Increased-mpg additive(CA-40) vs. 6.7 DPF?

[Wolfy]

Additives claiming increased MPG usually get the "snake-oil" response from me.



There is one however (link below), which has attracted my attention. I have heard a radio interview with the inventor, read everything on their webisite, and heard some claims from the radio host, supposedly an enthusiastic user, not commercially supported by the manufacturer. All positive, of course.



(Of COURSE!!



Bottom-line: Though still strongly skeptical, I may give it a (fairly inexpensive) trial, considering the relatively low mpg of these new rigs, and the ever-increasing fuel costs. Another factor of interest is the claim for superior lubrication, somewhat offsetting the lack-thereof in the new ULSD fuels which we use (See the web-site "test reports").



My reservations have to do with the possible effects of any additive on the DOC/DPF system.



I would appreciate discussion, and reports from anyone who may have used/heard of someone using this stuff in any vehicle,... especially the new 6. 7 Cummins.



Here's the scoop:



http://www.ca40g.com/pages.php?pageid=17



Waddaya think?

 

[JoeBioDiesel]

Independent lab test (by National Renewable Energy Labs) has shown that running Biodiesel with blends as low as 10% allowed the engine to run without having to burn off the DPF. Bio allowed the DPF flash-off temps to drop low enough that it burned off during normal driving cycles. Maybe this guy figured out that bio will still do the same thing at even lower concentrations. Preventing DPF burnoff is good for about 4% improvement in mileage.

Joe

 

[JFaughn]

One more product to watch .
I am in the state that that company is in & in the largest metro area in this state , and the closest outlet is over an hours drive , not good marketing - get it to the populated areas !

 

[jcarey]

Usually only about half of the hydrocarbons in fuel are burned in an internal combustion engine. Combustion enhancement is attained through further oxidation of the un-burnt hydrocarbons in the fuel. There are three things that are needed in combustion: fuel, oxygen and ignition. CA40 suspends within the hydrocarbons and further allows oxygen and fuel to be held together (fuel and oxygen). The third component of ignition is accomplished due to the thermo-electric and Piezo-electric properties of the calcium in CA40. When combustion occurs in the engine the heat and pressure causes the electrons in the calcium to accelerate. This acceleration provides the ignition (spark) in the proximity of the hydrocarbons resulting in further oxidation (burning) of the hydrocarbons. The end result is a longer stronger push during the power stroke.





Does this makes sense to any chemists out there? Sorry, but it does sound like snake oil to me.



However for $30 bucks, is it worth a shot!?!



CMH's business plan may be that you'll think so...



I hope it works. We can use a boost in fuel economy.



Good luck!

 

[ModifiedDiesel]

I'd personally wonder/worry what effect this stuff will have on our injectors. ie is this stuff tested in our high pressure common rail systems?

 

[Wolfy]

Usually only about half of the hydrocarbons in fuel are burned in an internal combustion engine. Combustion enhancement is attained through further oxidation of the un-burnt hydrocarbons in the fuel. There are three things that are needed in combustion: fuel, oxygen and ignition. CA40 suspends within the hydrocarbons and further allows oxygen and fuel to be held together (fuel and oxygen). The third component of ignition is accomplished due to the thermo-electric and Piezo-electric properties of the calcium in CA40. When combustion occurs in the engine the heat and pressure causes the electrons in the calcium to accelerate. This acceleration provides the ignition (spark) in the proximity of the hydrocarbons resulting in further oxidation (burning) of the hydrocarbons. The end result is a longer stronger push during the power stroke.





Does this makes sense to any chemists out there? Sorry, but it does sound like snake oil to me.



However for $30 bucks, is it worth a shot!?!



CMH's business plan may be that you'll think so...



I hope it works. We can use a boost in fuel economy.



Good luck!

"Combustion enhancement is attained through further oxidation of the un-burnt hydrocarbons in the fuel. "



This statement seems reasonable, if true, because the DOC in our exhaust system "raises the temperature" for regeneration, by oxidation of unburned hydrocarbons in the exhaust gases (thus the name "Diesel Oxidation Catalyst).



If this oxidation of additional hydrocarbons can in-fact be accomplished while the mix is still expanding in the combustion chamber during the power stroke, then the end result could well be "a longer stronger push during the power stroke".



In other words, the potential for "enhanced combustion" is present, in the form of unburned hydrocarbons (fuel),... or else there would be none for the DOC to act upon when the exhausted gases reach it.



If these can indeed be encouraged to join in the explosive effort to drive the piston down, then good things could happen.



The Greek-sounding statement, to me, is the one which says that accelerated electrons provide " the ignition (spark) in the proximity of the hydrocarbons".



I think the word "spark" is poorly chosen, ... since it is suggesstive of an electrical-spark ignition, ... which is a bit of a different thing than one where the high ignition-temperature is induced by increased pressure. I find the use of "electrical" terminology confusing.



Also, we have a "chicken egg" presentation to consider: Heat causes accelerated electrons - after which these "accelerated electrons" cause heat(ignition)?



Increased heat energy does "accelerate" electrons,... this is classic chemistry.



But increased electron activity is the RESULT, not the CAUSE of heat (It may however, be the agent of a more rapid "transfer" of heat energy, to adjacent molecules in the mix, which could accomplish the "enhancement" of combustion during the stroke). I believe this last section could be stated more clearly,... and should be re-written.



But the concept seems reasonable, and the claim may be true,... even if imperfectly explained.



I'm eager to hear more, when this relatively new/small private company is able to widen distribution of their product.



If there is a reasonable expectation of results, the cost of a trial is negligible, compared to what we are paying to fill the numerous tanks a small quantity could "treat".



Further comment/correction always welcome.

 

[JFaughn]

It sounds like the same use of propane or hydrogen ?

 

[JWhitman]

I am presently waiting for some of this to arrive so I can give it a shot. I will report back on how it seems to be working.



Jason

 

[Wolfy]

I am presently waiting for some of this to arrive so I can give it a shot. I will report back on how it seems to be working.



Jason

Hi Jason,



It will be good to hear your report.



Hopefully you will have a chance to get a real fix on your mpg before it arrives, so any apparent measured increase will be accurate.



Can you tell us your source for the product? They told me that there is only one outfit currently negotiating with them for becoming a dealer in my area, and I haven't had a chance to talk with them yet.



Thanks,

 

[GShelton]

Wolfy, are you sure you are not an engineer/chemist/physicist?



George

 

[Wolfy]

Wolfy, are you sure you are not an engineer/chemist/physicist?



George

LOL!



Nah,... I only play them on T-V.



(Only fakin' it till a real one shows up. 37 years as a firefighter includes a class or two on combustion. )

 

[JWhitman]

Hi Wolfy,



Even thought the process has been painful, I have got a very accurate fix on my mpg at this point. By the way, my source was via CMH's web site. We would be hard pressed to have a distibutor out here in the boonies where I am



Jason

 

[betterthanstock]

Usually only about half of the hydrocarbons in fuel are burned in an internal combustion engine.

Say what? The EPA allows HC (hydrocarbon emissions, and soot and CO and NOx) only in the parts per million. That means that 99. 99999% gets burned.



Now, if half your cylinders are misfiring, that's a different story. Smoke, cough, cough, smoke, big cloud of smoke...



Probably some uneducated redneck that confuses thermal efficiency of an engine, with unburned fuel. The fuel burns all right, but most of it goes into heat out the tailpipe and into the radiator. Only about a third of the hydrocarbons' energy makes it to the crankshaft, and even less out to the wheels. But improving the completeness of the combustion is not possible. Improving the timing, decreasing heat transfer into the radiator, and out the tailpipe, that is possible, but there are EPA mandated reasons for why things are as inefficient as they are, compared to the older engines.

The third component of ignition is accomplished due to the thermo-electric and Piezo-electric properties of the calcium in CA40.

Is he putting limestone into your fuel? Or is it baking soda?