Fuel Catalyst

[ChrisCrowie Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close ChrisCrowie]

Hi All,

Great to be here, good discussions and information available on this site.

Just wondering if anybody out there has tried using a Fitch Fuel Catalyst??

http://www.fitchcatalyst.com.au/Product-Detail.asp?P=10

Seems good just after some feedback before I invest.

[lc120_man Advanced Member Find all posts View Profile Close lc120_man]

The general concensus is taht even if it woks it will take around 80000km
to recoup your costs.

[DaveO Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close DaveO]

Re: Fuel Catalyst

Hi All,

Great to be here, good discussions and information available on this site.

Just wondering if anybody out there has tried using a Fitch Fuel Catalyst??

http://www.fitchcatalyst.com.au/Product-Detail.asp?P=10

Seems good just after some feedback before I invest.

They work, but dont expect to get over 10% better economy on a regular basis. Mine varies from 5% to just over 7% improvement.

Been on there for about 20K km now, and has marginal power increase (already tuned pretty well :-))

[Roktruk Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Roktruk]

Call me sceptical but...'less fuel is burned'?? I may be mistaken, but isn't injector duration controlled by parameters such as mass air flow and throttle position? I fail to see how introducing something additional into the fuel itself (in minute quantites, I gather) will cause less of that fuel to be burnt. If anything, you want ALL of the fuel entering the cylinder to be burnt, which is where your power gains will occur.

The only way I can see the Fitch helping this is if it helps produce smaller droplets as the fuel atomises - but a good injector is designed to do just this.Has anyone done any 'before and after' dyno runs to confim power increase?

I place this one in the same basket as the Hiclone - if they were that good all the manufacturers would be using it to meet their emmisions targets.

Plus at $470, a 5% increase would give me about 0.6 l/100km improvement. So, at $1.30 a litre, this works out at about 78cents/100km saving - so I'd have to travel about 60 000km to recoup the $$$, assuming the thing lasts this long and gives me that improvement constantly.

[DaveO Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close DaveO]

Call me sceptical but...'less fuel is burned'?? I may be mistaken, but isn't injector duration controlled by parameters such as mass air flow and throttle position? I fail to see how introducing something additional into the fuel itself (in minute quantites, I gather) will cause less of that fuel to be burnt. If anything, you want ALL of the fuel entering the cylinder to be burnt, which is where your power gains will occur.

The only way I can see the Fitch helping this is if it helps produce smaller droplets as the fuel atomises - but a good injector is designed to do just this.Has anyone done any 'before and after' dyno runs to confim power increase?

I place this one in the same basket as the Hiclone - if they were that good all the manufacturers would be using it to meet their emmisions targets.

Plus at $470, a 5% increase would give me about 0.6 l/100km improvement. So, at $1.30 a litre, this works out at about 78cents/100km saving - so I'd have to travel about 60 000km to recoup the $$$, assuming the thing lasts this long and gives me that improvement constantly.

Roktruk,

since more power is generated thru more complete burn, with the same throttle setting you will travel faster. As a result you ease off the throttle to maintain the original speed - and in doing so reduce the fuel consumed.

There is obviously a lot more science involved in than that, but thats the practical explanation.

As a side benefit, due to less carbon particles being generated, less makes it into the oil. One of the reasons for frequent oil changes on the 1KZ is the amount of carbon that gets into the lubricating oil.

Oil analysis has shown (standard 1KZ-TE engine) that wear rate on bearings goes up by 4 times if the oil is changed at 7.5K km instead of 5K km. It increases to a fraction under 5 times if changed at 1oK km intervals. Reduced wear equates to increased engine life.

The units are warranted for 400K km, so you can recoup your cost more than 6 times over (based on your calculations) for fuel alone.

I figure reducing fuel consumption and increased engine life provides both a short term and long term saving. Remember the unit can be moved to another vehicle if you trade up every few years - so the investment is not lost with the vehicle change over.

BTW, most manufacturers have a vested interest in selling parts after the vehicle is sold, so reducing the maintenance and running cost does nothing for them financially. Oskkosh (sp) I believe have it as OEM equipment. Their vehicles are mainly used in emergency services roles.

Like most people I was skeptical too. I took up the offer, and can report that they work. Not only that I know of others who have had good results too.

Anyway the choice is yours, take up the guarrantee or keep subsidising the fuel company's monumental profits, just dont ask other to justify why you wont try it, because their response may not be compelmentary.

Almost forgot, there is a reduction in emissions, to assist the green attribute (and I'm no greeny either - but do like clean air :-)

[Hutch Addicted PP Member Find all posts View Profile Close Hutch]

Guys, Bump on this one.

DaveO were do they installed it in the fuel line, i noticed a testimonial on here from a 4ltr prado owner quoting 20% improvement.

Will it effect warranty/ insurance?????? is it safe any issue with the safety.

[MickL Addicted PP Member Find all posts View Profile Close MickL]

Related:

http://www.fuelsaving.info/catalysts.htm


Mick