Broquet Fuel Catalyst

[Sunray-I40]

has anyone got a Broquet fuel catalyst in their tank? they say I should get (conservatively) 6-8% more mpg in my 110 300tdi with one fitted. what are people's experience --especially 300tdi owners?

[TheRecklessEngineer]

I don't have one, and have no experience of one. But speaking as an experienced diesel engineer I highly suspect that it's

Edit: "The Advertising Standards Autohrity has banned Broquet from advertising because its claims cannot be scientifically substantiated. There are a mass of testimonials, but no solid scientific evidence. Until it has been tested and approved by MIRA or the AA or the RAC there is no real proof that it works." From here: http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=437

Nice to see the ASA doing some good work.

[Snagger]

If it was that effective, don't you think it would be standard for car manufacturers to fit them from new? Never mind that it'd be legislated, the manufacturers all want to give the best economy figures for sales and tax purposes.

[sean f]

If it was that effective, don't you think it would be standard for car manufacturers to fit them from new? Never mind that it'd be legislated, the manufacturers all want to give the best economy figures for sales and tax purposes.

This is what I consider to be the single biggest argument about how effective these things are. If any of these things worked the manufacturers would fit them, for Ford to be able to claim there cars were a few percent more efficient than Vauxhal would win them a lot of business, particularly on the fleet car and van market where often big milages make economy a significant factor.

Remaps and rechips can improve efficiency as the orgional tune is generally a one size fits all and different markets have different requirements (being able to run well at -40C isn't generally a requirement in the UK but might be in some places) and once on the road the emissions requirements aren't as strict as they are for a new vehicle so there is some room to adjust things

[reb78]

They were selling these a few years ago to put in the tank of cars that ran on leaded petrol so that you could run them on unleaded. Is there anything this magical device cant do??

[Aragorn]

Their website still advertises that "feat"

As above, its a POS

[zoltan]

Just to stir the conversation a little teeny bit, many manufacturers were quite happy to build cars for donkeys years from crappy steel with loads of cavities acting as mud traps so that they would rust at the merest sniff of road salt weren't they?

Not mentioning any names here (Land Rover), if they were that worried about the customer experience they could have predicted very early on that galvanising chassis and bodies would extend the life of the vehicles considerably but that isn't a good business model is it?

Anyway, what are these little things we're discussing?

[Aragorn]

Thing is, legislation has been pushing emissions down and down, and manufacturers have been adding layer upon layer of complexity to their engines, management systems etc to achieve these reductions. If all they had to do for an instant 10% reduction in fuel consumption was stick some inline filter into the fuel pipe, you can be absolutely sure they'd have done it already!

Most modern cars ARE galvanised, because the idea that cars will rust away gives huge bad (and mainstream) press to any car manufacturer. Certain companies still to this day have a stigma about body corrosion which nowadays is likely completely unjustified, yet lingers due to how bad their cars were in the past. However commercial vehicles often arent galved, which i've never quite understood. Perhaps commercial operators are more interested in mechancial reliability as they tend to be changed regularly, and get battered around by employees anyway? Everyone raves about Transits for instance but they rust as well as any 1970's Lancia.

[FridgeFreezer]

Zoltan - LR's already last long enough (beyond the warranty), LR would have nothing to gain from galving them however much it would be a really great thing to do. Making an engine use less fuel / generate lower emissions, however, is a major and obvious selling point and has been for years, with all manufacturers doing all sorts of things to shave a fraction off MPG/CO2.

Anyway, the broquet thing is clearly bobbins.

[simonr]

I have one in my Electric Freelander. Now it doesn't use ANY petrol at all! Amazing!

Ere, between you & me, I have a device which looks a lot like a big spring. You place it between the throttle and the floor and you will notice an immediate improvement in engine noise, and fuel consumption. It will also build your muscles so you* will look like Arnie in no time!

Si

(* Applies to users right leg only)

[CwazyWabbit]

Hopefully you guys aren't making JIT07 feel too silly, it's easy to get sucked in by advertising claims

[Simon Smith]

The only slight similarity this product has to anything of any use is this. A similar, but probably not that similar product was fitted in the tanks of WW2 aircraft to enable them to use unleaded fuel in certain areas. I have no idea if it actually worked or not.

[Simon Smith]

When I had the old 110 Someone gave me one of those strong magnets you put on the fuel line for improved economy, It came in very useful for somewhere to hold small screws when working under the bonnet.

[simonr]

Hopefully you guys aren't making JIT07 feel too silly, it's easy to get sucked in by advertising claims

My apologies JIT107 - it was a fair question.

Si

[heath robinson]

There's actually quite a lot of evidence of vehicle manufacturers and other researchers/inventors etc. being coerced or bullied into ignoring/withholding/burying technologies that would change the game. As Simon pointed out, looking at WW2 oddities is interesting, what with water/methanol injection, HHO and that kind of thing.

I'm not saying that this isn't snake oil, I'm just encouraging people to not necessarily believe everything car/oil companys claim, and to have a little look and think for ourselves. The chap who invented the spark plugs that litterally never wear out is a good case in point. They're what the 4-pronged ones evolved from, but the inventor was categorically told by bosch that they'd never see production, as an ever-lasting consumable is an oxymoron and not a good business model. Not the shadowy hand of the NWO, just plain business sense, but still not coming to a parts shelf near you any time soon.

Asking questions is never stupid, but not asking them as you're assuming you know the answer is.

[FridgeFreezer]

Some interesting folklore there, if manufacturers could fit everlasting spark plugs for reasonable cost they would, and they'd happily go over Bosch's head to do it. Bear in mind other customers such as fleets, commercial vehicles etc. would absolutely LOVE some of these things that the manufacturers supposedly "bury" to make an extra £25 off you at service-time. If Ford or Vauxhall could make their fleet repmobiles or transit vans last the entire 3/5/7 year warranty/service life with no servicing they'd make a stackload from fleet buyers.

[heath robinson]

That's the thing though, isn't it, most repmobiles do last about 6 or 7 years with fairly long service intervals, but look at 90's transits. They are some of the worst rust buckets going! And Vitos, a bloody expensive van to start with, and they're made from the stuff that doesn't make the grade as Dairy Lee wrapping. It would make sense to make them of better material, but as a builder can drive one into the ground in just a few years, why bother? It's not supposed to last indefinitely, just long enough to appear reliable. Why bother building anything more? I'm not saying it's a conspiracy, it's just cold business logic. Same difference with an old cob house like my folks, and a Barrat-box like my cousin's. One's 400 years old and still perfik, the other's younger than I am, and already has issues. It's just about the money.

It would cost a massive lump to set up a sparkplug plant, compared to buying them from bosch. It's not worth building the plant just to save a small amount on a service of less than half of your vehicles. Nothing fishy, just no economical sense. They weren't even vaguely buried, either, just not given the time of day by any company big enough to manufacture them in worthwhile numbers.

Either way, it wasn't my point to start a debate about it, it was to encourage people to go and have a look at the available evidence themselves. I'd rather not use something because I've shown it to be a crock than on someone else's say so.

[heath robinson]

Obviously, there's some stuff along these lines that's complete rubbish, 100mpg carbs and the like, I'm not saying take any of it as gospel. Just look for your selves, and if possible, try it out and see before righting it off, if an idea's within your production skills/capabilities.

[Phil Hancock]

I fitted one of the Broquet units some years ago to my WW2 GMC truck as the engine was designed for leaded fuel, the extra heat of unleaded fuel had in the past caused the stretching of the exhaust valves. The claim by Broquet that cooler running and the capability of using unleaded in place of leaded fitted the requirement due to the unavailability anymore of leaded. After fitting one the running temp was definitely lower, IIRC before trundling on the flat on a coolish day was 210*F and after when climbing Marine Drive at full throttle in 4th around the Great Orme on a hot day was 200*F.

[TheRecklessEngineer]

They weren't even vaguely buried, either, just not given the time of day by any company big enough to manufacture them in worthwhile numbers.

The Dyson story springs to mind here.

[zoltan]

Edit: "The Advertising Standards Autohrity has banned Broquet from advertising because its claims cannot be scientifically substantiated. There are a mass of testimonials, but no solid scientific evidence. Until it has been tested and approved by MIRA or the AA or the RAC there is no real proof that it works." From here: http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=437

Nice to see the ASA doing some good work.

On that basis, can *all* religions be asked to refrain from touting for new business until all of their claims be substantiated? I'd like to see the ASA grow balls big enough to try that :)

[Sunray-I40]

I tried a broquet fuel catalyst out of curiosity since during extensive research I found the original DTI test report, I found lots of reports of improvements from users (particularly subaru impreza owners and a well regarded engine tuner on the fast car circuit), and lots of anti comments but interestingly none from anyone who had actually tried one. So I decided to risk some dosh!

After my first tank of diesel in my 110 300tdi, I can report that driving as I normally would and with no other 'changes', my town average MPG has gone from 26.25 mpg to 27.95. (+6.4%). I can also hear a distinct change in the engine sound - it's a much smoother sound at a lower pitch than before (I play in a band and do actually have a keen ear). I have no idea about any emission improvements though! I shall keep checking the MPG for every tank to see if this was a one off fluke or not.

[CwazyWabbit]

Ok then, I have used one in a GSXR1100 motorbike. If you want to be comparative I actually own two GSXR1100's, both exactly the same model, one with a broquet catalyst in the tank and one without.

My experience with the catalyst ran from about 10 years ago till about 7 years ago. During that time I noticed no noticable difference in engine performance or smoothness (MPG isn't something you pay particular attention to on a sports bike ). Both bikes have now been off the road for quite a few years, the one with the catalyst in the tank was taken off the road after the engine died from a big end failure, not related to the catalyst. I wouldn't waste my money on a catalyst.

[Simon Smith]

Ok then, I have used one in a GSXR1100 motorbike. If you want to be comparative I actually own two GSXR1100's, both exactly the same model, one with a broquet catalyst in the tank and one without.

My experience with the catalyst ran from about 10 years ago till about 7 years ago. During that time I noticed no noticable difference in engine performance or smoothness (MPG isn't something you pay particular attention to on a sports bike ). Both bikes have now been off the road for quite a few years, the one with the catalyst in the tank was taken off the road after the engine died from a big end failure, not related to the catalyst. I wouldn't waste my money on a catalyst.

And it's about time you got one on the road again, had some great days out so far this year !!

[CwazyWabbit]

And it's about time you got one on the road again, had some great days out so far this year !!

I have a sensible NTV650 on the road now ...... although if you fancy a go at a couple of GSXR jigsaw puzzles?