Magnetic Fuel Saving Devices - Do they work?

rev_henry

I've just been looking at devices like this:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/NEW-REAL-FUEL-SAVER-MISER-FOR-PETROL-DIESEL-LPG-GAS_W0QQitemZ350279693058QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_CarsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM?hash=item518e4bf302#shId

And this:
http://www.fuelsaver.co.uk/howitworks.html

The physics behind them seems ok; they claim to polarise the fuel molecules, thereby separating them out so they'll combust more readily.
Does anyone know anything about them, and if they work?

And no I don't make/sell them.

kaya

i know that they dont work, and i have that on good authority(from milbrook testing grounds), save your money

E.T.A
if ANY of these fuel saving devices worked they would be sold alongside data from milbrook, testimonials count for nothing

daveyjp

"The physics behind them seems ok"

The physics which states you can magnetise a non metallic liquid?

Tried on Spitfires in WWII - it didn't work then, it won't work now.

Stompa

rev_henry wrote: »

And this:
http://www.fuelsaver.co.uk/howitworks.html

Looks like complete and utter drivel to me.

rev_henry

daveyjp wrote: »

"The physics behind them seems ok"

The physics which states you can magnetise a non metallic liquid?

Tried on Spitfires in WWII - it didn't work then, it won't work now.

I suspected as much, thanks.
Davey isn't octane a polar molecule?

kaya

if they work(or you want convince people they work) then where are the scientific test results?, if i had designed a fuel saving device(which i did) i would go to milbrook testing grounds with it(which i did) and pay the £10,000 required to test the unit(i did, but used investors money) and when i found out it worked(which mine didn't) i would post the indesputable test results on my sales patter to prove to people i was genuine and not a scam artist, where are the results?
there are no results because it doesn't work. £10,000 sounds like a lot of money but a device such as the one you describe would be worth £10,000,000 if it worked(which it doesn't), while i was testing my device at milbrook i asked the company director if he had ever tested any fuel savers that worked in his many, many years of testing for people/companies, he told me of two deevices that had worked, no others worked , one was an engine oil which made a 3% fuel saving, the other was driver training which averaged a 20% fuel serving

http://www.millbrook.co.uk/page.asp?id=24
if its not tested here then its a load of old rubbish

Premier_2

So the ebay device requires the molecules to repel each other (disperse) whilst the prozone one requires a catalyst and is designed to create turbulence in the fuel flow path to "enrich" the fuel.

The fuel doesn't mix with the air in the fuel lines - hopefully there is not much air in the fuel lines for it to mix with! The engine already is designed to optimise the mixture of fuel with air at the appropriate point.

Scientific mumbo jumbo I'm afraid.

My insurance specifically asks whether any modifications have been done to the car that affect performance. The fact the seller states that installing them doesn't affect your insurance quantifies in what way it affects the cars performance. (despite their claims otherwise)

maninthestreet

There is no independant reseatch based evidence to show these devices work as their inventors claim.

st999

Well for the low cost of £3.90 why don't you buy one and fit it to your car then report back in a month or 2 what your savings, if any, were.

Stan

rev_henry

st999 wrote: »

Well for the low cost of £3.90 why don't you buy one and fit it to your car then report back in a month or 2 what your savings, if any, were.

Stan

No its ok thanks, I've heard enough. :P

sebdangerfield

There's been no research into whether the device works but there's been years of research into brownian motion and particle theory that proves the principle behind this sort of thing is based on doesn't work.