This was quite interesting to see visually...
Water in the fuel additive testing - Project Farm
- Thread starter StevieC
- Start date
- Status
It appears all three are garbage.
Originally Posted by demarpaint
It appears all three are garbage.
Yup.
It appears all three are garbage.
Yup.
Whipcitywrencher
Site Donor 2025
Thanks for the video!
I've bought heet before, (no more).
I've bought heet before, (no more).
Seems like a lot of water. I don't think that's the sort of volume of water that is intended to be handled by the products relative to the volume of fuel.
Not sure the test is really valid.
What would be more interesting is to see how much water untreated fuel will take before undergoing phase separation and then performing the same test on each of the additives.
Do they improve the resistance to PS and if so, by how much or for how much added water?
Adding 5-10% water relative to fuel volume seems to be a pretty extreme case and I'm not sure any treatment will address that sort of contamination.
Not sure the test is really valid.
What would be more interesting is to see how much water untreated fuel will take before undergoing phase separation and then performing the same test on each of the additives.
Do they improve the resistance to PS and if so, by how much or for how much added water?
Adding 5-10% water relative to fuel volume seems to be a pretty extreme case and I'm not sure any treatment will address that sort of contamination.
Yeah but he did try 64x the dose with one of them and it still didn't work out.
I think javacontour is spot on. The alcohol in E10 will absorb a certain amount of water before phase separation occurs. These products might increase the amount of water absorbed by a very tiny fraction. According to a discussion I had with a tech at Stabil a few years ago, no product can completely prevent phase separation.
Plus, would you really want to send all that emulsified water through your fuel injectors? When I studied fuel additives for my workplace John Deere tractors, the literature implied there were 2 kinds of water "handling". One type would emulsify the water and send it through the injectors to be burned - bad according to JD. The other type would cause the water to be pulled out and settle in the fuel filter to be drained out manually. Maybe gasoline injectors are different, but still it seems bad to send a lot of crap through them.
Plus, would you really want to send all that emulsified water through your fuel injectors? When I studied fuel additives for my workplace John Deere tractors, the literature implied there were 2 kinds of water "handling". One type would emulsify the water and send it through the injectors to be burned - bad according to JD. The other type would cause the water to be pulled out and settle in the fuel filter to be drained out manually. Maybe gasoline injectors are different, but still it seems bad to send a lot of crap through them.
I noticed that the first run with the generator had just a tiny bit of good gas in the tank before the test gas was added.
The 2nd and 3rd runs had much more good gas in the generator's fuel tank before the test gases were added.
The 2nd and 3rd runs had much more good gas in the generator's fuel tank before the test gases were added.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
