Methyl Hydrate

* Wrote:
> Raymond J. Henry > wrote in article
> >...
> >
> > He informs me that he's seen dyno tests improve using blended fuel,
> > and that reflects exactly what I've seen in about 98% of the vehicles
> > I've used it in. My 1986 Aries sees 2 MPG over unblended fuels, but
> > tends to crank a rotation or two longer prior to start on warm days.
> > My Fiats and Volvos all responded very favorably to it, whereas my
> > stock NA V8 engines ran the scale between moderate to zero change.
> >
>
>
> You are definitely the exception to the rule......
>
> Everybody else in North America experiences a drop in fuel mileage when
> the
> winter blends - containing higher percentages of alcohol, thus fewer
> BTU -
> are introduced.
>
> If your "K-Car" fuel mileage IMPROVES on an alcohol/gasoline blend over
> straight gasoline, then you need some serious tuning work.

Yup, timing's slightly overadvanced or something....


--
jeffcoslacker
------------------------------------------------------------------------
jeffcoslacker's Profile: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...?userid=219638
View this thread: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...d.php?t=581669

http://www.automotiveforums.com

Hello,
I'm a gal from WI who's older, 1991, Acura Integra just missed passing
the NOx emissions test by .14.

I don't want to replace the CatCon since I plan on buying a new car
within a year, and the car's just too old to warrant throwing that much
money at it. A mech told me to add a can of ISO Heet to the fuel and
run it hot for twenty minutes before giving it another try at the
testing facility. In WI we get two tests free, then have to pay for
any additional ones, I'm not sure if we have a limit to the number of
tests or not. I'd like to do whatever will give it the best chance of
passing I can. Not to mention it's getting near the end of the month
when my plates expire.

I appreciate any advice and consider myself lucky to have found such a
knowledgable group 'cause I sure don't know beans about engines..

In article
.com>,
"Moxie" > wrote:

> Hello,
> I'm a gal from WI who's older, 1991, Acura Integra just missed passing
> the NOx emissions test by .14.
>
> I don't want to replace the CatCon since I plan on buying a new car
> within a year, and the car's just too old to warrant throwing that much
> money at it. A mech told me to add a can of ISO Heet to the fuel and
> run it hot for twenty minutes before giving it another try at the
> testing facility. In WI we get two tests free, then have to pay for
> any additional ones, I'm not sure if we have a limit to the number of
> tests or not. I'd like to do whatever will give it the best chance of
> passing I can. Not to mention it's getting near the end of the month
> when my plates expire.
>
> I appreciate any advice and consider myself lucky to have found such a
> knowledgable group 'cause I sure don't know beans about engines..

I think adding the ISO Heet will make the NOx go up.
The Wisconsin emissions program has two Technical Assistance
Centers in he Milwaukee area, one is near 76th and Good Hope Rd,
the other is at 11th and College, the service there is free, an
appointment can be made for you by any inspection station manager.

You get three free tests, you can buy as many re-tests after the
free three as you wish but the station inspectors will do an
underhood component inspection before selling you any tests.

Can't remember whether a 91 Acura has an EGR valve, if so, it
needs to be working correctly to pass NOX, if not, the CatCon
needs to be able to reduce NOx in order to pass, if it needs a
CatCon, here's little else you can do.

aarcuda69062 wrote:
> In article

> I think adding the ISO Heet will make the NOx go up.
> The Wisconsin emissions program has two Technical Assistance
> Centers in he Milwaukee area, one is near 76th and Good Hope Rd,
> the other is at 11th and College, the service there is free, an
> appointment can be made for you by any inspection station manager.
>
> You get three free tests, you can buy as many re-tests after the
> free three as you wish but the station inspectors will do an
> underhood component inspection before selling you any tests.
>
> Can't remember whether a 91 Acura has an EGR valve, if so, it
> needs to be working correctly to pass NOX, if not, the CatCon
> needs to be able to reduce NOx in order to pass, if it needs a
> CatCon, here's little else you can do.

Thank you for your reply. I'll certainly call the Technical Assitance
centers you referred me to on Monday. It was actually the owner of one
of the "Recognized Repair Facilities" that told me to add Heet. Also,
I had been using "Regular" fuel, per the operationing hand book, but
switched to Premium after failing the test. Do you think that since
I'm now using that higher fuel grade that might help? I've burned a
full tank of the Premium. I'm frustrated because it failed the test by
such a slim margin ... seems like I should just be able to give it a
swift kick in the tailpipe to get it to pay attention and pass.

In article
.com>,
"Moxie" > wrote:

> Thank you for your reply. I'll certainly call the Technical Assitance
> centers you referred me to on Monday. It was actually the owner of one
> of the "Recognized Repair Facilities" that told me to add Heet. Also,
> I had been using "Regular" fuel, per the operationing hand book, but
> switched to Premium after failing the test. Do you think that since
> I'm now using that higher fuel grade that might help?

No, but stranger things have happened.
Visiting a different test station might help. Then again, you
might see worse numbers.

> I've burned a
> full tank of the Premium. I'm frustrated because it failed the test by
> such a slim margin ... seems like I should just be able to give it a
> swift kick in the tailpipe to get it to pay attention and pass.

Doesn't work that way.

On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 09:58:49 -0500, "*" > wrote:

>
>You are definitely the exception to the rule......
>
>Everybody else in North America experiences a drop in fuel mileage when the
>winter blends - containing higher percentages of alcohol, thus fewer BTU -
>are introduced.
>
>If your "K-Car" fuel mileage IMPROVES on an alcohol/gasoline blend over
>straight gasoline, then you need some serious tuning work.
>

Uh, no.... Funny thing about it is the difference between using it on
your own and having the gov't enforce it. See, we've had it available
here since the early 80's by one station. And hundreds of thousands of
drivers have experienced EXACTLY the same benefits that I have.
Primarily those with high performance engines.

Blended fuels made Mohawk stations a serious competitor in the market
at a time when they were almost out of business. And as a pilot
program, they did virtually no advertising of the product at the time.
It wasn't until after they had developed such a good market share that
they invested in real advertising.

It's funny that when one does their own evaluation on something, the
results are different than when they are forced to use it, isn't it?
The claim that mileage DROPS may be true in a very small percentage of
vehicles on the road. 95% of people here that try it see an INCREASE
in mileage and performance.

This is not the fist time that I've heard this horrible urban legend,
and every time it comes up, I mention it to a few cars guys around
town. That ignorance always provides us with comic relief.....

You are definitely NOT an exception to the rule, in spreading that
bogus rumor that it affects mileage in a negative manner.

On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 08:20:55 -0700, jeffcoslacker
> wrote:


>Yup, timing's slightly overadvanced or something....

Yeah...... Right..... Gee, wouldn't that cause pre-ignition?

Raymond J. Henry Wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 08:20:55 -0700, jeffcoslacker
> > wrote:
>
>
> >Yup, timing's slightly overadvanced or something....
>
> Yeah...... Right..... Gee, wouldn't that cause pre-ignition?

Yeah, but it affects performance at levels mush lower than you can
hear...so if you are over-advanced slightly, you likely wouldn't know
it, and when you begin to use a fuel that slows combustion slightly, of
course you will see a performance/mileage gain, which was precisely my
point, Mr. Sarcasm. :lol:


--
jeffcoslacker
------------------------------------------------------------------------
jeffcoslacker's Profile: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...?userid=219638
View this thread: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...d.php?t=581669

http://www.automotiveforums.com

aarcuda69062 wrote:

> > I've burned a
> > full tank of the Premium. I'm frustrated because it failed the test by
> > such a slim margin ... seems like I should just be able to give it a
> > swift kick in the tailpipe to get it to pay attention and pass.
>
> Doesn't work that way.

I was reading about PRI-G fuel additive being proven to lower
emissions. Do you think that's baloney?

In article
.com>,
"Moxie" > wrote:

> aarcuda69062 wrote:
>
> > > I've burned a
> > > full tank of the Premium. I'm frustrated because it failed the test by
> > > such a slim margin ... seems like I should just be able to give it a
> > > swift kick in the tailpipe to get it to pay attention and pass.
> >
> > Doesn't work that way.
>
> I was reading about PRI-G fuel additive being proven to lower
> emissions. Do you think that's baloney?

No. I think anything can be proven given the correct
circumstances.

If you needed to use PRI-G fuel additive to pass an emissions
test, would you continue to use that additive for as long as you
owned/operated that particular car?