Kronik

iTrader: (3)

Ya know I was super skeptical when I heard this too. I read all the data, saw the testimonies and I thought "this is too good to be true." But I trusted my friend who introduced this to me and what I found is this stuff really works. They have a money back guarantee so I figured what the hell right??

The only way you are going to truly know is if you put it in your tank. heck I can upload a picture I just took the other day -- my evo gets 100 miles per quarter tank now. And it's modified!

Hey it's your car if you want to try it or not -- but if you enjoy paying for high gas prices then maybe this isn't for you. but anything that PAYS ME to use it -- I'm all for it. 90+ miles for 4 bucks?? it's a no brainer man!

i bought mine from this site: http://howtosavegas.mysyntek.com (i think that's what you asked??)

mirkendargen

iTrader: (2)

You talk about loving your cooler EGT temps, but thinking ethanol in gas is a terrible idea? Ethanol in your gas is about the best thing you can have in a tunable turbocharged vehicle, the more of it the better.

And if it really works by more completely burning fuel, the AFR in your exhaust will most definitely be different. Unless you're saying you have a constant flamethrower out your exhaust and that's how you're burning all that fuel without it

Kronik

iTrader: (3)

Nah no flame thrower -- never understood that one. I did have my IC pipe blow off while I was on the track at full boost once (26 lbs) -- THAT produced a flame thrower out the back of the car. Still have the burn marks and partially melted bumper too! LOL

But yeah for our cars it's good for lower intake temps and such but have any idea how damaging it is for cars with rubber fuel lines? We aren't the only ones out there -- I was speaking generally. You do make a good point

Iowa999

iTrader: (1)

Given that this stuff is sold via an MLM, one should ask whether the people posting positives have any relationship of any sort with the vendor. Given the discussions of warranties in other threads, one should also ask if adding iron to your fuel could cause issues there, too. Finally, if you have a wide-band, you might want to ask the maker of such if iron deposits will cause the sensor to fail.

Kronik

iTrader: (3)

All great questions! I asked all these as well -- being sold as a MLM is irrelevant to me. Amway sells plenty of products (some of which I use) and they are quality products. This product does not add iron to the fuel. It's a "living" organo-metallic technology. Essentially it will "die" if not consistently added back to the tank. It also does not affect ANY of the sensors around the engine -- o2 sensors or wideband (i have this as well).

Guys this will not hurt your car in any way. The product is relatively inexpensive -- I paid 20 bucks for 4 foil packs (once a week fill up). Getting an additional 80+ miles for $5 is a steal imo. Do yourself a favor and at least check it out -- this company wouldn't have been around for 20 years (selling it commercially for 18 of them) if it caused any issues with ANY type of vehicle. Just trying to share the wealth with those in this thread. I'm saving money using it -- I hope you will too.

Iowa999

iTrader: (1)

I'm sorry, but you don't seem to know what you're talking about. The critical ingredient of XFT is ferrocene, as in one or more organic rings plus iron. "Ferro" is the standard prefix meaning iron. Any molecule name that ends in "ene" has a string or ring of carbons in it. Ferrocene is two pentane rings with an iron atom between them. It's has iron in it.

Also, anything based on a ring or string of carbon atoms is called "organic." That doesn't make it alive. By your use of the term, gasoline is alive.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go drive home before my gas dies.

ps. between you and me, you Syntek folks come across like Scientologists; you gotta take it down a notch or you'll be banned in Germany for being a cult

Iowa999

iTrader: (1)

If you're in the mood to learn how this stuff works, you can start here http://fpc1.com/sci_ferrocene.php and then read the cited studies.

In a nutshell (i.e., for the lazy or overly-trusting [of me]), it works by reducing the amount of free O2 in the exhaust. This "fools" the ECU into thinking that you're running rich, so fuel trims move negative. Thus, you end up running leaner which is known to get better mileage. At the same time, the anti-knock properties keep the flame front from jumping, so the standard problem with running lean is simultaneously prevented.

Buy some and log your LTFTs. You should - in theory (because I ain't about to do this) - see the drift negative over time.

In summary, it's not snake-oil. But sit down and think about how it works and then ask yourself this question: "self, do I want my turbocharged car running leaner than planned?"

ps. I only have college-level training in chemistry (just like I'm not a lawyer, I just play one on the internet), but I can read

mirkendargen

iTrader: (2)

This explains the claimed "no change" in AFR, thanks! And I also concur with your sentiment. Tune your car to run as lean as is safe the right way, rather than augmenting your gas with results that you can't predict or easily change between fillups.

And really, for any kind of driving where mileage is a factor, aren't you running a stoichometric A/F ratio cruising 95% of the time anyway, so leaning the mixture further is just reducing the amount of burning gas (power)? This just means that to maintain your cruising speed, you have to hold the throttle down slightly more to maintain the amount of combustion required. Same amount of fuel burned to maintain the same cruising speed.

The type of tuning to get the most cruising mileage is optimizing timing. That gets you the most power to the wheels for the combustion of a given amount of fuel.

Iowa999

iTrader: (1)

Actually, running above stoich is more efficient for cruising. The problem is that CO and NOx shoot up when you run lean, so it's a no-no from a tree-hugging/planet-cooling point of view.

It'll be funny when the Syntek cultists start failing tail-pipe sniffers because of this stuff. But we digress....

Kronik

iTrader: (3)

[quote=Iowa999;10060057]Actually, running above stoich is more efficient for cruising. The problem is that CO and NOx shoot up when you run lean, so it's a no-no from a tree-hugging/planet-cooling point of view.

It'll be funny when the Syntek cultists start failing tail-pipe sniffers because of this stuff. But we digress....[/quote

You seem like an intelligent guy. I just got some emails from the person who introduced me to it. What's your email? I'd like your take on the data he sent me.

Iowa999

iTrader: (1)

Yes, I think that I am at least half-way intelligent, which would explain why I have no interest in or intention of giving you my email address. Send what you want by PMs or just post it up in this thread.

Note: if what you're planning to send or post isn't in a peer-reviewed journal, save yourself some time and just let it go.

Kronik

iTrader: (3)

alright -- letting it go. Good day.