Happily, I get a slightly decent number of hits relating to acetone in gasoline. As noted in “Better mileage with acetone? I doubt it,” I cast my doubts on the, how shall I say, less than scientific “findings” of a Mr. Louis LaPointe
Today I followed a search which led to an article. The main source was Dr. Greg Davis, of the Mechanical Engineering Department at Kettering University (formerly known as the General Motors Institute). It seems that someone is actually trying to reproduce the “data” previously provided.
(following blockquote from the article added here on 7/7/06)
To find out, we went to the Mechanical Engineering Department at Kettering University, in Flint. Dr. Greg Davis thought it would be good experience for his students to verify the claims about acetone in the department’s test engine, a Buick 3.8 liter V-6 that is equipped with all kinds of probes and sensors.
For several weeks the students experimented with various strengths of acetone in gasoline. The findings were disappointing.
“Our current preliminary data suggests essentially no improvement running acetone in the fuel,” Davis said.
To the surprise of no one, preliminary data show no benefits from adding the recommended levels of acetone.
This is will prove inconclusive, however. Reasonable people with reasonable abilities of scientific understanding and interpretation would expect little to no change. The conspiracy-theorist type, however, would also expect any type of study coming from Kettering, with it’s ties to the Big 3 and big oil, to be completely biased.
Of course, if you are the conspiracy-theorist type, I encourage you to buy the hype, with skepticism, of course, as that should be your modus operandi. Now, I would test the hype, except that I expect it to cost me money. You, the conspiracy-theorist should expect to save money, right? So go for it. When you do it scientifically, and prove a 5%+ improvement, you’ll be published in major journals and possibly even legitimately world renowned.
I’m not holding my breath, but my mind can be changed.
Rob Morris Says:
Just a comment on acetone. I used a 1988 Honda Accord as my test vehicle. This car ran fine, passed the E-test and everything, but the body was shot, so we were thinking about a new(er) car anyway.
OK- I ran several tanks (over a few months) to establish a base mileage which was 30.2 mpg. Just about right for a Honda…
Started using acetone mix of 2 oz. per 10 gal of gas.
First tankful it seemed a bit peppier, but no difference in mileage.
Second tank mileage improved to 31.5, and I thought maybe I was just driving better to get more miles.
So on the 3rd tank I forced myself to drive normally-which is running around 75-80 mph on the freeway. Results were mileage up to 33 mpg!!
Continued to use acetone for 6-7 months till we got another car, and the improvements topped out at 36 mpg, which translates into an extra 70 miles to a tank ful!!!
Percentagewise, its 19 or 20% increase, which is as much or more than all those new companies are claiming with their pills and bottles of whatever. All I know is that Acetone works!
We tried it in our Dodge minivan, and after a few tankfuls it too was better, from around 330 miles to the tank to 370-380.
Not as good as the honda, but we are going to experiment with the mixture and see if that helps.
Sorry for such a long comment, I just had to speak up when I read stuff people write with little knowledge, and zero substantiation. Lastly, about the scangauge. I don’t have one, ‘cuz I can do math, but if people bought it, and use it, they would have ACTUAL data in front of them proving the product…
BTW-I still have a jar of carburator parts soaking in a gas/acetone mix, and it hasen’t eaten them after nearly two years, so unless you do the test yourself, maybe you ought not comment!
nobrainer Says:
First, your last point is ridiculous. First-hand experience is never required to comment on something.
Let me add that I will gladly trust a bunch of engineers I don’t know working under laboratory conditions rather than some random person.
JCollier Says:
“Let me add that I will gladly trust a bunch of engineers I don’t know working under laboratory conditions rather than some random person.”
Please let me add that I am a softwared developer and I work with engineers in the engineering department for a company that designs engines. There are many times that engineers simply make their best guess, or decide to do something because that is their opinion and their decisions are not always right. In fact this happens fairly often. Been hanging around engineers for since I was 16 and now twelve years later I have more respect for first hand experience than I do for theory.
BTW, I did the same experiment with acetone in my 1989 Ford T-bird. I saw an increase from about 20mpg to about 24 mpg, and I also noticed that the engine ran cooler.
nobrainer Says:
Design engineers absolutely do make assumptions, and best guesses, and mistakes (everyone makes mistakes).
However, I was talking about laboratory testing. Not theory. Not design.
And, frankly, you should value the theory based on the data that supports it. I like to say that I really don’t need first hand experience of a rattlesnake bite to believe that a rattlesnake bite will do me harm.
As for your test, please describe it and provide your underlying data. I ask for this because fuel mileage is highly variable. My mileage regularly changes by upwards of 20% on a tank-to-tank basis.
Finally, let me add, that if you go back and read the stuff from Louis LaPointe, he argues that to increase mileage you need to let your car run hotter!
Nobrainer’s Think Tank » Better mileage with acetone? I doubt it. Says:
[...] nobrainer: Acetone in Gasoline – Subjected to engineering rigor – … [...]
MrChili Says:
and, of course it HAS to be true because it said so on the internet…..both sides could be full of BS. Test the theory for yourself. Just because one person SAYS a bunch of engineers tested it doesn’t mean it got tested. And, vice-versa…just because a guy SAID he put it in his Honda doesn’t mean it got done. Sorry guys.
M
Wha Says:
Is this guy serious? We are supposed to not believe everything we read online. I call shannanigans.
Nobrainer’s Think Tank » Acetone in Gasoline - BUSTED! Says:
[...] Wha: Acetone in Gasoline – Subjected to engineering rigor – Is this… [...]
Brian S Says:
I would like to see more info on all the commercial fuel injector cleaner products. I read at one blog that they contain acetone, but the quantity wasn’t available. I went to a Walmart and looked at every brand of cleaner there. Most did not list their contents (other than “contains pertoleum distillates”) but one brand did, listing acetone and xylene among other things, which are petroleum distillates.
So, if I use a 12 ounce bottle of a commercial product advertised as “good for my engine’s performance” and “improves mileage” and it just happens to contain two of the same products LaPointe recommends then how can this be seriously harmful?? The ratios of additive to gasoline might be close to what LaPointe recommends. The end result is supposed to be the same.
I have not yet seen anyone explain why using a diluted mixture of acetone and xylene according to LaPointe is just totally wrong, but paying for it from STP or Valvoline or 20 other commercial manufacturers is just totally right.
nobrainer Says:
I, too, spent some time looking at the ingredients on bottles at Wal-Mart. I also looked at some MSDSs on the web. Unfortunately I never found any that explicitly claimed acetone as an ingredient. However such speculation is, in part, why I lean towards acetone not being necessarily bad.
However, when I looked at the bottles of additives for sale, the claims are very modest, and not nearly what LaPointe claims. It seemed there were 2 main types of additives: cleaners and octane boosters.
The cleaners only offered better mileage due to removing harmful deposits from fuel injectors and that type of thing. Their claims had nothing to do with adding extra methyl groups and reducing surface tension and improving mileage by 35%.
The octane boosters are mostly just kerosene and other heavy distillates. I’m not even sure those offer better mileage so much as “improved performance” or “more power” or something else fairly vague.
If I recall correctly from my research trip to Wal-Mart, only one product put a solid claim on mileage improvement. But even that was for something like 3%… maybe 5.
rs Says:
Hi guys,
I am a scientist, and I am working in the automotive fuel area, so that’s maybe what most people here are asking for.
I don’t know which additive works and doesn’t and by how much (0.0001%? why not?).
But here are my observations:
a) If something works well there will be a lot of evidence, in fact it will be obvious to anybody testing it.
So if Mythbusters and other labs can’t do it, then the normal person will also not notice it, and it probably won’t work.
b) If something doesn’t work well, you can do tests forever, since you will be within the standard deviation of your test. But what’s the point in spending all that money if the effect is small anyways.
What are the changes? 20% improvement in fuel-economy? That’s ridiculous. I don’t even have to try it. From all engine theory, there is no thermodynamic principle that can improve the efficiency by 20%, if the temperature in the cylinder stays about the same, and everything else in the engine is equal. And don’t tell me that you found a solution circumventing thermodynamics.
Of course, I am talking about a well working engine that operates at its designed efficiency. Yes, if you have a screwed-up engine that get’s only 80% of the nominal efficiency, because for example a fuel injector is blocked, or it makes a jet instead of a spray, then of course there is a chance getting back to 100% if you fix the problem. I have heard this from cars in East Asia that were running on 3 instead of 4 cylinders, and adding a lubricant magically fixed it.
So come out and tell me your story if you want, but be consistent. Don’t waffle between a new car getting 20% improvement yesterday and tomorrow only getting a 2% fuel improvement on an old beater.
Seamus Says:
I hate to appear stupid but I have a question about the XY graph. %Gain, amount of acetone. 0 should be no acetone correct or am I off onr this?
So what is the gain indicated at the beginning of the graph. I see the gain drops and goes negative as you reach a higher volume of acetone to gasoline but it dosn’t go from 0% to negative, it goes to positive gain and then negative as the mixture is enriched with acetone.
Also I love mythbusters but thay have had to correct thier finding a number of time when a flaw has been found in the testing method.
I am going to try this. I will keep tight records and report back.
P. Merrill Says:
Hehe,
Ok, so I was one of the engineers in Dr. Davis’ class doing these tests. We saw no improvement with acetone, or fuel pills. On gas or diesel. And I’m not talking driving tests. We did metered fuel consumption vs. power. Basically a pure mileage calculation. BSFC, look it up.
None, nada. Call it conspiracy, etc. The dyno was calibrated and tested back to back. The plain and simple truth it that engines combust almost 100% anyway, adding a solvent does not do anything positive.
As for the engine on the bench running longer on a mix than straight gas . . . just like was said, how much power was is making? You cannot tell. you have no metering method. If it was making the same power for a longer time then I’d be sold, but it wasn’t . . . basic thermodynamics.
The biggest flaw in mileage testing is the human variable. You are plain and simple going to drive nicer when you want to get better economy.
Take care,
Phill
Will Says:
Myth busters busted it, right. Many variables can effect the test. 1. condition of the engine. 2. condition of the plugs and wires. 3. the type of fuel used. I owned a 97 Saturn SL2 starting milage 31, put a cold air intake removed the muffler and used accetone xylene mix and made 40.4 for over a year 14,000 miles a year. Now have a 03 silverado 5.3 testing now.
Well, Will... Says:
But of course putting the cold air intake and removing the muffler and effectively cleaning out the fuel injection with said acetone xylene mix weren’t the cause of that mileage increase? Maybe it had to do with the continued use of said mix increased the potency of the gasoline or reduced surface tension and what not?
Silence! I have spoken! Says:
Seems to me that all acetone is doing is cleaning out the fuel injection enabling the engine to run at its normal max efficiency. For instance in a proof from a “believer”, his mpg only increased slightly the first time he used the mix and increased steadily with each fill-up and use of the acetone until he reached his maximum mpg awhile later where it then topped off. If it was really causing the gasoline mix to become more efficient/powerful, he would have seen the increase immediately on the first use. These results are consistent with what would be expected from cleaning your fuel lines and fuel injectors.
These additives are commercially available and are hardly slapped down or pursued by big oil and car companies, in fact, car companies encourage you to keep your tires filled, drive less aggressively and add additives as needed to keep your car running smoothly and efficiently. END OF STORY! Now go get a mechanical engineering degree and invent a solution to this problem instead of conjuring up fake quick fixes from the contents of your girlfriend’s bathroom cabinet! 
jp Says:
Hello everyone. seems that all of you have different opinions, but i still would like to mention that you really gotta sit down and read sometime. the correct formula for this acetone mix is 1 ounce per ten gallons of gas. not anymore, not any less, your mileage would be even better if you would follow this procedure. “less is more” never forget this and by the way guess whats in fuel injection cleaner? and another point, try it in diesel, its even better, almost doubled the mileage. want another secret? try 1 ounce of xylol per ten gallons of gas in addition to the acetone. it all breaks down to this. in my 1996 geo metro, i have run this mix in every tank for one year. with NGK spark plugs, i have achieved nearly 35 mpg city or highway regardless of my driving style. fast or slow doesnt matter. my spark plugs look the same as when they were installed. as far as the pros and cons, the only bad thing about the acetone is when you stop using it, drops like a rock, in my geo with 190,000 miles, i went from 15 mpg to 35, im sold. the only way to get better mileage than that is to ride a bike.
Fred Crookes Says:
If you had a Metro only getting 15mpg, you had major problems with the car to start with, and obviously the acetone acted as a cleaning agent. Come on, 15mpg driving a sewing machine? My Plymouth, big enough to carry your Metro on the roof rack, got better than that with 5 people and luggage to boot.
Max Says:
Well I definitely believe acetone improves mileage, since that I have tried it successfully. But I agree that it could easily be from cleaning the fuel system. I used techron gas when I fill up, but acetone might clean just a little bit better. Also there is a power gain, possibly from just having cleaner fuel system components. But it does strangely lose power when it is diluted with more gasoline, leading me to be confused if it does make any gain. And I am wondering if there is a mileage gain from not having to press the gas pedal as much. Since if it gas higher torque it might not use as much gas to take off and maintain speed.
Max Says:
I should add that my car is old is has over 228,000 miles on it and cleaning of components can probably help a lot. And yes it is fuel injected.
Frank Says:
For the results to be credible, the testor must NOT KNOW whether the tank has the acetone added or not. If the testor knows the acetone is in there, he will almost certainly (consciously, or not) alter the test or test results. If he is “blind” he will tend to test and report more accurately. Of course this means another person will have to know which tanks had acetone so the data can be calculated.
NCFRC Says:
I’ve been in the automotive parts business for over twenty years and it’s amazing the stories you hear about different additives. It’s human nature that we all want to find some magic product or ingrediant. I’ve heard positive reviews on products that are still in the trunk of the car.
There’s some very good products on the market but there’s probably twice as many snake oil ones.
My own humble opinion with this thread on acetone is keeping that fuel system clean , which most consumers do not do.
G Ed B Says:
Snake oil. I like that. If I could find real snake oil I’d market it in 1 oz. bottles with a label that claims it can improve anything you want improved (within limits) and I’d retire quite wealthy.
As far as acetone and xylol in gasoline is concerned it seems that if by adding it causes your vehicle to get better mileage for whatever reason then by all means go for it.
As for thermodynamics goes, gasoline mixed with anything is NOT gasoline. The bottom line is how many BTU’s is in a gallon of these assorted mixtures and what are the burn characteristics of them? Diesel has fewer BTU’s per gallon than gasoline but typically will yield better mileage because in a large part due to it’s burn rate. But then again diesel engines are designed around that fact.
How many gasoline engines are built that have no room for improvement in their design? None! The fact is no engine no matter how new achieves the theoretical maximum efficiency.
So if by adding something to gasoline changes it’s characteristics to better utilize a particular engine design then it is not, for that application, snake oil.
So with that being said, if you test the same fuel in 100 different engine designs you will likely get 100 different answers.
theguy Says:
well as fantastic as labs and “hard data” they dont account for the real ride and conditions that are used by a typical person. “50 mph for this long got us this”… is that counting stoplights? or hills? road conditions? probly not. so i think i’ll take the ADVICE from someone who has first hand, realistic experince in more than one vehicle over some air sealed simulation. just my opinion though
Frans Tonnaer Says:
I myself have made a additive which has the goals as the products in the discussion above. I think now it can work.
Toni Chambers Says:
I have to ask if the scientific evaluation discussed,made note of if engine controls such as oxygen sensors,affected results.
Toni Chambers Says:
I always thought thar octane boosters dont `increase power` but decrease preignition from temperature and compression.At least thats what they should do. I read somewhere lower octane fuel actually will produce more power due to the way it ignites.Assuming theres no preignition.
joe Says:
I have not heard anyone discuss the octane rating of acetone and how it effects the same of gasoline. Also, acetone is more similar to alcohol than it is gasoline, and when using alcohol with a carberated enging, you would jet the carb up, meaning that more fuel is required to produce the same amount of energy as gasoline. Does acetone’s ability to improve gasoline’s atomization characteristics make up for what it lacks in value of stored energy?
Ken Says:
And I will trust myself and what I find to work for me. If it doesnt work for you then I guess that is just too bad. But never trust the word of some uptight engineers.
[...] UPDATE (7/3/2006): You may be more interested in noting that engineers at Kettering University have yet to replicate the claims of Louis Lapointe. [...]
Here’s a simple test for you non believer’s.
Take any 5hp small engine.mount it to your bench.
run a full tank of gas through it.time it with a clock.
let it run out.mark your time.
Refill the tank with gas/acetone mix.time it with a clock.
Check your findings.
Take crow pie out of oven and start eating!!
This comment has bothered me for a long time. The test is simple, and may prove the point, but George doesn’t say which result is better.
Based on the comment, I suspect that the acetone/gas mix lasts longer. I then assume that the throttle position is the same, meaning that the amount (volume) of fuel used in each engine cycle is the same. IF that is the case, then the the acetone/gas mix lasts longer because the engine is going slower. That would then indicate that the mixture burns less energetically. This would be contrary to the idea that acetone improves the burn.
Admittedly I’m really speculating right here. Any thoughts from the other engineers?
gasoline intake in a car engine is the same amount with or without acetone…
But if with acetone lesser unburnt gasoline thus lesser deposits thus cleaner burn thus maximizing fuel…
The difference is when the car is in motion… higher the combustibility of the fuel the faster it runs, the sooner you get to your desired speed then the lesser you step on the gas pedal…
FACT: the lesser you step on the gas pedal the lesser gas you use.
Any thoughts from REAL car engineers or at least an observant driver?