Triggaaar

David,
Do you not want to respond to Pete's post?

Petrochemical chemists are not exactly independant, and have a lot to lose if people go for a product like broquet - not saying I don't believe John, but I still feel that we haven't learned enough.

With all the negative coments, if I were selling the product, I would try and fund test on Scoobys, that all parties were happy with.

David Lock

Hi Triggaaar,

In short, no, not really!! I have no wish to get involved in what is in danger of becoming a personal (and pretty boring!) squabble. I am also old and wise enough to realise that arguing with Pete on this particular board is hardly going to win me any converts. A bit like being asked to feed the lions!!

At the end of the day it seems to boil down to opinions only and scientists will always argue; I know of chemists and scientists who will take an entirely different stance. The leading tin research group in the world, The International Tin Research Institute are one example of this.

In a more general sense I should record that Henry Broquet died back in 1989 after a long illness and most of his later life was spent in South Africa. So any discussion with Henry would be way before things really got started with Broquet in the UK. Henry, at that time, would have been talking about it's use in wartime and later in diesel marines in South Africa and possibly the concept of using it in aircraft as we know he had discussions with what was BOAC. As for testing in Scoobs I hope I have posted enough hints on this board that it has been tested (not by us) specifically for use in Scoobs with particular reference to use in imports which would otherwise struggle on European spec 95 unleaded. There are specific test comments about use in Scoobs posted on this board - Bob Rawle's recent post/s being relevant in this context. David.

(Edited because I couldn't spell reserch)

[This message has been edited by David Lock (edited 26 April 2001).]

KF

We must never assume that which is incapable of proof.
G. H. Lewes, Physiology of Common Life

Tractor

David Lock, sorry to be an ingnoramous, but are you connected to Broquet? I assume so.

If you are, surely you will note from this thread that there are many prospective buyers of your product (me included) who are teetering on the edge of buying them, but not actually doing so because of the lack of any clear conclusions about the things.

I am not interested in someone saying, well look at all the positive posts etc. etc. The fact is that I have read the whole thread, and come out of it unsure as to whether to buy.

You can see the number of thousands registered on this board. Whether or not you think that your product has been proven to your satisfaction, would it not be a shrewd business move to prove it to our satisfaction? I for one would buy Broquets immediately if, scientifically, not subjectively, they were proven to work.

Consequently, I do not think the thread should be closed as no resolution has yet been reached, when it is clear that with some proper investigation, it could be. In the words of an oddly spoken bloke off TV, "David, it's over to you.......".

SDB

OK...

I have to say.. I have just had an interesting phone call.

I cannot say what exactly yet, but it is absolute definitive evidence that these units are fitted to all new P1s.

I cannot say more until later today and will explain why then.. but stay tuned

Best regards

Simon

David Lock

Tractor, Yes I am certainly connected to Broquet - a glance at my profile will confirm. I understand what you are saying about a continuing debate but I really think enough has been said - for and against - on the current thread/s on the subject (and I expect Simon would agree). I am always available for any board member to e-mail or telephone me and in that way I can answer specific queries and not bore the whole community.

I think we should all get back to Wax Wizard, Gold Wheels and Speed Limits ;-))

David (Broquet)

DavidBrown

If these things worked conclusively, I'm sure the likes of Ford, and General Motors would have them as standard in all of their cars. Without question.

But they haven't.

And we're supposed to be convinced just cos some company may or may not have put them in a 1000 P1's in the "off chance"..

SDB

LOL

DavidBrown. Do you have any information or anything constructive to add to this thread?

You are not supposed to be convinced of anything. If you don't want it, fair enough. You have already shown how eager you are to pounce on anything I say which may show this product to be genuine.

I am sure you are far more qualified to judge this than the technical directors of IM. After all, you must have studied it and gathered all the information you need in order to come to a conclusion. Not just had a knee jerk reaction to something you don't understand and have not tried or tested yourself.

It would be great if you could add some knowledge or insight, or just something relatively useful.

Best regards

Simon

Mike Rainbird

Markus,
You would only have to listen with det cans on one occasion and that would be either on an airfield (flat out) or serious track "abuse". If the car failed to det under these conditions, then it would be safe in ALL others.

However, you could could drive with them on all the time if you felt so inclined to impersonate a pilot...
LOL
Mike R

DavidBrown

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Simon de Banke:
<B>You are not supposed to be convinced of anything. [/quote]

Actually no, you <B>are</B> supposed to be convinced, that is unless they're being sold WITHOUT any claims.

I'm not the only person who wants to be convinced that something works before buying, hence the length of the thread.

To promote something saying "You're not supposed be convinced of anything" says it all really.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR><B>It would be great if you could add some knowledge or insight, or just something relatively useful[/quote]

I don't think anyone had mentioned that most car manufacturers do NOT use Broquets. For me to highlight that fact, is a contribution in my opinion. Just because it's not what you want to read, doesn't mean I can't say it, right ?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR><B>You have already shown how eager you are to pounce on anything I say which may show this product to be genuine.[/quote]

ROFLMAO. Don't flatter yourself !



[This message has been edited by DavidBrown (edited 26 April 2001).]

Tractor

double post

[This message has been edited by Tractor (edited 26 April 2001).]

Tractor

"I understand what you are saying about a continuing debate but I really think enough has been said - for and against - on the current thread/s on the subject"

Well, not if people keep asking questions there hasn't..

"I am always available for any board member to e-mail or telephone me and in that way I can answer specific queries and not bore the whole community."

The whole community does not have to read this thread - it is not exactly hiding what it is about...

"I think we should all get back to Wax Wizard, Gold Wheels and Speed Limits ;-))"

If you really want to David. I don't mean to offend, but IMHO, I cannot see why, if you have confidence in your product, that you don't want to prove to us, a large market, that it works.

Clearly there are some very technically minded people here who want to know more about your product. If it works, you should be able to justify why in their terms. Unless you would rather not talk about it of course.

Simon, I am very curious to hear what you have to say aboutthe P1. I do accept that this car is rather a casestudy for us lot - "how to make an STI run safely on UK fuel".

Ignorant question, but does the P1 have a differently mapped ECU to the STI5?

Mike

Markus

Mike,
Now that's an interesting point. Any idea how/where I'd be able to do this, and associated cost. Doubt that brands would let me hire out the track just for a det check

NDT

as we all seem to be either believers or sceptics...I better classify myself too....
I'm a natural sceptic, but I'd like to believe in it.....(is that self-contradictory, oh well)

Just because the major manufacturers don't use something, doesn't mean it doesn't work.
Most cars don't run that close to det anyway.
*Small* mpg improvements don't really influence car sales.
So why would they fit it?
It's way oversimplistic just to say 'if it worked Ford etc would fit it.'

This doesn't mean that it wouldn't be useful in imported STis (mine's a V4, hence the interest) or modded UK cars.
Keen to hear SdB's news ref. P1s etc.

There's no alternative to good scientific testing.
I used to be a designer at Cosworth - I can remember discussing fuel-line magnets etc with one of the commercial guys there - he said that whenever people selling 'miracle gadgets' called up to get an endorsement he would offer them a full testing programme, which they would always decline on cost grounds.

When's the closing date for the offer?

I'm not totally convinced, but in the absence of firm scientific evidence (which always cost money to obtain), I'll use the old adage of 'no smoke without fire' and give it the benefit of the doubt.

Nick

[This message has been edited by NDT (edited 26 April 2001).]

mutant_matt

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Simon de Banke:
<B>I am sure you are far more qualified to judge this than the technical directors of IM.[/quote]

Si,

Are you saying that IM definitely put the Broquet in the P1? If this is so, will they admit it publicly????

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Tactor:
<B>but does the P1 have a differently mapped ECU to the STI5?[/quote]

AFAIK, Prodrive re-mapped the ECU for the P1 so it can run on 95RON - the STi5 ECU is mapped for 100RON as it's a Jap model.

Matt



[This message has been edited by mutant_matt (edited 26 April 2001).]

KF

An interesting point NDT.

I would love this product to work. Cut fuel consuption by 10%. Wow! That is one big step to reaching Koyto agreements - with no negative ramifications. All governments need to do is force car manufacturers to put a little bit of catalyst before the engine, as well as the bit they forced them to put behind the engine. I am sure the state of California would be well up for it if it worked.

Prodrive P1's is an interesting point too. SDB points out that we are unlikely to know more than the technical directors at Prodrive, yet, do they know more than their counterparts at STI?

It would be interesting to know Prodrive's dilligence on this. Did they think
"possible benefit, but no downside, give it a go, the customer is paying after all". Or did they do the research?
KF.

EDIT: Bad spelling and geography.

[This message has been edited by KF (edited 26 April 2001).]

NDT

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by KF:
<B>An interesting point NDT.

I would love this product to work. Cut fuel consuption by 10%. Wow! That is one big step to reaching Koyto agreements - with no negative ramifications. All governments need to do is force car manufacturers to put a little bit of catalyst before the engine, as well as the bit they forced them to put behind the engine. I am sure the state of Los Angeles would be well up for it if it worked.

</B> I find the 10% bit hard to believe too.... I'm more interested in the engine durability side to it. But there must be more scope for economy improvements in tuned forced inductionn cars than in standard cars - like I said before, most cars don'trun that close to det. we do!

<B> Prodrive P1's is an interesting point too. SDB points out that we are unlikely to know more then the technical directors at Prodrive, yet, do they know more than their counterparts at STI?

It would be interesting to know Prodrive's dilligence on this. Did they think
"possible benefit, but no downside, give it a go, the customer is paying after all". Or did they do the research?
KF.[/quote]



[This message has been edited by NDT (edited 26 April 2001).]

SDB

DavidBrown

"Actually no, you are supposed to be convinced, that is unless they're being sold WITHOUT any claims"

You are taking my words out of context. I meant that my comments were not supposed to convince you of anything. This was in reply to your question which asked if we were supposed to be convinced of something due to information I was providing.

"I don't think anyone had mentioned that most car manufacturers do NOT use Broquets. For me to highlight that fact, is a contribution in my opinion."

I suppose you have evidence to back this up do you? You know for sure that this is the case I assume? Surely you are not jumping to a conclusion as being fact again, just because you have no evidence to support the oposite?

"Just because it's not what you want to read, doesn't mean I can't say it, right ?"

You know me well enough to know that this is simply a ridiculous thing to say. Why on earth would I hold off the purchase of this product (which is earning scoobyshop about £3.50 per unit I might add!) and spend so much of my own time trying to protect everybody, then make 3 offers on this board on one by email to all that have ordered the product that a full refund will be given if for any reason they do not want to continue???

Come off it David.. I have no gripe here.. I am just so incredibly cheesed off to be working so hard to find FACTS and INFORMATION for people only to have you sit there and say "THE WORLD IS FLAT! and that is it!".

Regards

Simon

KF

Simon,

With the most respect, people are not asking you to feel any responsibility in this matter.

For £3.50 a unit, you are doing David's work for him. He has stopped posting, so whilst anything you add is helpful, people do not expect it of you.

As an aside: we can infer from the fact that if Prodrive are fitting P1's with Broquet, Subaru don't fit it as standard. It would stike me as very odd if Subaru were the only manufacturer that omitted this piece of technology.

KF.

SDB

Hi KF

The reason I mentioned the £3.50 was merely to show that I am not trying to protect some big money making venture, merely trying to do the right thing by the community.

I am not spending all my time on this to protect or create sales (we stopped the monster deal 5 nights ago) only to assist the community.

BTW.. I don't think it is prodrive that put them in, but Subaru themselves... don't know for sure though, as IM may consider prodrive as part of them in some way.

All the best

Simon

KF

Simon,
That was my understanding. You are protecting a community, out of a feeling of duty.

You spend lots of time fire fighting issues on the board. There must be times when you lie in bed thinking "Is it really worth it?".

Whilst there are issues that may necessitate you take late nights and sacrifice drinking time etc, this isn't one. Have fun
KF.

EDIT: Just to add that I hope the above doesn't read as condescending twaddle.

[This message has been edited by KF (edited 26 April 2001).]

ROSS

Other options.-

Wow this sounds fantastic and an explanation of how it works...

ROSS

Sorry....I'm a Muppet... Double post...

[This message has been edited by ROSS (edited 26 April 2001).]

Stef

This is actually the first time I've looked at this thread, becasue I'd always presumed that Broquet was nothing more than a 'buy it and see for yourself' product. My thought there hasn't actually changed after reading this thread. What use is a money-back guarantee? Has anyone tried to remove these things from the tank?
OK, so it appears that IM fit these things into P1's. Surely Broquet knew this, and if so why not use it as a sales tool? Would Prodrive use them without vigorously testing them on Impreza engines?
There are simply far too many questions and not enough answers in my opinion.
Why are all the tests done on old bangers?
If Broquet are so sure of this thing, why not invest some money and produce independant and conclusive test results using modern vehicles that show the benefits?
It may be 'only' £100, but if it really does nothing it's £100 down the tubes.
So come on. We need to see some absolute proof that these things will benfit us in our cars. People's testimonials, however appealing, are NOT absolute proof.
I look forward to hearing about the IM stance.

Markus.
Why should the thread be closed? There is nothing wrong with a good debate, especially as the thread hasn't offended anyone. Stop being so red-misty all the time!

Stef.

Stef.

Joseph

Guys!
This is all very good but 113 of you have responded to this subject which was posted just after mine Crash Advice and none of you have bothered to help.
I WOULD LIKE TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE FACT that if you are as keen on driving as is apparent and as I WAS the same fate might just rear it's head.
So come on guys help a friend.

Thanks
Joseph.(El Loco)

Mike Rainbird

Markus,
I would imagine Pete Croney or Bob Rawle would be able to carry out a simple det test for you. Just find out when Pete is at the next track day and ask him to bring his cans along. It will require some track action, which may have to be halted if you are suffering from det, but at least you will know.
Best regards
Mike R

Markus

Stef,
oooh, now you've done it, pistols at dawn

As mentioned elsewhere on the thread, when my broquet comes along I'm going to drop it in and see what difference it makes. Must say that a present, after having new plugs in the blackbeast it's fuel economy has got better, so hopefully putting broquet in will help, if not, well, so be it, at least I will have used it and therefore WILL be in a position to say 'it does nothing!'

As for the old bangers testing, reason is, I think, that it was origianly intended for use with engines using 4 star, thus you pop in broquet, then use NUL instead fo 4 star.

As for David Lock not mentioning that broquet is used P1's, I've always assumed that it's due to some gagging order being placed on him by prodrive/IM, otherwise it'd be silly for him not to say 'as used in the Impreza P1' as that would make even more performance car owners use Broquet.

As to getting them out, i think the recommened solution is to attach some fishing line to them, then drop them in, thus if you need to remove them you just pull on the line. Highly technical i know

[This message has been edited by Markus (edited 27 April 2001).]

JasonHook

Just a quick thought and a question for David (Lock).

David
How many people have excercised their money back option on the Broquet?

Best Regards
Jason

JoeyDeacon

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Stef:
<B>
It may be 'only' £100, but if it really does nothing it's £100 down the tubes.
[/quote]

And if you look at

KF

Erm, Joseph. This thread started a fortnight ago...

WRT your crash. Sorry. Bummer. Have no experience of GGR. Nothing to add. If you want to wade through 113 posts of platitudes, then you are a brave man.
KF.