Hello–my FIRST post because it’s here that I would expect to learn the best information about car stuff. I’ve been looking at this “aftermarket” device with the appropriate amount of skepticism, but it does appear to be making some sense. Has anyone out there actually installed this device? If so, how did it work? Thanks for any info you have!
OOPS, MEANT TO SEND THE LINK ALSO:
http://www.preignitioncc.com/default/index.htm
Thanks for having a look!
We are all too familiar with this fraudulent device. You can use this forum’s search feature for more information, if you must.
It’s a scam, but if you think it makes some sense, buy one and install it. Let us know how it works out.
Thanks! Are there any posts that indicate why it’s scientifically impossible? Or that anyone has actually had first-hand experience as to why it’s a scam? Or what the device costs to install? I just saw a full page ad in Newsweek this week about it. NOT that this makes it valid, but one has to wonder if/when some reputable organization has actually tested it? All I see here are opinions, right?
Your just going to hve to buy it and try it.Please report back. This forum has made itself perfectly clear in regards to their opinions of these products. Why do you think the Car Talk forum has the responsibility to provide you with scientific,peer reviewed evidience?
How about the US Environmental Protection Agency? Is that reputable enough for you? According to an article in the July, 2008 issue of “Consumer Reports,” gas-saving devices do not work, and the agency’s website “lists scores of such devices that it has tested,” none of which has worked.
Have a look for yourself:
So instead of listening to common sense why don’t you just purchase one, install it, and don’t let us know the results.
I don’t think the Car Talk forum has any responsibility whatever to provide me with “scientific, peer reviewed evidence” that this device works or doesn’t work. I was just asking if anyone out there had any source of such. Obviously YOU don’t, but the next post does. And I thank that person for steering me to the source, whatever it might be. Perhaps it’s more “scientific” than “…perfectly clear in regards to their OPINIONS…”…which is just what you have given…in abundance!
You’ve got that backwards… we’d need first-hand experience to tell is it ISN’T a scam, not that it is. They are making extraordinary claims and need to back it up with evidence. Their “science” is a crock and that makes folks suspicious.
(For example, magnets don’t ionize… 50-70L per hour of hydrogen/oxygen gas mix doesn’t really stack up against the hundreds of thousands of liters of fuel/air mixture the engine pumps through…)
If you don’t want to deal with real science, you could try http://peswiki.com/index.php/Main_Page, which seems to be a vast collection of energy-related crackpottery.
Thanks! I did not say I don’t want to “…deal with real science…” In fact, I indicated just the contrary. It doesn’t matter to me if “real science” proves it IS a scam or that it IS NOT a scam. I’d have my answer either way, right?
Didn’t mean to sound insulting like that. I just mean that the PICC page falls down immediately on several counts, and so doesn’t really require further investigation to prove it’s bogus. If they came out with a reasonable explanation of why it might actually work, then it would be time to test it to see if it actually does. The burden of proof is on them for making extraordinary claims.
Thanks! Good point.
Moral of the story from Pop. Mechanics.
THE MORAL OF THE STORY
We’ve tested nowhere near all of the fuel-saver gadgets on the market, and I’m sure purveyors of others will be waiting in our lobby soon. But not one of the items we tested worked. At all. There’s no ignoring the laws of physics, people. Your vehicle already burns over 99 percent of the fuel you pay for. Less than 1 percent is squandered as partially burned hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide before the exhaust hits the catalytic converter for the last laundering. Even if one of these miracle gadgets could make the combustion process 100 percent complete, the improvement in mileage resulting would be 1 percent. Any device that claims quantum-level increases needs to be examined with considerable skepticism.
We say caveat emptor (let the buyer beware). But there are plenty of people out there who say: “There’s one born every minute.” Prediction: Within a few weeks after the appearance of this article, there will be gas-saving gadgets on the market that tout themselves as “Featured in Popular Mechanics.” Someone will buy them. Probably not you.
Thanks to all of you for your opinions…and facts! Thanks especially to Macparadise [see above] for the link you provided. I did find a test there done in the 1970’s [believe it or not!] that was very enlightening. Some of you, like myself, who might like more than just opinion might find it enlightening.
There are OPINIONS, and there is REASONING. Opinions and beliefs are, nearly, interchangeable. Reasoning involves the employment of bodies of knowledge and experience applied in a more rigorous fashion, using logic and insight, to arrive at a reasoned result…rather than a w.a.g.
When one can’t perform empirical tests, one comes as closes as one can to a solution / resolution using ones ability to reason. The greater ones knowledge and experience, the better the resultant reasoning (at least, one hopes).
One hopes, as one becomes older, one becomes wiser. There are other ideals, of course.