UPDATE (1/3/2007): Mythbusters was unable to validate claims that acetone will increase your fuel mileage.
UPDATE (1/21/2007): Acetone probably can’t improve the surface tension of gasoline.
UPDATE (1/21/2007): Oil companies make most acetone.
Note: This was the first in what became a series of posts about the purported benefits of adding acetone to gasoline. As such this is perhaps the least useful of all the posts I wrote. The most salient points are that only an extreme few are able able to get a 25+% increase in mileage and no one with any widespread credibility has been able to get significant improvements under laboratory conditions.
The original post continues below:
In a few instances, I have seen fark reference some work suggesting that adding small amounts of acetone to your fuel will increase your fuel mileage by up to 30%.
Today’s link goes to RealTechNews. That’s just the same information posted at PureEnergySystems. That information was written by a guy named Louis LaPointe. Both show the same graph, which is pretty non-descript. It’s the kind of graph that would earn you an F in most high school classes, let alone a college class with a professor like Leo Gaddis.

The links all use this same graph. It shows no data points. It does not tell us what kind of cars were used, although in one article it is explained that curve D is for a diesel engine. All the graph really tells me is that someone drew some pretty lines.
There really isn’t much methodology to be digested. Most of the information isn’t even brought close to your plate. The best you can get is that someone is adding acetone to their vehicles and basing the information off of runs done somewhere at 50 mph.
More links:
DIY Live
PureEnergySystems Wiki
FuelSaving.info
The DIY link is the same as the first 2 links but with less. The PES Wiki link involves numerous user testimonials, some good, some bad. It also took me to a link about calculating fuel mileage savings, which used an erroneous formula. (A hint: getting a 100% increase in mileage won’t reduce your fuel costs by 100%.)
There is some good information about being consistent while you test. But still, I don’t really trust individuals looking for results to give very good data. The article at fuelsaving.info is a counter to the pro-acetone group. I’m inclined to side with that article.
Here’s something that caught my eye:
Many products claiming to improve mileage are expensive and do not really help much. Others are fakes. For instance, a SMOOTH flow of air into a carburetor or injector is far better for mileage than turbulent air. Turbulence is bad. Yet many people deliberately introduce turbulent air into their engines. There are many silly myths floating around the car industry to fool the average person. Another is that cold intake air improves mileage. NO. Warm air improves mileage.
If I’m not mistaken, fluid flows much better under turbulence. Everyone from ship to airplane builders and golf ball designers know this. Per Parviz Moin and John Kim in the SEAS at UCLA:
In the cylinders of an internal-combustion engine, for example, turbulence enhances the mixing of fuel and oxidizer and produces cleaner, more efficient combustion.
Also, cold intake air, I believe should increase motor efficiency. The idea is that cold air is more dense. Thus each volume of intake air has a greater mass of oxygen. Oxygen, of course, is completely necessary for combustion of organic materials like gasoline. However, cold air will, due to its density, increase the air drag on a vehicle. So in real world conditions, there is a trade-off to be made.
So why should we trust Louis LaPointe?
FACTS. Absolute true facts. My Scan Gauge does not lie and neither do I. What data do these people show? Actual data. Actual test results.
Well his facts and test results aren’t that good. For example:
My 1995 Neon that is now 10 years old at 130,000 miles and runs with acetone all the time. It runs perfectly. Absolutely perfect. Just averaged 45 MPG IN TOWN last week. And just last weekend we averaged 50 to 73 MPG on a test run through Wisconsin with special mileage devices attached. Never had engine work.
50 to 73 MPG? That’s a huge variation. Is that for a whole trip? Is the 73 MPG just from that 1 mile where you tailgated an 18-wheeler? His FACTS, are pretty much anecdotal in my opinion.
Personally, I believe the guy is just try to sell the ScanGuage (Evan & Bear, you ought to offer to revamp their website). Damn near every link names this singular device and suggests that you should buy it to test your car.
Does acetone really work? I don’t have the guts to find out for myself. The risks of voiding a warranty, corroding my fuel system, or even spilling the acetone on my paint and ruining it are just too much for me to take.
If you are interested in improving your mileage, your best bet is still to be a good driver with a well maintained vehicle. Keep your tires inflated properly. Don’t run the AC. Keep your engine tuned. Don’t carry around unnecessary weight. Perhaps most importantly, accelerate and brake as slowly as possible. Gunning your engine and braking hard will probably do more to hurt your mileage than anything else. The key is to be gentle with the pedals. And remember, in this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
Dr. Gaddis rocked. He was stuck with the Agent and myself for three classes if I remember correctly. It got to the point where if you were seen fraternizing with us prior to class, and not in the class, you may get a warning to leave “his guys” alone. We weren’t stellar but he could see we knew everything on a practical level and moved us right along. Don’t get me wrong, he would punish the hell out of us for that crap graph. Probably make scene out of us ala the pop top can people, without hestitation.
I don’t buy it for a second. And I agree with you on the turbulent air. As for revamping his website… uhhh…
[...] Happily, I get a slightly decent number of hits relating to acetone in gasoline. As noted in “Better mileage with acetone? I doubt it,” well I cast my doubts on the, how shall I say, less than scientific “findings” of a Mr. Louis LaPointe (who’s crew is also “developing devices to extract electricity from the air“). [...]
I have started using acetone in my Chevy 01 Cavalier. So far so good, it does smooth out idle, and it does provide more pep. The graph is fine. It is not mean to be all that technical, and if you would read the articles, you will find what the letterings are for:
The A curve is with a 1995 Neon. The B curve is with a 1986 GMC. The C curve is with two Caravans, 1990 and 1997. D is for diesel fuel. I have done a lot of searching for this information, and so far I am convinced that the acetone is acceptable in low amounts. I have heard both theories, cold and warm air, and no turbulance or add turbulance. I wish I had the money to buy a dyno meter and test all this stuff myself !
Thanks Charlie, at the time I wrote this, the articles were not labeled. I have since read through most if not all of LaPointe’s ramblings, and did notice that the vehicle types were updated.
As for the dyno, I’m sure one can be rented instead of bought.
I think the guy is full of crap. He’s got an article up about how thicker oils (think 20w50 instead of 5w30) will yield better mileage. He fails to realize that the higher the ratio of horsepower to weight is the less effort the engine has to do, therefore the better mileage you get.
Just wanted to comment on your posting here. I tested acetone on my 1988 Honda Accord. Already had base mileage as I write down every time I fill up. Always get fuel at the same station. Started using acetone mixture, around two to three ounces per ten gallons. After eight tanks, had mix at just over two ounces per ten gallons, and fuel mileage went from base 30.2 mpg to 36.4 at best.
Mr LaPointe is correct in his assertion that acetone improves fuel mileage, however, it does not seem to work as well on newer cars, as they are already more fuel efficient. Cudos to the automakers…
I still have some carb parts and rubber bits in a mix of acetone/gas in my garage, they have been soaking for about three years now with no damage to anything. Mixture is 50/50!! Mixture in gas is 1:568 approx. So please, unless you have totally inferior parts in your car, there is no danger of acetone doing any damage!!!
On the other hand, I am inclined to agree that it seems Mr. LaPointe is pushing the ScanGauge a bit strong. He has good reason to though; its simply the best way to monitor fuel consumption. Most people, not being scientists, have trouble collecting empirical data, so this Scangauge makes it easy.
In summary, Acetone is excellent for use in gas or diesel engines, and apart from widely varied gains in fuel mileage, lets not froget the best part; emissions are reduced to almost Zero!!!
My 1987 Honda Civic Wagon, with 470,000 km drove in and out the air test. The mechanic thought I had rebuilt the motor because the emissions were sow low. Also, in my 1999 Western Star with Series 60 Detroit diesel got a 2 year pass because emissions were below factory!!!
Unless you work for big oil, in which case I understand, please don’t give acetone a bad rap. Its good for fuel, and even better for emissions…
I also want to comment on this cold/warm air thing. Has anybody read the test that Smokey Eunich did on the Fiero back in the 80′s??
He used a preheater for the gas, and heated it up th over 400 F!!
And the Fiero ran so good they put it in Road and Track!!!
Also, to address turbulence; if turbulence was so good, why did we go to all the trouble back in the day to port and polish our heads?? SMOOTH flow silly…
All those dummies with the cold air/ram air units are just after raw power, with no regard for mileage. If you cool the air, and the fuel, of course you can shove more of it into the same space…but if you heat both, and let them expand, less fuel takes up the same space.
Get the drift here??? If it was safer to do, everybody would have a preheater for fuel on their car…
We used to polish our heads because we were inspired to by other racers and magazines. In truth, no one polishes ports any more, unless you haven’t heard that all professional racers actually make the port sufaces look like a golf ball for at least the last 5 to 10 years. Racing sail boats as well have hulls like the outside of a golf ball because laminar air flow is less restrictive if there is turbulance. Drop a golf ball and a ping-pong ball from a high place and see which one hits the ground first. (and if you say it’s because the golf ball weighs more, then you really need to go back to school).
Back in the 80′s we had different fuel, now if we heat fuel the ethanel or the like will vaporize sooner then the gas and pow……..vapor lock. now for the port and polish, well that was for big carbed up cars and they did not know any better, they were trying to flow more air but the fuel was not staying in suspension or wetting out on those polished walls(people were putting screens in between the head and intake to fix this) and the best read is about “the old one” nascar loved him in the late 70′s he figured out the if you swurl fuel around in the combustion chamber you get more power. You can still read these Hot rod mags on line. As for my own testing of Acetone if you bought the wrong type by accident you get detenation (neighbor and I this both happened to) also if you have weak rubber fuel lines they do wear faster or turn to mush(99 mile tow) but they have to be old, as for milleage I got a couple of points higher and also got better emissions so its not all bad……M
Yes, I read that article back in 1985, while visiting a friend in Fla. It was called Smokey Eunich’s First Stage. He took a 1984 Fiero, 2.5 cid 4 cylinder and using this fuel pre-heater was getting around 1.6HP per CI.
Over 200HP from an Iron Duke Fiero!
Road & Track had pix of the car SMOKING the tires!
I want to find this info and apply it to my car, and see if I can duplicate the results.

Dr. Gaddis was a fair man who hated the soda can pop top. And yes, he would give you and F for that graph!