Saabscene Saab Forum - Saab Technical Information Resource banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,343 Posts
I was sceptical about it aswell. I drove from Sussex to Northern Netherlands and recorded my fuel economy in my 96V4.

The journey was motorways all the way from door to door except for the first two miles and the last one mile. My motorway speed was in the range of 50-55mph.

Whilst in the Netherlands, we fitted the CB-26P and adjusted it as per instructions. The return journey followed exactly the same motorway route and our speed was in the range 60-65mph (otherwise we'd be late for the ferry).

On the outward journey, fuel economy was calculated at 31.5 mpg.

On the return journey, fuel economy was calculated at 33.5 mpg. (which is the best fuel economy I have recorded to date)

I do think that it is healthy to question things and perhaps be sceptical, but I personally do not value comments that dismiss things out of hand just on the basis of presumption.

In any case, I understand that the CB-26P is actually a device marketed to reduce exhaust emissions. Any improvement in fuel economy is just a positive side effect and it is not guaranteed to improve fuel economy.

My suggestion is read about it, maybe even try it for yourself, and above all - make up your own mind.

/john
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
328 Posts
no disrespect John, but there were differences in the conditions of your two journeys.

the speed was slightly higher on the return, the fuel may have been different as it was bought on the continent and any atmospheric changes may have affected the engine and tyres. Plus, was there a difference in the weight of your machine as you were coming back from a presumed holiday?


If there are any scientific data on the ecotek and therefore less allegorical, it would definitely make interesting reading but you're right to keep your mind open all the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,343 Posts
blackcarlsson - you have missed my point.

I have not put this forward as a scientific experiment nor explanation that proves a point one way or the other. It is not.

What I have put forward is my own experience of the device. You have to accept that for what it is. That's why I promote open mindedness on this.

A lot of people swear by this device. A lot more disregard it in emphatic terms in their experience as whatever. I don't know why. I fitted it and it seemed to make a difference to fuel economy - but that is missing the whole point. It is their to reduce emissions.

Anyone looking for a "snake-oil" gadget to improve fuel economy then this is not it.

/john
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,908 Posts
Like quaryeff, I am normally quite sceptical of fuel economy improvers. But following Johns incentive, have read the http://www.ecotekplc.com/faqs.htm page with interest. The URL is actually extremely informative.

But, as stated on the faqs.htm page, the device does not work on Turbo engines under boost conditions. In fact, as it states, the CB-26P 'bleed valve' is actually shut down under Turbo boost conditions. As LPT and full Turbo engines are running on boost at most cruise and accelleration conditions, it will have minimal benefit, and take along time to cover it's purchase costs.

The following link provides direct feedback on fitting to Saabs (Turbo)
http://www.ecotekplc.com/saab.htm#900T

I also wonder if the additional 5% air feed introduced by the bleed valve will affect the Idle COntrol Valve adversly, although no negative feedback is provided in this respect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
657 Posts
As I said earlier, these devices are, in my opinion, worthless, especially regarding fuel consumption.
The major problem about fuel consumption is that people don't understand that it is totally impossible to reproduce conditions so as to get a good comparison. And people are so hopelessly optimistic about how accurate they can discuss consumption data. Calculate to 0.1mpg? Rubbish.
The best chance of comparing with and without would be on a motorway with little traffic and no wind. Such a test if replicated several times by drivers who did not know whether or not the device was there might slightly change my mind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,908 Posts
Most of them are for non turbo engines.

Although their appears to be a contradiction between the reported fuel reduction of 15% in the Saab Turbo summary (http://www.ecotekplc.com/saab.htm#900T), and the fact that the faq.hml actually states that the CB-26P actually shuts down (ceases to be functional) under boost conditions (because of the +ve manifold pressure).

I would like to see someone explain this apparent contradiction before accepting the 15% reported reduction in fuel usage on a Saab Turbo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
328 Posts
I believe you can influence test data based on the power of your thought and I regularly project the "reality" into my combustion chambers that the block they're firing is actually a 2CV.

I get a difference of .7843 mpg - and a nice lawnmower sound at 4k rpm...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Quote from Ecotek " As with any product that makes any claims, the audience is normally split into 2 camps, the believers and the non-believers.

For the non-believers, we have one easy answer, our money back guarantee. If you don't think it works, just send it back for a refund - simple as that!!

The whole point of the device is create a better, more complete burn of the fuel by adding turbulence to the inlet air. If you burn the fuel more efficiently you can expect more work from it, hence the lower emissions, better power output and better MPG. With any turbocharged engine, the Ecotek will only be effective when running no boost, which is stated on the forum, but the figures of 15% on our site are provided by our customer, not by us. But to qualify this, the Subaru Impreza owners are getting 12-13% improvement in MPG also!!

At the end of the day, we have over 17,000 happy customers!!"
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top