ECOTAZ ECO Fuelsystems Fuel Enhancers - Does it work?

avg mph as it's read from the computer is based off that same speed sensor as well as by the dwell and pulse count on the injectors.

So why is that not believable considering that's exactly what people are saying they want is the pulse count off the injectors.

 

LOL! And again, why only the guys showing no gain? OH! THAT'S RIGHT! Because this product works and so we only need to see what's wrong with these guys trucks! Silly me!

You keep turning this back on us, when the burden is on you. You accused me of being mad because "I couldn't figure out how it worked." No Ben, I merely told you that your device cannot be doing what you say it is doing, i.e. breaking carbon chains. I would love to hear how this exact same device works on natural gas, especially since natural gas is largely methane, which has only one carbon atom. And just how does your device increase the volatility of a gas? Inquiring minds want to know! Is it possible you have stumbled upon a technology that even your engineers can't figure out how it's working? Yes, it is. But such a discovery is worth far more than the few dollars you can make selling this directly to the end consumer. Any REAL scientist would have already presented this discovery to his peers, because the implications of what you claim your device is capable of are world changing. As in a 5% reduction in fuel usage with no loss of power is worth BILLIONS when one considers the amount of fuel burned every day for transportation and energy production.

Like all good scams, you use just enough real science to confuse people. After all, the best lies are mostly truth.

 

I don't know how the fuel usage is figured by the ECM. From what I've read by guys a lot smarter than me about these things, it's not accurate at all, that it's pretty much just a ballpark estimation. Real world experience has shown me it's wildly innacurate. Speed sensor is different, just a sensor counting revolutions - not much to that. Was hoping Hammer could explain this cause he's pretty much king when it comes to being an encyclopedia of useless knowledge lol.

 

the error comes in the fuel volume changes with temps. It's hard to measure an actual flow through an injector without some type of calibration to it.

I know we had difficulties and had regular calibration schedules for my production machines in manufacturing. Would need a similar process for fuel injectors.

VSS are basically nothing but a permanent magnet motor that creates a variable voltage signal read by the computer.

much like a wind speedometer in a weather kit.

 

Um, that's exactly what you said. I'm not in the habit of making up things.

The only diesels that run that efficiently are the huge ship engines. Trucks come nowhere close to that number.

I think we can agree about the % improvement numbers, yes.

But what has Dice done to improve his engine's combustion efficiency? The FASS might help some, but other than that? Breathers and exhaust only reduce pumping losses, unless they were so restrictive that they were strangling the ability of the engine to get enough air. (Unlikely at cruise settings.) If the ECOTAZ effects combustion as claimed, it would only further improve the efficiency. Now there are minor changes in BSFC numbers based on load, so Dice might indeed be operating at a greater efficiency number, but I've not found those kinds of charts published to know just how much the BSFC varies. You can't even find recent BSFC numbers of any sort for the newer engines. Used to be in advertising literature, but it's no longer mentioned. (Likely because of the nose dive it took due to EGR.) But this whole crap of Dice not showing any improvement because of his current MPG numbers is just that, crap. Due notice it was only an issue when there were no immediate improvements; aka damage control by Ben. I'll try and find the time later to go redo that post about fuel usage with the assumption that Dice is already operating at a higher combustion efficiency.

 

So where is the ECM reports from all your testers to prove to yourself and everybody that is skeptical that they did not slow down their speed.

When you start posting the ECM reports of ALL your Testers here on this Forum you keep crowing about of before and after the Ecotaz to prove they did not change their speed or driving habits, I am not obligated to do anything for you that you have not ask them to do.

When you post ALL those ECM reports, I will post the ones my shop will printout at the end of May when it appears the EcoTaz will be removed from my truck and one maybe 30 to 90 days later. My shop will be and will be the only computer hooked to my truck with this cost of $45 each for a total of $90 cost will paid in advance to me by EcoTaz. This is not negoiatable and will not be considered till all the other ECM reports are posted from ALL the testers Ben keeps crowing about here that is not an unresonable request since we want all testing to be the same and fair.

I have no reason to change my speed because I want to get the best fuel mileage I can get to save money and keep that fuel money in my pocket. If I would have sped up the EcoTaz would have looked alot worse and not come in around my usual averages for a dedicated run that I have posted. So far all my dedicated runs with Ecotaz have been within my usual MPG average for those runs the last 3 prior months.

Nothing has changed on my truck since the first of the year besides regular maintainence except the duct work I added in mid-January and installed EcoTaz Eco-5 the end of March with 100% of the fuel mileage in April done nothing but with the EcoTaz installed and with the same speeds and driving habits I have always done. I have yet to notice any difference in performance or fuel mileage using the EcoTaz except it did smooth out my fuel pressure for some strange reason when we moved it close to the injector rails, but that has already been discussed that is the stored fuel in the tube helping that just like the Turbo3000d Vada claims to do also.

I have went all over your website looking for the Cat test with the ECM reports posted that I can not find any information on this that you discussed? Can you please link me directly to this information?

 

Thank you.

The real bad part is on an older truck like mine being a 98 model the ECM may only give the average speed from when the truck was bought new or in my case when I replaced the ECM that has my odometer 331,000 miles off from when it was replaced on my truck by Volvo dealer.

 

Amen!

Ben only acts like there is just 2 of us that it isn't showing gains for when his own website makes out there is others who have asked for their money back and I know of at least one more on this website that was complaining it did not work who also had a dedicated run. There is more and he just does not want to admit it and only counts the ones with more of his fuzzy math that show improvement and act like this is first time in history his product did not work.

I quess he also missed that one of the testers he crowed about it is now back in the skeptical category after having on the truck since last year, but Ben will completely miss that one with more sales hype and fuzzy math with mpgs.

What is really sad is my wife talked me into doing this to hopefully make my goal of 10 mpg on my Dedicated runs and to actually test it to give the true results of what it is does instead of letting down the several posters on here that talked me into coming over to this thread to get my testing results and opinion about this device. Nothing more nothing less.

 

Temps do play a part, although I think all these engines have fuel temp sensors; so does air within the fuel, even eddies in the fuel current. The ECM would calculate fuel usage based on a idealized injection event, when the actual amount of fuel injected varies from that ideal. And don't forget they have to assume a certain fuel spec, when the actual fuel used may vary from that spec in viscosity (and density, but we're talking volume here,) which could effect the flow into the injector body and also cause minor variations in actual output at the tip. In manufacturing environments like MNDriver speaks of there is a much tighter control on the supply feed, plus careful monitoring of output to detect changes in performance. Even the most careful measurements of injector output are only good for a certain amount of wear within the injector. Over time the output will change as the sealing efficiency of the plunger varies over the life of the injector, as does, of course, the restriction of the nozzle and the release pressure as well. Cummins used to have the ability to input your fuel usage to self-calibrate the MPG number that the ECM spit out, but I haven't driven anything with the display in so long I don't know if that's still true.

 

I never said they could not print out their reports. I encourage it on all tests. Fleets use this all the time to check on average speed and idle time...