very little acetone. Use 1-3 ounces for every 10 gallon. The only danger is to plastic parts of the fuel system, but most system shouldn't have any damage. Also watch for flamability...

Also discussion with results:

http://us.lexusownersclub.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=37124&pid=239724&st=0&#entry239724

One guy got a boost of 14 to 16, so if you already have a 26 or so you can eta 3 mpg boost....

People reporting their results:

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Acetone_as_a_Fuel_Additive

Or by burning a more explosive fuel, no?
Such as Nitrous Oxide injections?

No. The compression ratio is a measure of how much the fuel-air mixture is compressed before it is ignited. It's the same whether you use helium, air, or nitromethane.

No. The compression ratio is a measure of how much the fuel-air mixture is compressed before it is ignited. It's the same whether you use helium, air, or nitromethane.

You're right.
I'm mixing terms.

However, if you run a high burning fuel, there is a greater explosion and a greater tendency for parts (such as valve stems) to suffer failure.
Correct?

Do you see my point?

I see your point, One_Raven, but this stuff isn't going to burn very much higher at a few ounces to the tankful.

Well, I bought a bottle of pure acetone at Walgreens at 2.49$ for 16 ounces. I figure that I need 3.2 ounces of acetone for 16 gallons of gasoline. I'll give it a shot tomorrow when I fill up.

I do not know about acetone, but I am convinced that water droplet mist will.

The water droplets are converted to steam as the piston descends and the increase in gas volume more than compensates for decreases of the temperature so the pressure on the piston as "bottom dead center" (exhaust opening point) is approached is higher.

Some old WWII airplanes could inject water when extra power was needed, so I have read.

I do not know about acetone, but I am convinced that water droplet mist will.

The water droplets are converted to steam as the piston descends and the increase in gas volume more than compensates for decreases of the temperature so the pressure on the piston as "bottom dead center" (exhaust opening point) is approached is higher.

Some old WWII airplanes could inject water when extra power was needed, so I have read.

I believe adding slight amounts of water was what Arco does - or did - to their gasoline.

Well, as far as I am concerned, I'd use it even if it saved me a penny per gallon or whatever you wanna call it, because eventually it will add up, and gas just went up to $3.34/gallon where I live.

The only issue I can think of is in modern cars with everything controlled by a computer, a plethora of sensors and electronically controlled fuel mixture.

Adding things to the petrol can screw up exhaust sensors, which will then affect the mixture of petrol/oil/air and potentially mess up your idle and performance.

We had a VW Bora (Jetta) a couple of years back that started to rev hard of its own accord. I wondered why my mother felt the need to do a drastic wheelspin from a junction, but it turned out to be a dodgy sensor.

I guess if you have a simple lump of an engine that you feed petrol and oil, and you can fiddle with the carb, you'll be just fine.

...this is true

Well I added an unknown amount of acetone in my take (2 ounces to 3.5 ounces). We'll see what it does for my MPG.

It's not a good idea to run your engine on fumes anyway, as well all know, but I've got a question.

How well would the acetone mix in with the petrol? I assume it does, otherwise your engine would roar whilst the acetone went through it and might misfire?

I was wondering if there'd be any risks with running out of fuel whilst you had acetone in your tank. If it might be a little lighter than petrol and you'd get a lot of it at the end.

Well I added an unknown amount of acetone in my take (2 ounces to 3.5 ounces). We'll see what it does for my MPG.

What kind of truck is it?
What make/model/year?
Fuel injected?

What kind of truck is it?
What make/model/year?
Fuel injected?

1991 Ford Ranger 4.0L V6.... yes, fuel injected.

I've read online where a guy tried it with his Ford Ranger... says he increased his MPG by 6 or so.

Preliminary results. As far back as I can remember, I always hit 100 miles at 1/4 of a tank used. So far, I am at 109 miles at 1/8 tank used. No, I didn't double my MPG. Usually my tank reading dropps really fast after half a tank. But so far, it looks like I am using a bit less gas. I predict I'll hit 400 miles on a single tank. My best ever is was around 350.

Hey Absane, I want 10% of the savings!! I started the thread!!!

Also, what damage could it potentially do to your car? I presume the greater mileage is due to greater compression ratios.Not compression ratio. That's the ratio of the volume of your cylinder with the piston at BDC to the volume with it at TDC and you're not changing that. Just greater pressure, as you say in your next sentence.With standard valvestems, tappets, lifters, etc (as opposed to hight-performance) would they be able to withstand the greater combustion pressure and greater stresses?The other problem you might encounter is a change in the effective octane rating of your mixed fuel. Lowering it can cause pre-ignition, which you'll hear as "pinging" and creates some really bad forces that can stress out your bearings and other moving parts. Raising it can cause a lag in ignition timing which gives you heat problems, but this is very unlikely with something that's supposed to increase performance.

Isn't the burning of fuel a very complete process in today's "green" engines? In order to get more more miles from a gallon of fuel, don't you have to get more total energy out of it? So in order for an additive to substantively increase fuel economy, doesn't the additive simply have to have more BTUs per gallon than gasoline? And if so, why would it be cheaper per gallon than gasoline?

Well, with the unknown amount of acetone I put in my tank, I went 370 miles with 15 gallons. I actually matched my all-time record (which I think I got from a fuel-injector cleaner). I have a 16.3 gallon tank... so if I actually ran to E (which I have come close to in the past) I would have made 400 miles on a single tank.

Before this acetone trick, I have been needing to fill up around 320 miles... so it looks like I done very well.

I filled up yesterday, and I put in nearly double what I put in last week's tank. We'll see what this does.

Interesting.

(which I think I got from a fuel-injector cleaner).

I wonder what happens if we use both. I get the same effect from the $1 fuel injector cleaner, increases mileage by 2-3 mpg.

Here is a combo I would like to know about:

acetone+ fuel inj. cleaner + high octane gas. It should give a boost for sure....

This may be a helpful resource, a wiki type page with lots of on hand experience:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Acetone_as_a_Fuel_Additive

I see my model (2001 Saturn SL-1) someone reported going to 41 mpg from 33. I'm going to consider trying this myself.

I wonder what happens if we use both. I get the same effect from the $1 fuel injector cleaner, increases mileage by 2-3 mpg.

Here is a combo I would like to know about:

acetone+ fuel inj. cleaner + high octane gas. It should give a boost for sure....

I once put premium gasoline in my tank (93 octane) plus octane booster just to see what happened. Well, basically my engine got pissed off at me and misfired a lot.

I'll never do that again. I am guessing I had like 98 octane in my truck.

I heard premium does nothing for most vehicles (if not doing negative, as some aren't equipped for it). I saw some news story about some gas station getting caught selling regular gas as premium, and they only got caught because they exposed themselves--no one actually was able to tell they were not getting "premium".

My 86 Mustnag ran better, had more power and got better mileage with regular than with premium.

I went on a whole tank that was nearly clean of acetone. Result? I got 320 miles on a tank for an MPG reading of 21 mpg.

I conclude that acetone really does increase MPG... at least in my truck.

Do you have anyway of being sure it isn't damaging engine parts?

Do you have anyway of being sure it isn't damaging engine parts?

Not really, but I doubt that such a low concentration is doing harm.

This is very good data. Assuming the price of gas is $3.20/gallon, and acetone $20/gal, and approximating the amount added in Absane's car is 3.2 oz/15 gallons, then with the data (the extra 50 miles) he got 7.63 miles / dollar vs. 6.67 miles / dollar. So almost an extra mile with each dollar, or a 14 % increase in distance. Excellent.

Too bad I am very bad about writing down exactly how much I used... as you may recall, I said I put an unknown amount in my tank... :)

I heard premium does nothing for most vehicles (if not doing negative, as some aren't equipped for it). I saw some news story about some gas station getting caught selling regular gas as premium, and they only got caught because they exposed themselves--no one actually was able to tell they were not getting "premium".

Generally speaking, 87 can be used in most cars, I'd say upto a 9:1 Compression Ratio, 91 for 9.1-11:1 and 93 in 11:1 or higher ratios, Most standard engines in consumer cars are 8-9:1 in ratio, performance heads usually increase the ratio as does a supercharger, the head by physically changing the distance from piston to head. A supercharger doesn't actually change the ratio but increases pressure in the cylinder, which is effectively the same as increasing the ratio just like Nitrous Oxide, NO and Superchargers work by packing more air, more air, more gas, more power. thats why superchargers always require 93 octane, they say using 93 in a lower compression engine is actually bad for it.

As one of the other posters mentioned, high octane can eliminate pinging, also known as detonation. Detonation is when the gas ingnites by the sheer pressure, rather than by spark, and can cause bad damage as the piston doesn't complete a full cycle like normal, adding pressure to your wrist pin, piston rod, and rod bearings. It is similar to what happens in diesel engines, but gasoline engines aren't built as thick as diesel to handle the detonation pressure. Diesel compression is usually between 17-25:1 huge difference.

My guess is that the Acetone increases atomization, thus a more complete burn, and more power, so you use less throttle than you would normally
Instead adding more air like NO or a Supercharger, it makes that burn more effcient.

Here it states that its all a MYTH!!

http://www.snopes.com/autos/techno/acetone.asp


The theory, so far as I can tell, is that it enhances the vaporisation of the fuel and so reduces the fraction that is wasted by escaping unburnt out of the exhaust or past the piston rings. While I have no specific knowledge of the effect of acetone on fuel vaporisation, it is nonetheless very easy to demonstrate that it cannot give a useful benefit via this mechanism. It is very well known that the vaporisation of fuel in a modern engine under normal operating conditions is already very good, and only about 1 - 2% of the input fuel escapes unburnt. Hence, whatever the properties of acetone, it is extremely hard to see how the economy benefit can be more than this relatively small amount.

There are, of course, many people who have tried putting acetone in their tanks and reported huge benefits. But you can find equally powerful testimonial evidence for a whole raft of devices that have been scientifically proven to be worthless. Fuel consumption measured on the road is subject to so many confounding factors - traffic, journey type, driving style, weather, etc, etc - that it is very, very easy to see changes of 10%, 20% or even more, even when the true engine efficiency has not altered at all. This page considers the general risks in determining fuel consumption via uncontrolled on-road measurements rather than scientific testing. Some people have tried very hard to eliminate or compensate for the confounding factors, but in the end it is impossible to control them all outside of a proper testing laboratory.

Many "supporters" of acetone have tried it themselves with apparently good results, and are scathing of the experts (like myself) who dismiss it on theoretical grounds without doing any testing. The point is, of course, that those same experts also recognise that any on-road testing they (or anybody else) do is essentially pointless, since it is virtually impossible to separate the true effect of the acetone from the "noise factors" - therefore, why go to the time and trouble of doing testing, when it can only produce an essentially random result?

http://www.fuelsaving.info/acetone.htm

So Absane was bullshitting? Well thats a surprise. Not.

adding beer does increase your kpl

...Some people have tried very hard to eliminate or compensate for the confounding factors, but in the end it is impossible to control them all outside of a proper testing laboratory....One summer student job I had was as researcher for Lion Oil. Their "dynamonitor lab" only used spark plugs for 100 hours so every week-end when I drove slightly more than 100 miles home I started with "new spark plugs." There was little traffic and only one red light, at which I always stopped even if it was green. I filled the tank exactly to a scratch line I had made inside the filler tube always parking in the same spot so that was the highest point of tank. (Also always the same pump as there could be slight difference in pump measurement accuracy) Refilling after end of trip at a second gas station with the same care.

Initially I varried very minor things, like one or two windows open, radio and lights on or off (I could calculate that extra waste of energy) etc. None of my careful data made any sense, until I discovered the true variable, which was more (or at last as) important than 5 mph speed change, which I wanted to learn how important it was. (I tried to drive whole trip at constant speed - 55 or 60 mph, as I recall)*

Guess what that variable was. If I fail to return and tell some one PM me.
PS it was not "wind." - not much of that late in evening after my dinner and traffic was near zero on the trip, normally.
---------------------
*Goal of my testing was to learn if driving at 55 instead of 60 was worth while trade of time for money. (For a poor student with his first very-old car.)

One summer student job I had was as researcher for Lion Oil. Their "dynamonitor lab" only used spark plugs for 100 hours so every week-end when I drove slightly more than 100 miles home I started with "new spark plugs." There was little traffic and only one red light, at which I always stopped even if it was green. I filled the tank exactly to a scratch line I had made inside the filler tube always parking in the same spot so that was the highest point of tank. (Also always the same pump as there could be slight difference in pump measurement accuracy) Refilling after end of trip at a second gas station with the same care.

Initially I varried very minor things, like one or two windows open, radio and lights on or off (I could calculate that extra waste of energy) etc. None of my careful data made any sense, until I discovered the true variable, which was more (or at last as) important than 5 mph speed change, which I wanted to learn how important it was. (I tried to drive whole trip at constant speed - 55 or 60 mph, as I recall)*

Guess what that variable was. If I fail to return and tell some one PM me.
PS it was not "wind." - not much of that late in evening after my dinner and traffic was near zero on the trip, normally.
---------------------
*Goal of my testing was to learn if driving at 55 instead of 60 was worth while trade of time for money. (For a poor student with his first very-old car.)

So you are saying Snopes is wrong as well as the researcher?

Initially I varried very minor things, like one or two windows open, radio and lights on or off (I could calculate that extra waste of energy) etc. None of my careful data made any sense, until I discovered the true variable, which was more (or at last as) important than 5 mph speed change, which I wanted to learn how important it was. (I tried to drive whole trip at constant speed - 55 or 60 mph, as I recall)*

Guess what that variable was.

whether you were chased by the police or not?

So Absane was bullshitting? Well thats a surprise. Not.

That's right.. I was bullshitting.

:rolleyes:

The article said that reported increases in acetone must be due to some of the random factors, but we can find out after 6 months... it should of averaged out if that were the case. So can you give us an update Absane?

The article said that reported increases in acetone must be due to some of the random factors, but we can find out after 6 months... it should of averaged out if that were the case. So can you give us an update Absane?

He won't be able to. That stuff also damages fuel lines and they won't last a full six months. Of course if he wants to keep on replacing them...

No one has guessed, so I will tell what the relatively important varriable, MENTIONED IN POST 53, was.

Humidity and water in the air, especially if present as "micro fog droplets".

I think I understand why: There is more heat released in the cylinder when the gasoline is burned than can be efficiently used to expand the mass of burnt fuel and dry air that entered before the intake valve closed. As the piston goes down, some combustion is continuing (assume gas burns instead of explodes in "knocking") but as it nears the lowest point the pressure on it is dropping rapidly. I think the "micro drops" being converted to steam causes the fall off in presure to be more slow, effectively getting more work from the burning fuel. - Sort of "internal cooling." Most of the heat released by the fuel is dumped in the exhaust gas. (IC engine is open cycle.) Some heats the cylinder walls and ultimately leaves car via the radiator. As the temperatures in the cylinder are lower if some micro-drops are being vaporized, there is less transfer (at lower cylinder temperatures) of heat into the cooling water. Thus, the pressure curve remains higher longer as the cylinder goes down with more energy retained inside the expanding gases until the ehaust valve opens.

I am not sure the above is correct POV. I only know that when there was some obvious fog in the valleys or light rain I got better gas milage. I planned to add a "water tray" and at least a rag to wick water into the air intake stream but wrecked the car before I got around to it. (That was a blessing in disguise - as I could not afford to maintain it after the six large cans of free oil I took from the Lion Oil company were gone. It badly needed a "ring job" which was out of the question in my limited budget. I referred to the car as a "semi-diesel." Perhaps water dropplets only boost mpg when there is serious pressure loss due to "blow-by" the rings?)

Are you guys retarded or is it just me. All the acetone does is breaks down the gas particles into smaller particles which reduces the amount needed for your engine to run. It makes the particles smaller so they're more explosive, little or no harm will be done to your engine.

It is just you.

The harm is done to the rubber/ plastic parts, not to the engine...