ECOTAZ ECO Fuelsystems Fuel Enhancers - Does it work?

As I stated earlier it will work on an n-14 or any diesel or gasoline. It only treats the fuel so the engine does not matter. I want to put between 6 tp 8percent of your fuel budget back in your pockets for you and your family to enjoy.

 

I am concerned that this device may not work in the manner claimed. I am skeptical and do not believe this. I am going to politely explain why I do not believe this and ask for a technical explanation of the claims.

from the presentation:
"ECO Systems Fuel Enhancers work by electro-statically charging the fuel you are currently using."

"ECO-Systems work as a catalyst to enhance the fuel by increasing it’s ability to Vaporize creating a better Air – Fuel ratio."

from the patent:
"The present invention relates to a device that installs in-line in the fuel supply line of a gasoline, diesel, propane, or natural gas powered vehicle. The device consists of a hollow cylinder that contains a tightly packed copper wire core. The copper wire serves as a catalyst to crack the fuel's carbon chain molecules as the fuel flows through the device. The resulting fuel contains more and shorter fuel molecules, has a higher vapor pressure and burns more efficiently in the vehicle's engine."

I challenge the manufacturer to supply a scientific explanation for the claims. If it works as advertised, every major manufacturer should be buying it and installing it as stock equipment or licensing the technology and including it for the simple reason that a more economical vehicle sells more easily.

There have been many products over the years for inline devices that claim to crack or charge up (or magnetize) fuel in a variety of ways. None of them produce the results claimed yet many have been patented and marketed.

Although fuel is more of an insulator/dielectric than an electrical conductor and could accept an electrostatic charge according to its dielectric constant (generally 2<K<5 for No. 2 diesel), the charge put on the fuel, if any, would be immediately dissipated as the fuel moves through the very same conductive metal device. The device is not connected to any source of high voltage that would impart a physically meaningful charge to the fuel (like 5,000 to 50,000 volts DC for example).
The amount of charge required to meaningfully ionize fuel is not available by passing the fuel, under the usual pressure and velocity of an engine fuel pump, through a tightly packed core of copper wire in a pipe.

Copper wire does not charge anything due to flow friction or due to triboelectric effects (vibrations or pressure of substances moving against it). -> That is because copper is a conductor, a very good short circuit, and can not develop or cause a static charge from one end of a wad of it to the other.

The patent says the core cracks the fuel molecules. The amount of energy available from passing fuel through a tightly packed copper core is not sufficient to do anything to the molecules except heat them up by a miniscule (nearly un-measurable) amount due to friction.
Cracking molecules such as those of fuel requires greatly increased temperature and/or pressure and exotic catalysts, which copper is not. Fuel used to be cracked at high temperatures but is cracked today by high pressure with hydrogen as a principal catalyst.
That can be looked up in petroleum engineering texts and on the internet. No scientific explanation is available for the breaking of the molecules inside the product or because of it.

One look at the engineering books does reveal that fuel processing (new-style cat cracking, not the old high-temperature methods) is done at 900-1400 degrees C (2500 degrees F), at extreme pressures of 1000-2000PSI, and with hydrogen as a catalyst, but not copper. If diesel and all the other fuels could be improved by flowing them through these products at normal temperatures or under-hood temperatures, the refineries should be using giant versions of the product instead of the extremely dangerous machinery in use today that kills some of our country's best workers and engineers every year.

Maybe the increased economy, if any, is due to the tightly packed copper wire core restricting the fuel flowing to the injection pump, and the different sizes of the device for each application are calculated to restrict only a certain amount of fuel flow during "wide open throttle" or "full rack" positions for gas or diesel respectively. A slight restriction, as we know, or a partially clogged filter, is similar in effect to keeping the pedal off the metal. That might save fuel. However, this paragraph is only speculation about how the product might actually do what is claimed (save fuel).

For these very good reasons, which are based on study of the manufacturer-supplied information and website, the patent on the US government website, and general scientific principles, I do not believe that the product claims are achieved by the methods stated and I have given my objections to the claims above. The claims in the patent are stated, but the method as to how copper cracks or breaks apart fuel molecules, which is at the very center of this product technology issue, is not evident. I hate to be so skeptical but the laboratory tests don't stand up to chemical science or petroleum engineering and I would prefer a scientific explanation of precisely how this works before I consider it. Don't worry about being too technical or making the explanation too long, the effort won't be wasted and I will be grateful to learn something new.

patent 7942135
http://www.patentgenius.com/patent/7942135.html
http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html

 

Goodmorning to you Sir,
I respect the fact that your quote above shows you are highly educated in Fuels. Your quote also shows that you are more interested in HOW we work than IF we work. First of all we have been in business for over 10 years here in Central and South Texas. We have forever been hit by our competitors and persons that we may effect by reducing the amount of diesel being bought. Lets face it - Fuel companies are making record profits right now.
Why the manufacturers dont use our product is a question you need to ask the manufacturer. I would be happy to help them save you money. As for our Claims I believe we have enough info on the website that explains our stand. The White Paper written by Richard Carlson who in fact is a Highly respected engineer in California and helped design many of the air quality laws in California explains much of what we do. Even though we are patented We do not want to put up the complete recipe.
The amount of People that have proven our product in the real world should have something to say for itself. We have many people that - like you - were skeptical and non believers. After a few installs with emissions test being done and mileage records being recorded they now became our strongest supporters. In Fact we have some companies that sell fuels and deliver fuels that are using our systems to help their bottom line. As on our website, Oil Drilling companies use our Product to reduce their fuel consumption. We have hundreds of school districts, Counties, and cities that have proven our product. The Chief Investigator for the Consumers Affairs
Division for the State of Texas investigated us and found us to be actually advertising less than what we actually do. We have received grants thru the state of Texas to test because the Engineers in Charge of these projects found merit in our product. Engineers at several large facilitiues have found that our product actually does work such as the Whitesands Test Facility in New Mexico for NASA. We are being tested as we speak by very large companies and We have met with there engineering staff's and they also have found merit in our product to proceed with their own testing. We will be releasing these companies names and contacts as soon as we get clearance from them to do so.
We have many Thousand units sold over the last 10 years with satisfied customers that will still tell you they are very happy with their savings, and they still may not agree on how we do it but their priority is saving money for their bottom line.. We are listed with the Better Business Bureau with an A+ Rating. Our Customers which many are on the website and at request we can give you names of many more are very happy with our performance and the results which is leaving money in their budgets, bank accounts, and pockets and not going into the fuel pumps.
I do have a handful that will not buy our product because scientifically they cannot figure How We Work. Scientifically Helicopters aren't supposed to fly, but they do gracefully, Hummingbirds aren't supposed to fly but they do gracefully and Bumble Bees aren't supposed to fly and they do! Again, this handful of people are only interested in finding out exactly how we do it and are not concerned about a fuel savings. 99% of the people I deal with are only interested in the fuel savings and emissions reductions. A 5 to 8 percent savings to the members in this forum could be $3,000.00 to $5,000.00 a year per truck depending on the amount of miles driven. This is a vacation, retirement building, an extra vehicle or truck repair. It is money left in their pockets.
I respect your opinion and everyone is entitled to their own but we do have a 90 day 100% money back guarantee and our Better Business Bureau rating shows our Customer Service. You are under no obligation to Have to Buy our product. No Sir we are not a Fly-By-Night company and Satisfied Customers is how we built our Credibility. It's your money, Your company and you're choice to save it for yourself or give it to the Pumps.
I am sure the majority of the members work very hard for their dollars earned and have to be very competitive in quoting their rates. A 5 to 7 percent fuel savings can help many of these Truck Owners. Knowing How it works exactly will not put extra money in your pocket unless your competing with me.
Or selling Diesel!
And May God Bless America!

 

Back in my auto mechanic days (specialized in driveability, electrical) I had many occasions of diagnosing and removing numerous similar "fuel saving" devices. The reports from the user were always the same: At first there were measured improvements. Once the novelty wore off and their memory of the device (careful driving habits) faded, mpg was back where it was in the first place or worse. Ultimately, these things added a new point of failure - which landed them in my shop. Usually clogged. Removing them restored performance, provided there wasn't anything else damaged or broken from use. Unlike my friend M818, my advice is less scientific. The best way to install these fuel saving devices is to tape them to the floorboard under the accelerator.

There is no magic to saving fuel. Aerodynamics establish the baseline, maintenance and driving habits provide the upside. Period.

Coinkidentally, I just finished up IFTA figures. For the quarter I've gotten 7.25 mpg. That's on a 2004 FL Century with a 14L 500hp Detroit, 13-sp, 3.58 rears, pulling a 53' reefer loaded about 80% of the time to 60-80k gross and idling all night long at the truck stops. The only aero "extras" we have are the side fairings over the fuel tanks. No trailer fairings, no hubcaps, and no mysterious devices in the fuel line. We run on not too steep terrain in the southeast, and I generally avoid loads that cross the Appalachians or Ozarks direct in favor of something else.

If I had bought fuel saving tires (instead of the Yoko TY577 drives and RY587 trailer which are a happy medium) and were to buy an APU, I think 8 mpg would be achievable.

 

Helicopters actually do fly based on science and I'd wager that those who fly them know how they work. The old saw that bumblebee and hummingbird flight is scientifically impossible is very outdated. Once high speed photography was invented, it became evident how these creatures managed, and evident that they were built for their peculiar means of locomotion.

Ok well I've asked my questions and I've had my say. thank you.

 

My Point exactly, The Technicians, Directors of Transportation, Shop Foremen and Engineers, that thought we were snake oil 8 years ago, now not only use our product on their entire Fleet but use it personally as well. They have taken the units of vehicles they are trading out and installed them into the new ones that replaced the older vehicles. Once they personally tested them they agreed "There is something there worth looking at." The many professionals that have proven the units are very well educated and have very big resposnibilities as well. We are talking about the bottom line, and if it puts money back in the Profit Line, is that not what we work for?
I know there are scams out there, and it is always "Buyer Be Ware"
That's my say.

 

I owe M818 an apology and will do it here instead of a PM. Under our Patent which he refers to about Under Claims, the words "Carbon Chains Of" was left off before the word molecules. M818 is correct in that our unit does not crack the Molecules of the fuel. That would be very difficult to do and if you did crack them you would end up with something different from diesel or gasoline. For that mistake by who ever typed this I apologize to you Sir! You are correct and we will have it corrected.
If you read the Abstract at first, it is correct, we crack or break the carbon chains of molecules. Under the section of Field of inventions we claim again to Crack or break the carbon chains of molecules, that is correct and under the Summary of the Inventor we again claim to break the carbon chain of molecules. It is correct in all of these sections. In all of our advertising and on our website we only claim to break the Carbon Chains of Molecules.
The system increases the vapor pressure of the fuel by this method making it more volatile. We have had hundreds of emissions test and even thru grants issued by the State of Texas to prove we lower emissions. We cannot lower emissions without burning fuel more complete. We burn fuel more complete by making more of a burn surface of the fuel coming out of the injectors and and allowing a better air fuel ratio mixture, this is how we increase the power of the engine. Doing the same work as before, you will have a fuel savings.
Again I apologize to M818 and bringing the error to my attention.

 

The Volunteers that will try the ECO-Systems have their units on the way to them already.
Big Bad Bill
Nevs
Mr. Plum Crazy
Driver 1189
Gerardo1961 is coming down South and will have the unit installed while driving thru.
We have a volunteer from Reno Nevada with a powerstroke and his has been mailed as well.
I want to thank these volunteers in advance.
Thanks,
ECOTAZ

 

is it too late to volunteer.
cummins n14. st louis mo

 

Send me a pm with your contact and mailing info with year make and hpr of engine. Thanks