Article published in the weekly Auto Plus number 895 of November 1, 2005
This box is part of a more complete article aimed at testing different fuel “economizers” on the market.
If you want to read the full article, you must consult the archives of autoplus.fr to find the number 895. For this, click here.
Our opinion on this article is as follows: "It is quite remarkable that only water doping presents good results in terms of consumption, the other economizers being simply" can "but the test noticed overpollution when slowing down (probably due to the excess of water injected and to the non-optimization of the assembly) "
Analyzes and debates
Some excerpts from forum discussions
In all cases the tests were made on an “amateur” construction… imagine the results on a “real” proto made by the manufacturers…. ?
In addition, we do not know the test protocol followed for depollution ... if this was done at slow speed (maximum suction in the bubbler and minimum temperature in the reactor) it is not surprising to see such results ... inject a large amount of water in an engine will not promote combustion. Quite the contrary.
In addition the pollution test is done in static and probably with engine idle, which does not promote the performance of the pantone ..
It is still super satisfying to see an amateur assembly tested by auto-plus with such good results. For the unburnt, nothing surprising. Between the non-optimization of the engine and the rest, that was to be expected.
Learn more and participate in the debate.
To participate in the discussion about this article (or discuss what has already been said) click here.