# Whats up with clubfrontier.org and the eco fuel systems thing?



## Hackker (Aug 5, 2005)

http://www.ecofuelsystems.com/

Apparently this must be like his biggest sponser or something, as soon as I started asking for any sort of scientific proof that it actually saved gas like it claimed I was labeled a "basher". And then banned. 

I'm sorry, but there are hundreds of things like that - from magnets, to tornados, to the recent gas pills and they all share one thing in common. None have ever proven to actually work. Ever.


----------



## BakedCookies (Sep 18, 2005)

Yeah I read some of that BS over there the other day. They even pushed out a spam message to me all about this great "group buy" Its pretty obvious IMO that the site has been "bought out" by this eco fuel systems garbage in an attempt to push a bogus product.

I wouldnt sweat getting banned, if people are dumb enough to buy "snake oil" then let them.


----------



## 4x4NISMOguy (Nov 17, 2005)

Just don't buy it yourself. And, like you did initially, let people know your objections to it, then let it go. I've learned that if you make it your goal to stop stupid people from doing stupid things you will go nuts. I'd just let them buy it, then bask in it in a couple of months when they're all bitching about wasting $200. But that's just my .02


----------



## inyourface1650 (Oct 6, 2005)

Yeah....I got that email too...


----------



## Hackker (Aug 5, 2005)

4x4NISMOguy said:


> Just don't buy it yourself. And, like you did initially, let people know your objections to it, then let it go. I've learned that if you make it your goal to stop stupid people from doing stupid things you will go nuts. I'd just let them buy it, then bask in it in a couple of months when they're all bitching about wasting $200. But that's just my .02


I wouldn't buy it even with with money back guarantee because who knows IF they would actually take it back like they claim. Or if the place will still be in business.

The fact that the owner of the site appears to be hyping what can only be called a SCAM product is what kept me replying. Well that and their stupid replys - ie: we can't scientifically test it because it'll give away the secret. Yeah, the secret is probably that you sell people a $5 metal tube for $200-300 that does exactly ZERO for the car.

I also find it interesting that the FTC seems to require people to back up their fuel savings claims with "competent and reliable scientific evidence may violate the FTC Act.". Stange, I didn't see anything like that on the site. Wonder why? 

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/04/energysurfletter.htm


----------



## neicedover1982 (Jan 27, 2006)

I had seen more and more of posts claiming how great that product was and just ignored them. I know they are stupid and have no positive affect and thats all that matters.


----------



## Hackker (Aug 5, 2005)

neicedover1982 said:


> I had seen more and more of posts claiming how great that product was and just ignored them. I know they are stupid and have no positive affect and thats all that matters.


I think that part of it is that people (especially car guys) don't want to admit they were taken for $200 on a hokey tube that doesn't do anything. Or maybe they slightly change their driving habits and see a very slight increase in MPG. 

Does anyone with a brain really think that gas flowing through a tube will actually do this...

*When the fuel passes through the unit it creates a catalytic reaction, breaking up the hydro carbon chains in the fuel, causing the vapor pressure to increase. This increase in vapor pressure causes the fuel to burn more completely in the combustion chamber.*


----------



## Gerald (May 23, 2005)

I got the same email. I do not feel like this thing will do what they say and do not plan on buying one. It is probably like the pharmacy tests where they give some people the 
drug and others a placebo. Amazingly a lot of times the placebo makes the people feel better.

It is in our minds, if we think we are saving gas then we are. I know my butt dyno does
not work near as well as others. I keep doing modifications that are supposed to increase my hp and I don't feel a thing while others can feel the increases.

I am sure if there was a gain in fuel mileage I would not be smart enough to know it.
Heck no more than I drive my truck I would never recoup the cost of the device anyway.

OkieScot


----------



## avenger (Oct 7, 2005)

it doesn't work, it's just more tornado/magnet/other BS... tell those fools to have fun paying 200 bucks for a worthless item.

have the mythbusters prove it wrong


----------



## scuba91ta (Aug 19, 2005)

they already did.... it no worky...


----------



## smokeydadog (May 30, 2005)

The fact that they sent out the spam email made me suspicious right off the bat. Like one guy said, $20 for a grounding kit is worth a try. Just about anyone can take a $20 hit without losing the farm. $200 is a different story, though. Besides, I'm really afraid the device could interfere with my warp core reactor I installed last week. Man, that thing is great! I get 300 miles per dilithium crystal!


----------



## Franko Manini (Nov 22, 2005)

With all the pressure on car manufacturers to increase their overall corporate fuel efficiency, if something like this truly worked, the manufactures would give the guy a couple of million bucks and it would be on EVERY vehicle.

Who cares about getting benned from that site. We should all ban clubfrontier.org for putting that crap on their site and letting him spam us.


----------



## Centurion (Sep 5, 2002)

I read just parts of that thread and I was absolutely astonished that people were (literally) buying into it. Back in the 70s those types of "miracle" fuel savers were around too. But now we have the innernets so it must be true, right!?


----------



## Hackker (Aug 5, 2005)

Franko Manini said:


> With all the pressure on car manufacturers to increase their overall corporate fuel efficiency, if something like this truly worked, the manufactures would give the guy a couple of million bucks and it would be on EVERY vehicle.
> 
> Who cares about getting benned from that site. We should all ban clubfrontier.org for putting that crap on their site and letting him spam us.


Exactly. Does anyone honestly think that some random dude invented some miracle device that can somehow net a huge gas savings? And that companies like GM, Ford, Honda, and Toyota never did something similar? 

If that thing worked as advertised, every truck sold in the US would have one installed at the factory...


----------



## FuzzyRag (Jul 13, 2005)

I refuse to buy anything rated from that website after the throttle body spacer is raved about so much. Despite him admitting that the difference could not be shown on a dyno likely, he insists it improved the power of the truck.


----------



## Franko Manini (Nov 22, 2005)

This statement is patently untrue:

*When the fuel passes through the unit it creates a catalytic reaction, breaking up the hydro carbon chains in the fuel, causing the vapor pressure to increase. This increase in vapor pressure causes the fuel to burn more completely in the combustion chamber.*

I spent 8 years at university studying long chain hydrocarbons and aliphatics. If there was a catalyst that broke up hydrocarbon chains I'd be a gagillionaire... and I'm not. Furthermore, it takes ENERGY to break a bond, called the bond dissociation energy, so if the molecule of fuel is broken down prior to combustion, you're actually REMOVING some energy from the molecule before it's consumed as fuel.

It is true that shorter hydrocarbon chains will produce a solution with a higher vapour pressure, thereby increasing its volitility (i.e. making it evaporate more easily), but this is no benefit to combustion in a pressurized container, i.e. a CYLINDER under 8-10:1 compression.

The energy lost during the bond dissociation would GREATLY reduce the fuel's performance. In the case of pure octane (i.e. gasoline with an octane rating of 100) breaking just one bond would reduce the chemical energy of the fuel by 14.3%.

So this simply cannot be true.


----------



## FuzzyRag (Jul 13, 2005)

Popular Science did an article on a invention some guy patented, its a box added to your vehicle that replaces most of the oxygen in the combustion process with carbon dioxide. It supposedly increased mpg by around 40% and fuel efficency by 50% for large SUV. The pricing made more sense too if it really works, around $1000 for SUVs.


----------



## avenger (Oct 7, 2005)

Franko Manini said:


> This statement is patently untrue:
> 
> *When the fuel passes through the unit it creates a catalytic reaction, breaking up the hydro carbon chains in the fuel, causing the vapor pressure to increase. This increase in vapor pressure causes the fuel to burn more completely in the combustion chamber.*
> 
> ...


but what does science tell us about real world savings???




:crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: 

j/k


----------



## smokeydadog (May 30, 2005)

FuzzyRag said:


> I refuse to buy anything rated from that website after the throttle body spacer is raved about so much. Despite him admitting that the difference could not be shown on a dyno likely, he insists it improved the power of the truck.


My last car weighed 2900 pounds. I swapped out the ECU and gained 10 HP/10 TQ at the wheel. I'm just an average joe, not a race car driver trying to shave a few tenths off my lap times. I could not feel the extra power in my butt dyno after adding the chip or the loss after removing it right before I traded the car. I don't believe anyone who says they can feel a 4 or 5 HP increase in a 4000+ pound truck. Not unless their employer is Nascar.


----------



## MrFancypants (Nov 18, 2005)

smokeydadog said:


> My last car weighed 2900 pounds. I swapped out the ECU and gained 10 HP/10 TQ at the wheel. I'm just an average joe, not a race car driver trying to shave a few tenths off my lap times. I could not feel the extra power in my butt dyno after adding the chip or the loss after removing it right before I traded the car. I don't believe anyone who says they can feel a 4 or 5 HP increase in a 4000+ pound truck. Not unless their employer is Nascar.


Agreed. The really interesting thing is that everyone always talks peak hp/tq gains, they never talk total area under the curve. Sure the TBS probably adds low end oomph... he lengthened the intake runners so it stands to reason. However, longer intake runners will cost you top end hp. Did he feel it? Probably not enough to point out, especially when compared to the low end (although even that is HIGHLY subjective). If you put it on the dyno you'd know for sure.

The thing that really bugs me about the TBS is how they claim the "vortex machining" or whatever such bullshit apparently gets you better fuel mixture and a better burn. Hello... anybody heard of the Tornado?? Yeah, it's snake oil.


- Greg -


----------



## Hackker (Aug 5, 2005)

This post at clubfrontier regarding me is just plain funny (and sad).

*What is the motivation of hackker's and CT_Nismo's protests?

Do they have some vested interest in stopping the sale of the ECO units?

Are they in the employ of Big Oil?

Maybe a competitor of ECO System's?

To go to such lengths to bash a product that was mearly offered at a discounted price baffles me? *

For the record, I don't work for Big Oil and unless I suddenly start selling gas pills to RIP PEOPLE OFF, I'm not a competitor either. 

To the person that wrote that (since they seem to read this forum), I'm pointing out something that DOES NOT WORK. And will NEVER work. Its a scam of a product clear and simple.


----------



## smokeydadog (May 30, 2005)

I guess the bottom line is subjective proof. Test your stuff on a dyno, the quarter, whatever...but prove it. CT_Nismo (I think that's his name) asked the right questions, and I never heard a good answer.


----------



## Hackker (Aug 5, 2005)

smokeydadog said:


> I guess the bottom line is subjective proof. Test your stuff on a dyno, the quarter, whatever...but prove it. CT_Nismo (I think that's his name) asked the right questions, and I never heard a good answer.


You won't ever see valid proof. Someone will slap the thing on, possible drive a bit different, then go - "wow, my MPG went up by .3!". 

Whats funny is that in the past fillup with the warmer weather I noticed a .5 MPG improvement, wonder if I should claim that was the result of installing a different child seat in the back. haha

And anytime I tried to ask for scientific proof, I was told that he couldn't do that because it would give away their secret. I'd assume that if it was such a great secret, he would be trying to patent it now. Is he?


----------



## smokeydadog (May 30, 2005)

I meant OBJECTIVE proof in my earlier post. Doh! Don't post when you've been drinking. 

So I'm wondering...if you put a device in your fuel line that actually cut down on the flow, could this produce a 2 or 3 mpg gain? Of course you'd lose some power, but would it be noticeable to the average driver?


----------



## Hackker (Aug 5, 2005)

smokeydadog said:


> I meant OBJECTIVE proof in my earlier post. Doh! Don't post when you've been drinking.
> 
> So I'm wondering...if you put a device in your fuel line that actually cut down on the flow, could this produce a 2 or 3 mpg gain? Of course you'd lose some power, but would it be noticeable to the average driver?


Yeah, you would also lean out the fuel/air mixture and blow the engine.  

Someone could test that theory by taking a pair of plyers and crimping down their fuel line. haha


----------



## smokeydadog (May 30, 2005)

That's impossible. Don't you know VQ engines are indestructible? Ha ha...but I see what you're saying. I'm just trying to think if there's any possible way to reduce fuel consumption with that kind of device, even if it has bad side effects. What I can't figure out is all the guys who claim they're getting better mileage. It's hard to believe that the placebo effect is good for a 2-3 mpg increase. Out of the 30 or more tanks I've measured in my own truck, only one has been out of the 19-22 mpg range. And even then, it was only off by .2 mpg. I've tried different driving techniques such as granny driving for one tank and then hammering the truck on the next tank, but it's still consistent. I'm actually pretty amazed at how little it varies. I know one thing, though--if my gas mileage consistently goes up or down by 2 mpg or more, you can be darn sure I'm going to notice it.


----------



## NISMO CC 4X4 (Feb 1, 2006)

I agree, I think I would notice any difference greater than 0.5 MPG...my mileage has been 16.0 to 16.3 MPG for the past 3 months...hasn't enough time elapsed to indicate thumbs up or down?


----------



## Gerald (May 23, 2005)

I am confused now, years ago I was a dispatcher for a large trucking company and some of the drivers would carry visegrips along to pinch the fuel lines. They did this to increase the fuel pressure which in turn let them run faster. The company frowned on this policy.

OkieScot


----------



## FuzzyRag (Jul 13, 2005)

Gerald said:


> I am confused now, years ago I was a dispatcher for a large trucking company and some of the drivers would carry visegrips along to pinch the fuel lines. They did this to increase the fuel pressure which in turn let them run faster. The company frowned on this policy.
> 
> OkieScot


I could see it increasing fuel pressure in the lines, but I'd bet on it leaning out the motor a bit, causing strain on it. The company likely would frown on a damaged motor =P


----------



## DrRowdy (Jun 2, 2006)

hey Frank and hackker, 

Out of sheer amusement value I've taken up the 'good fight' on club frontier... It's damn good fun.... ecosystems dude gets angrier and angrier ever passing post!... 

I also have a background in catalysis (a few years ago now).. Room temp catalysis of HC bond scission is a fantasy!!.. We were going the other way CO+ H2 -> HC. It works (cobalt & praseodymium adsorbed onto silica) but only at 500 + degrees!.. Some copper plates at ambient any going to do shit!.. Surely the oil companies can't have wasted all this money of fractionation columns and cracking at high temp, when all you need is a tube filled with copper plates!... 

The only way this workto reduce fuel consumption is by fuel pressure reduction due to restriction in the fuel line. Noticably one of the fronty guys reckons his car is pinging under load now.......

The truck guys used to clamp off tank return lines to increase fuel pressure to improve performance. Modd'd turbo powered car drivers often get adjustable fuel pressure regs to increase fueling when they increase boost on their cars. ECU remaps are a far better option IMHO!.. 

Rowds


----------



## FuzzyRag (Jul 13, 2005)

Thanks for explaining the fuel pressure lines better than I could =)


----------



## Hackker (Aug 5, 2005)

DrRowdy said:


> hey Frank and hackker,
> 
> Out of sheer amusement value I've taken up the 'good fight' on club frontier... It's damn good fun.... ecosystems dude gets angrier and angrier ever passing post!...
> 
> ...


haha - cool. Wonder if they will ban you now for asking too many questions.  

The only way I could see it work was to alter the A/F curve by possibly restricting fuel flow, as far as I could see thats the ONLY thing the device would do. I should send the info to Nissan and ask them if it'll void my warranty. 

I still can't believe he sticks with the claim that it causes a catalytic reaction & breakings up the hydro carbon chains in the fuel. Right....


----------



## Markcuda (Apr 24, 2006)

May be we all can get these contraptions for free, just so we shut up:banhump:


----------



## scuba91ta (Aug 19, 2005)

personally i'd just like to see some tuning software come out for these ecm's so i can play int here...


----------



## MrFancypants (Nov 18, 2005)

Check the thread I posted something you may find interesting.

Thanks for getting me fired up, Rowdy... I was just going to walk away and shake my head but you got me curious enough to email Popular Mechanics 

I too laughed when I read the comment about pinging. I am wondering when Ben will reveal that he has figured out cold fusion too. But of course he wont tell us how he did it.


- Greg -


----------



## smokeydadog (May 30, 2005)

Emailing Popular Mechanics was a great idea. I'd love to see them do an independent review of the fuel stopper...er, I mean filter.

One of us should email Nissan and see if this device will void the warranty, especially in regards to engine problems. I think I know what they'll say...


----------



## Mylt1 (May 10, 2006)

i had to post up on this over there. what a fraud. my first post will probably get me banned for starting trouble.lol


----------



## Hackker (Aug 5, 2005)

smokeydadog said:


> Emailing Popular Mechanics was a great idea. I'd love to see them do an independent review of the fuel stopper...er, I mean filter.
> 
> One of us should email Nissan and see if this device will void the warranty, especially in regards to engine problems. I think I know what they'll say...


I e-mailed Nissan to see if this device would void my warranty. Wonder what they will say.


----------



## inyourface1650 (Oct 6, 2005)

I asked my dad, who was the General Manager of NTCNA (NIssan Test Center North America) Test Track (also known as ATC) down in Stanfield, Arizona. He said it was crap, and that they worked damn hard to get the fuel economy of the Fronty where it is, and a simple little trick like that they would have already implemented if they could have.


----------



## DrRowdy (Jun 2, 2006)

Hackker said:


> haha - cool. Wonder if they will ban you now for asking too many questions.
> 
> The only way I could see it work was to alter the A/F curve by possibly restricting fuel flow, as far as I could see thats the ONLY thing the device would do. I should send the info to Nissan and ask them if it'll void my warranty.


Probably will ban me- do I care... hell no!, It's the interweb.... meh.... I'm now in trouble for 'wasting bandwidth' because I find the situation amusing enough to post over hear and keep my sense of humour about it!... OMG!1oneeleven1!!!  someone can keep a cool head!... 

Nice work with the Nissan email too Hackker!

I'd also be interested as to what the EPA say over there. Usually here interfering at all with the factory induction/fueling/ emissions systems in a non certified way, if you get caught, lands you with a big fine. Run no catalytic converter= 10000 AUD... straight up... 

the interesting thing about all that is now he's claiming that because they've monitored A/F ratio under closed loop conditions it's not changing the A/F ratio- hence no reduction in fuel pressure- hence it must be a catalytic reaction! I'll bet that's because under closed loop the ECU is compensating for reduced fuel pressure and increasing injector pulse width and perhaps pulling back ignition timing to prevent pinging. Under open loop- acceleration and high load, it can't do this- it goes of the maps in the ECU, and hence I reckon that's pinging under load, and not showing up anywhere else!!

MrFancyPants- I left well enough alone for weeks, then one day at work I just couldn't resist reading through their website, then I went Oh hang on, I can drive a truck through the holes in their testing protocols and data; I've gotta say something.... it's certainly beats the numer crunching I'm doing for a couple of reports at work right now!... 

Mylt1- nice work BTW!!!.. 

Rowds


----------



## MrFancypants (Nov 18, 2005)

inyourface1650 said:


> I asked my dad, who was the General Manager of NTCNA (NIssan Test Center North America) Test Track (also known as ATC) down in Stanfield, Arizona.


Hey man... can your dad get me a job? Project Management is fun and all, but I'd much rather drift cars on the test track for a living 

Hush everyone I asked first!! :cheers:


- Greg -


----------



## inyourface1650 (Oct 6, 2005)

hehe, Sure, I think starting pay for a durability driver is $7.50 an hour 
Its actually really strict over there. There are only 6 drivers in Nissan as a whole that can drive skylines at their top speed. I think my dad was only allowed to go 90 on the track, because he had a level C driving clearence...

CT_Nismo, I like your last post over at clubfrontier on the subject, its well put together...


----------



## MrFancypants (Nov 18, 2005)

inyourface1650 said:


> hehe, Sure, I think starting pay for a durability driver is $7.50 an hour
> 
> CT_Nismo, I like your last post over at clubfrontier on the subject, its well put together...



Sounds more like the guys that drive cross country than performance track driving! Ok Im not interested anymore 

Oh well there's still hope for me... I need to get a resume together for the Porsche final test driver in Germany... Now there's a tough job that surely pays well into the 6 figures.


- Greg -


----------



## DrRowdy (Jun 2, 2006)

MrFancyPants- I think you'll have to wait til Walter Rohrl dies before that gig comes up at Porsche..... I can't see him retiring and he's sooo the man.....

the otheruber gig is to take over from Dario at Ferrari... he's their road test/evaluation guy... awesome driver also.. 

I'd love to do that kind of work too. I'd go teach advanced driving if I could get a job doing it. I've know a guy who's job it is to teach people how to drive on racetracks. 

Rowds


----------



## MrFancypants (Nov 18, 2005)

Damn... you know their names so you'd probably edge me out in the interview process. I better start researching their personal lives and take up all their hobbies to get a leg up on you.

Screw it, now the dream job just became work 


- Greg -


----------



## FuzzyRag (Jul 13, 2005)

Might as well give up on them guys, its become a mud slinger there now. You tried to help, look at it that way =)


----------



## ZacUSNYR (Jun 5, 2006)

In my google search I came across that site first and saw that and thought "these dudes are crazy".

Glad i'm not the only one who shares that opinion.


----------



## Markcuda (Apr 24, 2006)

What, I'm shocked, you are still a non believer even after sientific(sp) proof that it saves you money?:fluffy: :wtf: :cheers:


----------

