AlexM

Ah but he would say that wouldn't he?.

I've never believed the claims for the Broquet 'catalysts' - if they were that good why would any manufacturer bother recommending SUL when factory fitting one of these devices would allow their customers to benefit from lower fuel costs?

AFAIK, a catalyst is a substance that promotes or enables a chemical reaction to take place without being consumed in the process. No one has ever explained what the petrol is supposedly transformed into?

I would love to beleive, but I've never heard a convincing explanation of how it is supposed to work. Can someone with the requistite petrochemical industry experience oblige?.

Cheers,

Alex (the sceptic)

P.S. £99 is quite a lot for a few tin pellets don't you think?

Eric Chadwick

It is good to be sceptical but the fact that subaru uk have used them in the past and are using them again speaks for itself. I used one in the past to run a rover 216 vitesse on unleaded and suffered no problems or power loss. I beleive they were developed during the war to allow merlin aircraft engines to run on poor quality russian fuel.

Does this mean that prodrive have not modified the STI engine at all for use in the P1 ? Relying instead on the catalyst packs.

I'm not entirely sure anyone knows exactly how they work, expert or not, hence the problem convincing people of their efficacy.

Possum Fink

For information purposes, Ralliart also utilise them for their Evo's even tho' they run better on lower octane fuel than the Scoobies.


And a question - I raised this topic a few months ago and there was some scorn - fair enough it sounds a bit like black magic.

HOWEVER - no one on this board would dispute the fact that adding simple LEAD to petrol increases it's octane rating by several points.

So - Why shouldn't a four metal alloy used by Brocket have the same effect?


Mr Fink - who wanted to put an in line broquet in place but for a 300BHP car it would be £300+

Adam M

I am going to run the details past some engineers I know who specialise in fuelling and engine emissions. I will post the results when I get them.

Eric Chadwick

Just been talking to Peter Wright at Broquet who told me that Subaru UK has bought 2000 of their 8 cone units to fit 2 per vehicle to the P1 to enable running on 95 octane fuel without damage or loss of power. He also told me that of the 16 type 22b-UK 3 have been run exclusively on 95 ron so far without problems. They wished to make a press release about this deal but subaru uk have prevented them sugesting that this would imply there was a problem with subarus when in fact all high performance cars are suffering from piston crown failure with the modern low octane petrol. He himself runs an RB5 with the performance ecu mod and has run it with broquet on 95 ron without any trouble so far.
He can offer a 25% discount to owners of subarus which brings the cost to £99.20 +VAT for the two units which drop in either side of the fuel tank. Not much for a little piece of mind.

Broquet have a web site at

GCollier

Possum >>>

I spoke to RalliArt a while ago, and they were indeed experimenting with the Broquet at the time, as well as looking at remapping to make the Evo6 more tuneable as well as able to run on 95RON as standard. I don't know whether or not the Broquet is actually standard on the cars though.

The comparison you make with Lead is not really valid. Lead is an additive to the fuel, ends up in the combustion chambers, and gets spewed out the back of the car in the form of some other nasty compounds. Broquet is purporting to be a catalyst, ie. a substance which promotes a chemical reaction, but is not changed itself.

The Broquet website gives no insight at all into how the product actually works. From my limited knowledge of A level chemistry, I remain sceptical.

I also recall reading a similar sounding thing somewhere about the benefits of strapping magnets to the fuel lines of your car.

Gary.

Eric Chadwick

I assume a small quantity of the metal dissolves in the petrol and therefore it's catalyst effect is during combustion, just as you might add pellets or filings of a catalyst substance to a reaction vessel to improve yield or efficiency of a chemical reaction.

MorayMackenzie

Guys,

What we need here is to arrange a scientific test of the product. The manufacturer, assuming they believe in their product, could probably be persuaded to supply one of their units (in-line preferably) on a "return if not satisfied" basis for testing. The test should encompass the use of a Knocklink equiped car with a remappable ECU on rolling roads AND real roads for a significant period of time, using different types and makes of fuel. The test should also be conducted on a second catalyst unit, sourced anonymously, just to keep things fair.

If this could be arranged and properly conducted, and the results were positive in favour of the product, imagine how many WRX/STI owners would want to fit the unit for peace-of-mind and to allow safe running of cheaper, more widely available fuel.

If, however the results were negative, then the unit would be returned to the manufacturer for a full refund.

Well, that's what I think anyway.

Moray

Eric Chadwick

I forgot to mention that - If you are not happy they will refund your money.

Who sells the knocklink in the uk and how much is it ?

MorayMackenzie

Scoobymania.

Eric Chadwick

Cheers.

AlexM

Eric,

Many questions remain unanswered with respect to fuel line catalysts.

You say that you have run your Rover Vitesse 216 without any power loss or other problems - I would certainly hope this is the case!. Did you realise any of the benefits that are supposed to be provided by the Broquet device?.

Until someone can come up with a plausible explanation as to how it works, then I shall remain unconvinced, much as I would like it to be true!.

Rgds,

Alex.

MorayMackenzie

Alex,

I have read another manufacturers explanation, it was something like:

The catalyst converts the long chain molecules present in the fuel to more easily combustible short chain ones.

It would be nice if it works, it's just getting proof of it working that's the trick!

Moray

AlexM

Moray,

Yes - that is also what I heard. I'm about to demonstrate my lack of understanding about chemistry, but I thought was that long chain molecules are the 'heavier' fractions of the crude oil distillate, i.e. diesel and heating oil are less volatile (higher RON?), and have long molecules. I thought the lighter fractions (petrol, kerosene etc) were more volatile (lower RON?).

How would breaking up the long chain molecules increase the effective octane of the fuel?. How does the Octane rating of fuel relate to it's molecular weight?.

Rgds,

Alex
Confused of Earlsfield.

GCollier

I find the possible explanation so far difficult to believe.

1. From what I remember, catalytic "cracking" of long chain hydrocarbons into short chain ones still needs high temperatures. I don't see how anything significant can occur as the fuel moves quickly past the Broquet in the fuel line.

2. According to the web site, the Broquet is designed to last 250,000 miles. This means that even if the materials do dissolve in the fuel, they would be present to a negligable degree.

I would still like to be convinced otherwise, but if they really do what they claim, I can't understand why their use isn;t widespread.

Eric Chadwick

I think it's the other way around - the higher the ron the lighter the fraction. Diesel is a lower fraction to petrol and has (I assume) resistance to knock as it is ignited in a large part by compression. I'm guessing however. I should remember this sort of stuff, I did a degree in chemical engineering before going into IT.

Eric Chadwick

I think the catalyst action occurs when the fuel is burnt in the combustion chamber just as it does when lead is added to the petrol. So the pack has no effect in the tank other than some of the metal dissolving into the petrol.

carl

Breaking up the long chain hydrocarbons would, IMHO, reduce the octane rating. I ought to point out that I gave up chemistry at 16, but 'octane' itself is a hydrocarbon with 8 carbon atoms (hence 'oct') and 18 hydrogen atoms. I would presume that octane has a RON of 100. Other hydrocarbons in the same group include hexane (C6H14), butane (C4H10), ethane (C2H6) and anything else of the form CnH(2n+2). The energy comes from breaking of the chemical bonds, so you get more energy from octane than you do from, say, butane as there are more bonds per molecule to break. The downside is that the 'lighter' stuff is easier to ignite than the 'heavier' stuff. So I reckon that breaking the long-chain molecules, if that's what the catalyst allegedly does, would make the fuel easier to ignite and thus more lightly to pre-detonate. Also, the amount of energy released would decrease.

Any other takers?

Eric Chadwick

Paul Wilson

Eric,
thats a good find, and could go some way to explain the differences some of us note when using different brands of fuel, I'm going to mail the various petrol companies and find out the MON rating of their fuels.

Possum Fink

If a Broquet acts as a catalyst to make you want to drive a Rover then I don't want one thank you

Possum Fink

PS Lead goes in as lead and comes out as lead and so is technically a catalyst. The action in breaking down long chain hydrocarbons to shorter chain ones is what lead does, and is what the Broquet claims to do.

PPS Does this thread make us all 'Armchair Chemical Engineers'?

david

I think this is all excellent stuff, jut imagine, £100, no more knock (I would still use 97RON though).

One question, how do you drop two of these items iether side of the tank? I have had a look at the size of them while I have been round at SS, but surely you don't just shove 'em down the filler cap?

Cheers

Dave

david

I've never been backward in coming forward, so I tried this...

For the attention of,

Malcolm Clements

Dear Mr Clement,

I am a proud owner of a Suburb Impreza Turbo WRX STi V, as you may be aware, these cars are designed to run on 100RON fuel and hence there are potential hazards to enthusiastic driving of these cars on the fuel grade available in the UK.

Since owning my car (April 99) I have always used 98/97RON fuel. Being an active member of the Subaru Impreza Drivers Club (SIDC) I have been made aware of the detonation concerns with my particular type of car due to the fuel differences between UK and Japanese grade fuel.

It has come to light through discussion with various club members that your product will allow for safe use of 97RON (and 95RON) fuels in these cars, however, there seems to be allot of scepticism within the club regarding the effectiveness of your product.

Over the last couple of months I have been driving my car with a 'KnockLink' installed, this device listens for detonation in the engine an informs the driver of detonation via a lighted console, and, unfortunately, my car (like most STI V's) exhibits knock during enthusiastic driving.

The point of my e-mail is to investigate further the effects of introducing two Broquet Fuel Catalyst '8 cone units' into the petrol tank. If you are in agreement (and apologies if this appears cheeky) I would like to offer my car as a test case to prove to the sceptical members within the SIDC of the value of your product. With the use of the 'KnockLink' I have fitted, it will be easy for me to investigate the benefits.

Yours in anticipation,

David Barthorpe

e-mail : DavidBarthorpe@Aol.Com

I sent it to the following email address

info@broquet.com, I hope it's the right one

I'll let you know what happens

Stupot

there is a reason for that. Give the number above a ring and find out why.


Stu

keith rose

......a word of advice to all you sceptics, theorists & would be chemists out there...contact Peter Wright direct & get the real world answers,experiences & results.phone 0113 2790016 , e mail Peter@carbonflo.freeserve.co.uk

Weaver

If the fuel contains lead after contact with the pellets and this gets blown out of the exhaust then surely it will knacker the cats?

Eric Chadwick

I believe fitting involves dropping the packs through the two access panels in the top of the fuel tank via the boot.

david

Cheers Eric,

Sounds straight forward, I'll let you all know how I get on.

Dave

[This message has been edited by david (edited 03-03-2000).]

Stupot

I have just come off the telephone to my sister who is a distributer for Broquet and the information I have is as follows. She was quite reluctant to be a distributer until she investigated the product to her satisfaction. She has visited their labs and seen demontrations on the pellets and how they work. I have an of example of the effects on an engine fitted with the product: 1987 1.8 golf head temp before unit fitted 85 degrees, after 82 degrees. block temp before, 80 degrees, after 74 degrees. CO reading before 2.15, after 1.70. The best results are to be found after approx 500 miles of use. I am thinking of getting one fitted just for the emmisions reduction alone. I am also told that Broquet are the only manufacturer that offer a full garuntee with the product. Although I am still to be convinced that it will prevent my STi engine knocking, I think it will help reduce it and thats got to be a good thing. You can find out more detail by phoning Michelle at AJ Still motors on 01293 533519. This way you can find out the opinions of someone who was willing to put her good company name on the line after being convinced of the product doing what it is said to do. I would like to add that I am impartial in this matter and dont work for Broquet or AJ Still motors. I would also like to put my car forward as a test case for the subaru cause
Stu

Pumpkin

I'm very sceptical about the Broquet things. Broquet have never managed to proove their claims.

Sceptical of Norwich...