Thread: Leaded engine additives

I found the test article from Monash uni

LAB TEST OF FUELSTAR
Summary of University of Melbourne Report

These tests have concluded that the Fuelstar petrol catalyst had no significant measurable effect on valve seat recession or knock-limited performance of the engine.
The tests were based on Australian Standard AS4430.1-1996. This Standard is specifically designed for evaluating claims made for devices, processes and additives to enable engine systems designed to operate on 97-98 RON leaded petrol to run with comparable antiknock performance and durability on 91-92 RON unleaded petrol.
The tests consisted of two parts: a cyclic durability test to measure valve recession and an incipient knock-limited spark advance test. They were done on a GMH Commodore engine installed on a test bed and fully instrumented to measure all critical parameters.
New Zealand unleaded 91 octane petrol, certified by BP Oil NZ, was used for all the tests. The Fuelstar PS 120 petrol catalyst was mounted in accordance with instructions supplied by Fuelstar New Zealand.
The test procedure consisted of initially stripping, inspecting and measuring the engine to establish the reference measurements, and mounting the engine on the test bed. After a 20-hour conditioning period (equivalent to about 2,000 km of normal driving) the engine was run over a repeated 30 minute cycle consisting of both high speed and load and idle for a number of hours. At set intervals the inlet and exhaust valve clearances were checked and compared with the performance limit set down in the Standard.
At the end of the durability test, the knock-limited spark advance was measured by running the engine at full load and adjusting the ignition timing until knock just started to occur. This procedure was repeated for speeds from 1,000 to 4,000 rev/min. Both the durability and spark advance tests were carried out with and without the Fuelstar device fitted. Normally the durability test would be run for 50 hours, at which point the exhaust valve recession should not have exceeded 0.25mm. In this case the limit was reached after only 8 hours of running both with and without the Fuelstar device fitted.
There was no significant difference in the valve seat recession with and without the Fuelstar device fitted.
In the Standard test procedure the spark advance test should have been conducted at the end of the 50 hours. However, as it was not possible to reach this point without excessive valve recession, the tests were done at the end of 8 hours. While this may not have been acceptable had the test been required to measure the absolute knock-limited spark advance, due to insufficient time to build up deposits in the combustion chambers, for the purposes of comparison it was considered acceptable. The study found no significant difference between the engine’s spark advance requirement at incipient knock with or without the Fuelstar device fitted.

Originally posted by DEFENDERZOOK

hey........an audible fuel guage!!

And it would be more accurate than the one I've got.

[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]G,day Phoenix.
Well Iwill save you heaps of Dollars and you wont need fuel additives ('cept Flash lube) .

The power loss in most cars is cuased by bad tuning , poor compretion , wrong Dwell angle ' wrong spark plug gap and old worn parts .
So b4 you go spending all that doe on cures that only mask the problem not fix it remember that your old Sarge. here is fully versed in the mysteries of the holden 6 motor and I have all those expencive tools that a Gararge charges the earth for.
Bring old Grover down and Iwill make her sing a much nicer song than she is [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif[/img] .
Will also give you a Sgt.E discount on labour saaaaayyy ..........absolootly
frreeee :wink:

see ya next biv guys [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>it's a catalyst thing that you put inline with your fuel line, and claims to do all kinds of things, but most importaintly increase octane and provide the lubrication that leaded petrol engines need. [/b][/quote]

I thought the very definition of a catalyst was that it supplied nothing to a chemical reaction, so I could maybe accept that it modified the octane (not accepting that it does though) but I fail to see how it could provide a lubricant (additive).

As others have said methinks snake oil (throw a hyclone in your tank to improve the fuels characteristics and jam one in the exhaust to reduce emmisions) [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img] .


Bushie

[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img] [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img] Might have to do that one day joe :wink:

I am staying with the flashlube for now, I'm actually working on the engine mounts once I get the brakes bled in the next couple of nights.

Then the exhaust, and then the overdrive 8)

Originally posted by Phoenix
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img] Might have to do that one day joe :wink:

I am staying with the flashlube for now, I'm actually working on the engine mounts once I get the brakes bled in the next couple of nights.

Then the exhaust, and then the overdrive 8)

And from there the work never ends..... :roll:

Originally posted by Phoenix
I'm actually working on the engine mounts once I get the brakes bled in the next couple of nights.

If it's anything like Rangie brakes, then it will take you a week!!!!

After reading this post I am more confused than before. I bought the landy and the previous fellow used Lucas Lead Replacer. From what I know Lucas is good stuff. Then i saw another Lucas product called Lucas Fuel Treatment.

This add the lead as well as conditioning the fuel. Being a Lucas product they wont market something if it doesnt do the job.

What works best as I am not convinced this "catalyser" thingamabob works.

Lucas or a local lead replacement product ? thats is very good ?

Any advice will be appreciated.

Cheers