Originally Posted By: joaks
There is a good mythbusters on it.
What did they prove?
There is a good mythbusters on it.
What did they prove?
Mothballs in the fuel tank
- Thread starter JHZR2
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: joaks
There is a good mythbusters on it.
What did they prove?
They were probably too busy mindlessly blowing things up to prove anything remotely scientific.
Originally Posted By: joaks
There is a good mythbusters on it.
What did they prove?
They were probably too busy mindlessly blowing things up to prove anything remotely scientific.
Originally Posted By: scurvy
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: joaks
There is a good mythbusters on it.
What did they prove?
They were probably too busy mindlessly blowing things up to prove anything remotely scientific.
Sounds like someone has their haterpants on.
It doesn't look like they really put it to the test, but here's a more helpful answer:
http://mythbustersresults.com/episode15
"
Adding mothballs to the fuel tank of a car will increase its horsepower.
Plausible
The engine still started, but it soon started spluttering. When Jamie pressed the accelerator, the engine sounded more powerful.
"
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: joaks
There is a good mythbusters on it.
What did they prove?
They were probably too busy mindlessly blowing things up to prove anything remotely scientific.
Sounds like someone has their haterpants on.
It doesn't look like they really put it to the test, but here's a more helpful answer:
http://mythbustersresults.com/episode15
"
Adding mothballs to the fuel tank of a car will increase its horsepower.
Plausible
The engine still started, but it soon started spluttering. When Jamie pressed the accelerator, the engine sounded more powerful.
"
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: PZR2874
CRAZY!!!
Why?
Theyre 99.95% purity of a component already in the fuel in some quantity.
CRAZY!!!
Why?
Theyre 99.95% purity of a component already in the fuel in some quantity.
Originally Posted By: martinq
Sounds like someone has their haterpants on.
Quite the opposite. I've enjoyed their show for years and frankly glad that they've dropped the thin guise of 'science' and are focusing more on 'entertainment'.
Their test methods were/are laughably bad... summed up quite nicely by this:
Originally Posted By: Mythbusters via martinq
The engine still started, but it soon started spluttering. When Jamie pressed the accelerator, the engine sounded more powerful.
How many more hp-dB did it generate?
Those guys are every bit as good at determining if mothballs are an effective fuel additive as the folks on here who swear that oil X makes their car much more powerful/smooth/quiet than oil Y of the same type & viscosity. Remember, folks, your butt-dyno has, ah, merde for brains.
Seriously, there must be a bay area chassis dyno that would give them a day on the rollers in exchange for some free advertising. Hook up external fuel sources and do back-to-back A/B tests.
But all they did was rev it up and remark about how it 'sounded' more powerful. Give me a break...
Sounds like someone has their haterpants on.
Quite the opposite. I've enjoyed their show for years and frankly glad that they've dropped the thin guise of 'science' and are focusing more on 'entertainment'.
Their test methods were/are laughably bad... summed up quite nicely by this:
Originally Posted By: Mythbusters via martinq
The engine still started, but it soon started spluttering. When Jamie pressed the accelerator, the engine sounded more powerful.
How many more hp-dB did it generate?
Those guys are every bit as good at determining if mothballs are an effective fuel additive as the folks on here who swear that oil X makes their car much more powerful/smooth/quiet than oil Y of the same type & viscosity. Remember, folks, your butt-dyno has, ah, merde for brains.
Seriously, there must be a bay area chassis dyno that would give them a day on the rollers in exchange for some free advertising. Hook up external fuel sources and do back-to-back A/B tests.
But all they did was rev it up and remark about how it 'sounded' more powerful. Give me a break...
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: PZR2874
CRAZY!!!
Why?
Theyre 99.95% purity of a component already in the fuel in some quantity.
Just....
People always looking for ways to do this and better ways to do that.... That's all.
Originally Posted By: PZR2874
CRAZY!!!
Why?
Theyre 99.95% purity of a component already in the fuel in some quantity.
Just....
People always looking for ways to do this and better ways to do that.... That's all.
Originally Posted By: Turk
HA - You REALLY brought back memories!!
I watched my friend put in 1 Moth Ball per Gallon of gas in his '68 GTO back in 1977.
So I did it in my '71 Galaxie 500, 400CI, low speed rear-end.
Then I put them in my '72 Cutlass Supreme as well!
Yeah, this was an old fad I bought into. Never was any provable results, but if you really believed it was better...
HA - You REALLY brought back memories!!
I watched my friend put in 1 Moth Ball per Gallon of gas in his '68 GTO back in 1977.
So I did it in my '71 Galaxie 500, 400CI, low speed rear-end.
Then I put them in my '72 Cutlass Supreme as well!
Yeah, this was an old fad I bought into. Never was any provable results, but if you really believed it was better...
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
