Fitch Fuel Catalyst question

[buddah]

I dropped two (2) of these in each of my '02 Viper and my RX-1 over the summer. Seemed like a great idea since I couldn't do the summerizing back when I needed to since I was on crutches for 11+ weeks. Then, recently, I read a comment in SnowTech about the sleeves of pellets "banging around" in the tank and possibly damaging the fuel pickup.

That got me to thinking/worrying, how much of a problem do you think that might be? Anybody else used these yet, and if so, how did you address this issue?

Thanks,
Buddah

 

[Boston RX1]

I just installed them last week. Freddie swears by them. I had the same concerns as well. He said it would not hurt anything in the gas tank.

 

[Boston RX1]

I just installed them last week. Freddie swears by them. I had the same concerns as well. He said it would not hurt anything in the gas tank.

 

[Bob Miller]

I tried them in my 1998 Suzuki 1500 LC, and put on around 2000 miles with absolutely no difference in fuel mileage or performance :roll: I took it out of my tank and returned it and got my money back :wink:
I can not recommend them

 

[buddah]

fuel mileage

Bob,

I wasn't really looking for any boost in mileage, just the freshness of the fuel. I dropped them in my 99 Suburban (10 of them for the 44 gal. gas tank) and mileage on my trip to the U.P., 600 mi. right on the button, went from 16.1 to 17.4 with no other changes. Have to "assume" these were it, since like I said, didn't change anything else.

 

[fstblkwarrior]

The guys at snow tech have been using them in all their yard machines, dirtbikes etc. with perfect results so far. I want to get them, anyone have a partnumber of the recommended size for the rx?

 

[buddah]

They're pretty much all the same, as I understand it. You basically use one "sleeve" of pellets for every five gal. of gas to be treated. 10 or 12 gal. tanks in sleds = 2 sleeves each. 44 gal. tank on Suburban = 10 sleeves. Cost is approx $24.95 / sleeve, so it's not cheap. I just hope it's worth it in the long run. I have every reason to believe it will be.

 

[SUPERTUNER]

Then, recently, I read a comment in SnowTech about the sleeves of pellets "banging around" in the tank and possibly damaging the fuel pickup.

That got me to thinking/worrying, how much of a problem do you think that might be? Anybody else used these yet, and if so, how did you address this issue?

Thanks,
Buddah

It is impossible for they to hurt anything inside your gas tank. Think of it this way...Have you ever tried to throw a rock under water?

This product absolutely, positively works. I have tested them my way and have the resources at my shop to not have to believe a magazine ad or test. If you are not using them, you are the only one losing.

When I have more time, I will write detailed post about them but for now I'm afraidthat you are either going to have to beleive me or not.

I sell them for a reason...BECAUSE THEY WORK! Period. Have them in stock. My website tells of some real life experiences if you want to read something about the product.

More to come when I have more time.

Freddie Klies
www.easterncycleperf.com

 

[Roadrunner]

I'm trying them in my sled. I too was worried about them banging around in the tank. My "fix" was to remove the fuel level sending unit and using a couple of long zip ties, attach them to the body of the sending unit and let them hang down to the bottom of the tank. Reinstall the sending unit and you're ready to go. This way I can easily remove them if I want.

 

[tshelver]

I've seen tests on these things in the formal motorcycle and auto press (magazines), where they did back to back comparos of the Fitch versus stock.
No measurable difference.

One of these magazines does not accept advertising, goes to great lengths to test the various myths (motorcycle versus auto oil, fuel enhancers, protection capabilities of various leathers and synthetic materials and so on), and their review of the Fitch was not positive, to say the least.

With the pressure on corporate CAFE and emmission standards for all the auto / power sports manufacturers, you would think that if these worked as advertised, they would be all over them.
But no, for some reason we have to put up with really expensive lean burn engines, overly complex electronic and mechanical controls and more, when all the not-so-smart engineers have to do is throw in the Fitch.

Even better, seeing as how we snowmobilers have just been barred from Yellowstone at the last minute, let's through FFCs in all Yellowstone-bound machines and we'll be allowed back in. After all, according to the Fitch website, the City of York Council (Pennsylvania? England? Transylvania?) got a 90% reduction in hydrocarbons with the FFC! We'll be allowed back into the park immediately!

Yeah, I don't think so either.....

Fitch isn't advertising exactly how the catalyst works, what it is interacting with or anything else. And if it was a truly new idea, it would qute easily be patented. But to patent it, they'd have to list the formulation. Bad idea if you're trying to market fake science...

I don't see anything about patents. I don't see any postiive reviews from the reputable, professional auto / bike magazines that do comparative testing under controlled conditions. I don't see any in-depth technical information about how the product actually works. I don't see anything about what is actually in the catalyst. Nada, zip, zero.

I do see positive reviews from the niche Merkun Iron motorcycle magazines. You know, the ones who tell you that a loud pipe and shiny chrome double your horsepower and phallic size.
Add to that reviews from the various hop-up artists. You know, those guys with a dyno who sell you a product, conduct a cold test before installation, install the product, warm the machine up to optimal temperature, and test: hey presto, instant bolt-on power gain. Must be, the dynos says so.

If somebody could get me real proof, I'd shut up and buy the product. But, funny thing: on almost any forum where I have posted this kind of message, nobody comes up with real information.

All you get is the anecdotal 'I had problems with poor running, put in the FFC, ran through a few tanks of gas, and poof! all better!' kind of stuff.
Of course, nobody mentions that maybe he had a bad tank of gas to start with, or maybe his carbs were gummed up and the new fuel slowly cleaned them out.
Or maybe he was looking for fuel gains and so unconsciously drove with a light foot, or went on a long freeway cruise...

If it works for you, great. It's your money, your choice. Probably won't harm anything (as most of the testers say).

By the way, seeing as the Fitch works for you, did I tell you about this great new herbal product that adds 5 inches to your length? I've got a few boxes left I can let you have for a measly few hundred bills...

;->

 

[Bob Miller]

Like I said: I tried it and it did not work, and if it did I would say so! :shock:

 

[SUPERTUNER]

I've seen tests on these things in the formal motorcycle and auto press (magazines), where they did back to back comparos of the Fitch versus stock.
No measurable difference.

One of these magazines does not accept advertising, goes to great lengths to test the various myths (motorcycle versus auto oil, fuel enhancers, protection capabilities of various leathers and synthetic materials and so on), and their review of the Fitch was not positive, to say the least.

With the pressure on corporate CAFE and emmission standards for all the auto / power sports manufacturers, you would think that if these worked as advertised, they would be all over them.
But no, for some reason we have to put up with really expensive lean burn engines, overly complex electronic and mechanical controls and more, when all the not-so-smart engineers have to do is throw in the Fitch.

Even better, seeing as how we snowmobilers have just been barred from Yellowstone at the last minute, let's through FFCs in all Yellowstone-bound machines and we'll be allowed back in. After all, according to the Fitch website, the City of York Council (Pennsylvania? England? Transylvania?) got a 90% reduction in hydrocarbons with the FFC! We'll be allowed back into the park immediately!

Yeah, I don't think so either.....

Fitch isn't advertising exactly how the catalyst works, what it is interacting with or anything else. And if it was a truly new idea, it would qute easily be patented. But to patent it, they'd have to list the formulation. Bad idea if you're trying to market fake science...

I don't see anything about patents. I don't see any postiive reviews from the reputable, professional auto / bike magazines that do comparative testing under controlled conditions. I don't see any in-depth technical information about how the product actually works. I don't see anything about what is actually in the catalyst. Nada, zip, zero.

I do see positive reviews from the niche Merkun Iron motorcycle magazines. You know, the ones who tell you that a loud pipe and shiny chrome double your horsepower and phallic size.
Add to that reviews from the various hop-up artists. You know, those guys with a dyno who sell you a product, conduct a cold test before installation, install the product, warm the machine up to optimal temperature, and test: hey presto, instant bolt-on power gain. Must be, the dynos says so.

If somebody could get me real proof, I'd shut up and buy the product. But, funny thing: on almost any forum where I have posted this kind of message, nobody comes up with real information.

All you get is the anecdotal 'I had problems with poor running, put in the FFC, ran through a few tanks of gas, and poof! all better!' kind of stuff.
Of course, nobody mentions that maybe he had a bad tank of gas to start with, or maybe his carbs were gummed up and the new fuel slowly cleaned them out.
Or maybe he was looking for fuel gains and so unconsciously drove with a light foot, or went on a long freeway cruise...

If it works for you, great. It's your money, your choice. Probably won't harm anything (as most of the testers say).

By the way, seeing as the Fitch works for you, did I tell you about this great new herbal product that adds 5 inches to your length? I've got a few boxes left I can let you have for a measly few hundred bills...

;->

Wow...what a mouthful! Nice piece of writing there tshelver. Only problem is, your reply is full of holes.

Tell us all what you did to test this product?

 

[buddah]

tshelver,

I'm not out to do a testimonial for their product. Just reporting the simple facts that over four (4) trips to the U.P. from central OH (600 mi. each way) my average mileage in a 99 Suburban with 5.7L V-8 was 16.08 mpg. In three trips since adding the FFC the average mileage for each trip has been 17.444 mpg. Maybe I'm just not driving as fast or something :lol:

 

[fstblkwarrior]

I'm interested in it because of the fuel quality benefit. After getting nailed with a damm $200 bill to clean my carbs when the sled was only a month old, I've been on a quest. Snow Tech says it has worked as far as keeping fuel fresh.... I don't care about mileage!

 

[tshelver]

Buddah, that is pretty impressive mileage for a Suburban, with or without the FFCs. I used to only get around 14 - 15 towing a 2-place covered trailer with my Tahoe 5.7.
Last year I towed with a car (Aurora V8, don't ask) that got me a few mpg better. Towed the 2-place fine, but not as much control as the wife's Expedition.

Superturner: not trying to start a flame war, but when I saw a preceding post something like 'I sell these things, they work, I have the tests but I couldn't be bothered to publish them, just buy my product' I kind of saw red.

In a way, you make my point: there is no way I'm going to test this product. Just like I'm not going to test all the 'improve your manhood by 3 inches' or 'become a millionaire in 3 days' spams that cross my email on an hourly basis, as I'd go bankrupt (or blind and deaf) in days.

I (and probably most private individuals) don't have the ability or resources to conclusively test whether these things work or not. If the high-end magazines can't get a conclusive result, there is no way I'm going to do it.
And I'm not going to throw anything in my fuel tank just 'in case'. As for observable differences, I've just trailered up to Pittsburg and backi: last season I was picking up 16.5 - 17.5 mpg, this season it's 15 - 16 mpg. No difference in vehicle or trailer, no FFCs installed or removed...
On my bikes I can observe differences of up to 5 mpg between different trips. Again, no FFCs, just headwind or throttle control differences.

As for bad fuel / ruined carbs, never had it, just throw in stabilizer every season. Cheaper than buying the FFCs for the 3 cars, 3 bikes, 2 sleds, lawnmower, tractor, snowblower, edgers, saws and other sundry powered items.

As in anything, it's your money if you want to try it.
Bit of a religion thing: it's the nature of the beast that believers will spend the money and then defend their choice, and the naysayers (like me) will fight against being converted...

Regards