Money Saving Device for Vehicle Users

Discussion in 'General Business Forum' started by Awinner2, Aug 27, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Awinner2

    Awinner2 UKBF Regular Free Member

    340 64
    I was reading the DM online this week and an article caught my eye. About an ex Royal Navy engineer who, from his experience with submarine oxygen generation, has developed working and tested units that will improve the engine burn and cut emissions, which result in fuel savings for vehicles from cars, small and large vans right up to HGV and coaches. I have no personal knowledge of these units but had a good look at their website and the information there looks sound?
    Having run a fleet of cars, vans and trucks for my refrigeration company in years past, I thought others might want to investigate for themselves.

    The site is cgon dot co dot uk I would be interested to hear peoples views?
     
    Posted: Aug 27, 2017 By: Awinner2 Member since: Aug 4, 2017
    #1
  2. Mitch3473

    Mitch3473 UKBF Regular Free Member

    1,012 236
    It's all been done before. Now if some qualified technican would call round and fit a good old fashion magnet to my fuel line I'll be willing pay lots of money.
     
    Posted: Aug 27, 2017 By: Mitch3473 Member since: Aug 25, 2011
    #2
  3. Mark T Jones

    Mark T Jones UKBF Big Shot Full Member

    3,170 917
    SYou molar,y, I have no technical expertise. But I do remember back in the mid '80s there was a big push on selling some device that apparently remagnetised particles (or something). Thereby improoving performance, efficiency and your chances of filling

    Perhaps it's failure was just down to the way it was sold as an MLM scam, perhaps it was just a plus if crap, but seioysly, this is what tjey are competing against.
     
    Posted: Aug 27, 2017 By: Mark T Jones Member since: Nov 4, 2015
    #3
  4. Dimo

    Dimo UKBF Regular Free Member

    105 18
    There are customer testimonials on the website but I'm questioning why there's no scientific analysis under strict test conditions. I'm no more convinced by Cgon at present any more than I was years back when offered some magnetic device to attach to my car engine to improve fuel economy. No evidence for that one either.
     
    Posted: Aug 27, 2017 By: Dimo Member since: Jul 23, 2007
    #4
  5. Mitch3473

    Mitch3473 UKBF Regular Free Member

    1,012 236
    We can all get customer testimonials.......
     
    Posted: Aug 27, 2017 By: Mitch3473 Member since: Aug 25, 2011
    #5
  6. Awinner2

    Awinner2 UKBF Regular Free Member

    340 64
    Regarding authentic test results, I found this on their "News" page

    "CGON Ltd teamed up with Morgan Motor Company some months ago and has successfully trialled CGON’s ezero1 product in Morgan’s flagship 8 cylinder vehicles; this engine has seen significant improvements in emission levels along with increased fuel efficiency.

    The product itself has been successfully laboratory tested by the approved Government testing facility Millbrook; also in real road conditions by leading independent testing providers Emissions Analytics, establishing emission reducing capabilities for all emissions including the extremely hard to reduce ultra-fine particles by up to 80%; these life threatening particles have previously evaded all reduction attempts."

    Remembering that ALL manufacturers will have to publish real road test results from 1.9.17 to avoid the scandals that VW and others faced by allowing them to manipulate results and "self certify" false information to dupe customers.
     
    Posted: Aug 28, 2017 By: Awinner2 Member since: Aug 4, 2017
    #6
  7. fisicx

    fisicx It's Major Clanger! Staff Member

    30,385 8,926
    So have you brought one for your car?
     
    Posted: Aug 28, 2017 By: fisicx Member since: Sep 12, 2006
    #7
  8. Awinner2

    Awinner2 UKBF Regular Free Member

    340 64
    Seriously considering it when I change mine later in year. No point spending money until then!
     
    Posted: Aug 28, 2017 By: Awinner2 Member since: Aug 4, 2017
    #8
  9. The Byre

    The Byre UKBF Ace Free Member

    8,645 3,357
    The difference here, compared to all the other idiotic ideas and bogus devises, such as magnets, adding tiny amounts of water to the air intake and adding magic formulae to the fuel, is the two words Emissions Analytics.

    This is a respected company with deep resources in vehicle testing. I trust their results. Unfortunately, CGON do not give much information on their results from E.A.

    I have not researched this device, but my wild guess is that it will perform well on old and grotty engines, but fail to make much improvement, if any, on a modern and already highly efficient and clean engine. There is also the danger that all certification of the vehicle can become null and void and thereby invalidate registration, insurance, guarantees, etc.

    Manufacturers do not like to put 'foreign' technology into their cars and each tries to develop their own in-house methods of cleaning the exhaust. For that reason, any additions or alterations to the fuel input, even adding a bogus fuel additive or a magnet to the fuel line, will invalidate the guarantee.

    So I suppose, for under £500, it would be worthwhile experimenting with this device on an old banger that was going to fail its MOT on emissions anyway, but as only E.A. has the sophisticated test equipment and know-how in the UK to verify any improvements in detail, you would never know if anything worthwhile had happened!

    CGON have only tested one car with E.A., the two litre Jaguar Diesel and that is hardly a high-tech, low emissions vehicle. The improvements were notable, except MPG, which gave just 6% improvement. I would be interested to see what, if anything, happens to a high-tech vehicle with particulate filters, such as the VW Blue-Motion or Mercedes Blue Efficiency series.

    The other three cars on their 'results' web-page are old bangers with low-tech and very dirty Diesel engines from Renault and the results are from the old VOSA smoke tests that no longer exist. The improvements in consumption can be taken with a bucket of salt, as they are customer comments only. My experience, is that if people hear that something magic has happened to their car and they believe you, they immediately get far better MPG figures, when in reality, they are just driving more carefully!
     
    Posted: Aug 28, 2017 By: The Byre Member since: Aug 13, 2013
    #9
  10. webgeek

    webgeek UKBF Big Shot Full Member - Verified Business

    4,029 1,475
    Funny, the only patent they've filed in the past 10 years deals with electrolyte concentration monitoring - hardly a cure-all for internal combustion everything.

    Sounds too much like the guys that made naptha + water a great combustion solution, doubling fuel economy, yata yata.

    Sure, if you can atomise the fuel into more fine particles, you'll get better combustion efficiency/economy/less pollution. But for that, you either need improved carb jets or injectors - not a 500 quid bolt on device that comes before the carb/injectors.
     
    Posted: Aug 28, 2017 By: webgeek Member since: May 19, 2009
    #10
  11. Awinner2

    Awinner2 UKBF Regular Free Member

    340 64
    Posted: Aug 28, 2017 By: Awinner2 Member since: Aug 4, 2017
    #11
  12. fisicx

    fisicx It's Major Clanger! Staff Member

    30,385 8,926
    That's just a press release from CGON

    I've been doing some reading and there are lot of articles debunking the use of hydrogen as a fuel additive. One article said you use more energy creating the hydrogen than you save with more efficient burning.

    So while it may work, nearly everything I have read suggests you can't get close to the results from the testing stations. What you can do is get much better efficiency but driving economically.
     
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2017
    Posted: Aug 28, 2017 By: fisicx Member since: Sep 12, 2006
    #12
  13. UKSBD

    UKSBD Not a real duck Staff Member

    9,183 1,720
    Reminds me of the last kettle I bought.

    Big sticker on it saying how energy efficient it was and 60% more efficient than normal kettle.

    Then it the small print it says, when only putting enough water in it to for one cup of tea.
     
    Posted: Aug 28, 2017 By: UKSBD Member since: Dec 30, 2005
    #13
  14. JakeM

    JakeM UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    28 3
    If it's purely fuel savings, consider having an ECU remap. Most cars sold in the UK have a safety margin in terms of the efficiency they can gain from fuel. This is mostly to account for poor quality fuel which we don't tend to experience in the UK.

    By having an ECU mapped to remove some of this safety margin, you can get a much higher fuel economy.

    Most people then tend to have the upper ranges / turbo boosted to enjoy more power, but you can have a car mapped purely for fuel economy / efficiency.

    I had a turbo car of mine mapped and whereas I could previously push the economy to the limit and get 60mpg, I ended up getting 74.5mpg on a 200 mile run which included motorway driving, as well as crawling in bumper to bumper traffic.
     
    Posted: Aug 28, 2017 By: JakeM Member since: Jun 8, 2017
    #14
  15. webgeek

    webgeek UKBF Big Shot Full Member - Verified Business

    4,029 1,475
    LOL - hasn't anyone else used a can of HEET (pretty much 99% methanol) added to the fuel tank of your old car so that it passes vehicle emissions? The trick has always been to run it down to nearly empty so there's a minimum of petrol, add the methanol, and then run it through the emissions checks, hoping you don't burn up your valves before the test ends, then rush it to the station and fill it up quick. It's how my 1977 Smokey and the Bandit Trans Am passed, despite have that 6.6litre that was the most inefficient on the planet.

    Sure, you dilute the hydrocarbons with something that's less polluting and suddenly you've got an 'efficient' engine. Is this economical, safe, truly a savings? wink, wink, nudge, nudge
     
    Posted: Aug 29, 2017 By: webgeek Member since: May 19, 2009
    #15
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.