Fitch fuel Catalyst- Fact or Fiction ?

[TommyD]

So, one saturday afternoon I was watching 'Horespower TV' like I usually do and they had a dyno test of the Fitch Fuel Catalyst.

After the Dyno tests were done this is what they came up with,
octane HP Ft/Lbs gal/hour
without The Fitch 93 424 490 20.26
with the Fitch 93 426 493 19.70

without the Fitch 89 417 484 23.03
with the Fitch 89 417 484 20.59

This seems to show that with the Fitch installed you require less gas to produce the same Horsepower and Torque.
It would also seem to indicate that you should be able to use gas with lower octane with no adverse effects ( they should have compared 93 octane to 91).
Because I can only get 91 octane here, I was hoping that with the fitch I could use 89 octane and maybe save some money.

So to make a long story short, I purchased a Fitch Fuel Catalyst and have installed it on my charger.
I have kept detailed records of my fuel consumption over the last year and will see what happens with the fitch installed.
I will post back here in 2 weeks with the results.

[MikeEast]

I, for one, will be waiting with an open mind - I'd like to see your results and I'm not one of the 'If dodge didn't put it on the car it must suck' crowd...

Mike

[netnathan]

I was toutng the Fitch unit for a few months before the Horsepower TV test first aired. The "catalyst process" in this application makes sense to me, I have seen it work well in other similar appliactions.
A few members at some of the orther forums are running it with good results.
You can also see the Horsepower TV test here.
http://www.fitchcatalyst.com/automobiles.php

Go to the "How does it work" link on this site a nice video:
http://www.wesavefuel.com/

satfrat has been running one for over 6 months.
Maybe he will sing in.

[formerice]

425 hp at 20 gph is very efficient. A typical 425 hp diesel engine will burn 17-20 gph. A 320 hp 350 chevy marine engine that I owned would burn 35 gph. It was carbed not EFI though. If you can run 87 or 89 and get 93 octane performance, thats decent.

[TommyD]

Well after running thru 2 tanks of 91 octane my mileage has decreased.
Before the fitch I was getting 17/18 mpg (US) on a mixed drive (50% hwy 50% city)
After the fitch I got 17.7 mpg on the first tank and 16.4 mpg on the second tank.
Same gas station same 91 octane. The only conclusion I can come up with for now is that the 91octane isnt really 91 but maybe closer to 89 as it takes more lower octane gas to get the same HP.

I have just purchased a Diablo predator in the mean time and will start some data logging to see if there is any knock retard present when using this 91 octane.
More results will follow.

[05magmn]

There is another member on the forums here that bought one and was going to let us know how it worked, i don't remember if he did or not yet.
Here's alink to that thread
http://www.lxforums.com/board/showthread.php?t=77242

[desquirrel]

Absolute BS.

[TommyD]

Well it turns out I had got some bad gas from the service station. I finally got the diablo so did some logging and found I was getting a s**t load of st & lt knock retard. I put in a can of octane boost which got rid of the LT knk retard but I was still getting some ST.
I have since given up getting my gas from this service station and have switched to shell vpower 91 octane.
After installing the 91cai tune I took the car out for an extended road trip of 275kms using vpower 91octane and the diablo 91 octane CAI tune.
I was very surprised to find I got 23.7mpg (28.4mpg canadian) going 66mph (106 kmh). I set the cruise so the motor was turning 2100rpm.
All I can say is that the fitch catalyst & the diablo tune have shown some definite improvements in fuel economy. Before the fitch & diablo the most I could get was 18mpg.

[jhs914]

After installing the 91cai tune I took the car out for an extended road trip of 275kms using vpower 91octane and the diablo 91 octane CAI tune.
I was very surprised to find I got 23.7mpg (28.4mpg canadian) going 66mph (106 kmh). I set the cruise so the motor was turning 2100rpm.
All I can say is that the fitch catalyst & the diablo tune have shown some definite improvements in fuel economy. Before the fitch & diablo the most I could get was 18mpg.I get better than that with the Diablo and no Fitch catalyst.

[Mag Dr]

I get better than that with the Diablo and no Fitch catalyst.
same here, last road trip hwy 28-29 mpg city is 20-21

Doc

[TommyD]

Maybe the 5.7 with MDS, but not the 6.1 which I have.

[Mag Dr]

Very true, but know idea of what you have, not in a sig or your post.

Doc

[desquirrel]

Anybody try those copper bracelets for arthritis?? I heard you can get a big boost by stringing them across your radiator.

Threads like this convince me the avg American is a twit operating at a sub Jr High School level.

[TommyD]

Ya and you probably think the world is flat, man never set foot on the moon and airplanes are really too heavy to get off the ground.
Before you criticize maybe you should do your own real life test so you have some basis to base your comments on.
I was skeptical at first, so I bought the fitch and am testing it.
I dont know how much the increase in mpg is directly related to the fitch and how much to the diablo.
The next test will be to put the original tune back in and do another test.

[desquirrel]

Nahh, the world is round stuff you find out about in preschool.

Absolutely stupid.

[MattRobertson]

I get better than that with the Diablo and no Fitch catalyst.So do I. Furthermore when I had a 5.7L motor I did a 120-mile test over flat ground at an absolutely constant (cruise control) 65 mph. One run with and one run without MDS. Net result: 0.5 mpg increase. Dodge only claims MDS increases mileage "up to" 10%, so lets put the effect of MDS in the equation into perspective.

...switched to shell vpower 91 octane.

...After installing the 91cai tune

...Before the fitch & diablo the most I could get was 18mpg.
Actually, that is before the fitch, and before the Diablo, and before you started putting decent gas into the car.

I'm sorry but your experiment is worthless so far. You changed multiple parameters and you really have no idea which one gave you any benefit. What you have to do is

1. Pull the Fitch and the Diablo and let the adaptives do their work for maybe 200 miles. Then recheck your mileage having had decent gas in the tank for that entire time.

2. Put the Diablo in. Let it settle in adaptives-wise and run another mileage check.

3. Now you can put your Fitch in and see what happens. Only then have you controlled all of the other wildly swinging variables which have direct effect on your result.

Maybe the 5.7 with MDS, but not the 6.1 which I have.Look at my sig. I have a 6.4L motor and you can bet I have no MDS, I recently got 23.8 mpg on a tankful while driving to the race track... loaded with about 500 lbs of floor jacks, tools, spare parts, gas cans, ice chests, lawn chairs etc. Since I have a 320-mile commute I can get mileage numbers over a fixed course very quickly and reliably, and those numbers *look* better, although I haven't taken the time to check them.

Finally, if the wondrous Fitch fuel catalyst is so great, and the entire free world has been searching desperately for a way to reduce fuel costs ($4 gas is only arecent phenomenon in the U.S.) then why has this wonder-cure remained in near total obscurity, sold not in stores where billions (*billions*) could be made off the mass market... but dribbled out by a handful of multilevel marketers. Is the secret too good to let the inventor(s) make the *billions* of dollars they easily could by actually selling it to the public? One floor stand at one Wal-Mart in Bakersfield would probably double their worldwide sales overnight.

Follow the money. If there isn't any ... there's a reason.

[Husker]

Nahh, the world is round stuff you find out about in preschool.

Absolutely stupid.
Enough, no one asked for your comments, some people actually like to test to see the real answer instead of just THINKING they know it all....let it go. If you have nothing constructive to add, then don't add...

[Husker]

So do I. Furthermore when I had a 5.7L motor I did a 120-mile test over flat ground at an absolutely constant (cruise control) 65 mph. One run with and one run without MDS. Net result: 0.5 mpg increase. Dodge only claims MDS increases mileage "up to" 10%, so lets put the effect of MDS in the equation into perspective.


Actually, that is before the fitch, and before the Diablo, and before you started putting decent gas into the car.

I'm sorry but your experiement is worthless so far. You changed multiple parameters and you really have no idea which one gave you any benefit. What you have to do is

1. Pull the Fitch and the Diablo and let the adaptives do their work for maybe 200 miles. Then recheck your mileage having had decent gas in the tank for that entire time.

2. Put the Diablo in. Let it settile in adaptiveswise and run another mileage check.

3. Now you can put your Fitch in and see what happens. Only then have you controlled all of the other wildly swinging variables which have direct effect on your result.

Look at my sig. I have a 6.4L motor and you can bet I have no MDS, I recently got 23.8 mpg on a tankful while driving to the race track... loaded with about 500 lbs of floor jacks, tools, spare parts, gas cans, ice chests, lawn chairs etc. Since I have a 320-mile commute I can get mileage numbers over a fixed course very quickly and reliably, and those numbers *look* better, although I haven't taken the time to check them.

Finally, if the wondrous Fitch fuel catalyst is so great, and the entire free world has been searching desperately for a way to reduce fuel costs ($4 gas is only arecent phenomenon in the U.S.) then why has this wonder-cure remained in near total obscurity, sold not in stores where billions (*billions*) could be made off the mass market... but dribbled out by a handful of multilevel marketers. Is the secret too good to let the inventor(s) make the *billions* of dollars they easily could by actually selling it to the public? One floor stand at one Wal-Mart in Bakersfield would probably double their worldwide sales overnight.

Follow the money. If there isn't any ... there's a reason.

Good point Matt, you need to really set a baseline of sorts to really see if this thing is anything more then hype. Please let us know how it progresses!!

[MattRobertson]

If I were to guess, I'd say its really likely that the known problem of bad gas, and the known fact that you are now using Top Tier fuel is the bulk of the solution here. I am CMR tuned so I never tried the Diablo canned tunes, but when I had the Superchips brick they had a performance tune that increased mileage. You had to use 91 octane but we calculated out here on the forum that the increased fuel cost (at the time) was more than offset by the increased fuel economy. So the tuner can definitely improve mileage -- just as it could decrease it, I suppose.

I haven't conducted any tests, like I said. Those seem like decent working hypotheses though. Only a proper test will say for sure. For reasons I closed my little novel with above, I remain highly skeptical.

[netnathan]

Of course...cleaner fuel could also lead to better combustion and a cleaaner combustion chamber.

[MattRobertson]

or not. Nobody I have seen so far has actually run anything coming close to a proper test.

And a test of any sort will still leave the question unanswered: Why is this only sold in back alley channels? Why isn't it in stores where the real money... the real volume is? I mean, the whole gasoline-consuming planet is begging for solutions. Why is this one staying under the radar?

Edit:

Better yet, lets see this claim substantiated:


Once fuel has been refined, it sits in a holding tank, is pumped into transport vehicles, is shipped worldwide, sits in the holding tank at a gas station, and then you purchase it. That fuel refined as 93 octane has substantially lost its potency and freshness. The Fitch Fuel Catalysts help return gas station grade gasoline or diesel fuel back to its refinery-fresh state for increased fuel economy and performance.


That, to me, is just pure hogwash.

[netnathan]

Why is this only sold in back alley channels? Why isn't it in stores where the real money... the real volume is? I mean, the whole gasoline-consuming planet is begging for solutions. Why is this one staying under the radar?


Would you really list Summit Racing or Oshkosh Trucks as a "back alley channel".

Plus a host of other known performance and off road sites world wide....
Global distrubution list:
http://www.fitchfuelcatalyst.com/products/distributors.html

This isn't really a "clap on"...."calp off" type product and it is not a "buy one get 2 free" product. It isn't really cheap in cost either.

Check out the videos here:
http://www.fitchcatalyst.com/automobiles.php

Need reviews and not by just "joe blow":
http://www.fitchfuelcatalyst.com/products/reviews.cfm

Oh yea....90 day money back guarentee.
It may be a monor on the mod list but over time it may welll prove itself.

[MattRobertson]

OK I'll grant that. I actually found Summit after I posted.

But the real problem here is the blind acceptance of the seller's claims.

For example, the claim that fuel deteriorates meaningfully from refinery to pump. Now, I would hope no one would want to argue that fuel does not deteriorate over time. It does. Thats why you put in fuel stabilizers -or run the gas tank empty - before storing anything with a motor. But are we storing motors here? Are we letting tankfuls of gas sit for weeks? Furthermore, where is the expected time to market from the refinery cited in any of the seller's discussions? Who knows what that time is? Is anyone who is accepting the deterioration argument doing so from an informed standpoint or are they just taking the advertising at face value? What if i only takes a week to go from refinery to pump? Or a day? Who knows the answer, and once armed with that answer, who knows whether the claim is still valid?

As to the claim of this stuff cleaning fuel... Detergents in fuel are increasingly common. Especially with Top Tier spec-compliant vendors. Just like Top Tier vendors provide higher quality fuel in general. How does this factor into the product's claims, which are silent on this subject?

There are lots of testimonials on the Fitch site (many of them pertaining to diesel motors and stuff that sits all winter). But those aren't independent tests that make any attempt to fill in these gaps.

When someone makes extraordinary claims the burden is on them to back up those claims with *evidence*; rhetoric and anecdotes don't count. Consumers owe it to themselves to be skeptical and think critically.

[netnathan]

You forget Matt...a lot of members do not have the priveledge of driving their SRT all year. So some of these "storage" stories may mean something to them, but it still relates to the quality of the gas conditioning. I have had to completely rebuild my lawnmower carb more than once due to the winter strorage ruining the gas, but we are not talking about lawnmowers here.

Don't look at the "Fitch" as a perfomance adder (I mean, a stupid throttle body spacer may be worth 1HP), look at it as in the "quality of life" catagory, like Caviar or a fine wine for your engine.

[desquirrel]

Enough, no one asked for your comments, some people actually like to test to see the real answer instead of just THINKING they know it all....let it go. If you have nothing constructive to add, then don't add...

You should "be constructive" and stay mesmerized by the JC Whitney catalog. Preventing people from wasting money on this or "fuel pills" or any other scam that was "new" 50 years ago is quite constructive. I'll bet you didn't know there is a carb that gives 200mi/gal but the oil companies bought it up.

I would gladly match my credentials with yours.

[netnathan]

You should "be constructive" and stay mesmerized by the JC Whitney catalog. Preventing people from wasting money on this or "fuel pills" or any other scam that was "new" 50 years ago is quite constructive. I'll bet you didn't know there is a carb that gives 200mi/gal but the oil companies bought it up.

I would gladly match my credentials with yours.

Credentials?
If you want to discuss a product...get your facts straight...please.

The Fitch Fuel Catalyst was released after 1994....not quite "50 years ago". Strangely... the 200mpg carburetor was about 70 years ago.

200mpg carb... 100mpg carb...Wrong...proven true bs

Progue was the supposed inventor (between 1928 and 1935) of the 200 mpg carburator of which you speak.

"All a carburetor can do is meter and atomize fuel in correct proportion to air.
Any further increases have to come from increasing the thermal efficiency of the engine itself (such as raising compression) or reducing rolling friction. And this last is why a diesel locomotive with steel wheels will go ten times as far on a gallon of fuel as a diesel truck of the same weight with rubber tires.
For Pogue—or any similar carburetor—to go 100 mpg on a gallon of fuel on a vehicle normally going 20 mpg, the air/fuel ratio would have to be in the neighborhood of 75 to 1 or better."

"Put that in your pipe and smke it" (....but don't use a charcoal granulated filter, the Easter Bunny told me they don't work)

[desquirrel]

You're joking right? You think I was actually referring to a real device?

And I did not say the Fitch was 50 years old either. While you may think it unique, there are dozens of these junk items around and there have been for even MORE than 50 yrs.

200mpg carbs, fuel "catalysts", energy pills, are all shills used to extract money from the gullible.

Unbelievable.

[netnathan]

Find me another piece of "junk" that is as well supported and tested as the Fitch Fuel Catalyst. But I don't think you have done much research, just on a bandwagon attack.
There is more than one forum that has a few members that have "been around cars" (not newbies) and are seeing results with the Fitch. But I don't expect that statement to sway your view either, but that's okay. The world would be boring if everyone just said "okay, your right'.

[Husker]

You're joking right? You think I was actually referring to a real device?

And I did not say the Fitch was 50 years old either. While you may think it unique, there are dozens of these junk items around and there have been for even MORE than 50 yrs.

200mpg carbs, fuel "catalysts", energy pills, are all shills used to extract money from the gullible.

Unbelievable.
You are just acting like a sad little boy who really wants to be involved, but has ZERO to add. Go play back in the house little boy..if I rememeber I slapped you down a while ago about Syn oil and you ran away. If you have nothing to add to the thread, then pleas GO AWAY. NO ONE wants to hear your worthless comments...Don't make someone report your dribble to the mods, you have made many personal attacks at people calling them idiots etc...jsut let it go..

[NORCAL SS]

??????

[MattRobertson]

Find me another piece of "junk" that is as well supported and tested as the Fitch Fuel Catalyst.
I am seeing a lot of testimonials and anecdotes... virtually all of it sourced at the Fitch site. But precious little true research.

Don't mistake quantity -- something there's plenty of at the Fitch site -- for quality. Pare away the happy stories and you are left with almost nothing.

Did you read the file that seems to be the independent test prepped for when they asked for a CARB exemption? Even though its conclusions are positive, the data has some serious -- and totally glossed-over -- quirks that point to a bad test. But you have to read and make a stab at understanding the individual data before you realize that they are hiding something. The data they have effectively buried on that site while pushing the "wow its great!" stories into your face.

Its there for you. All you have to do is dig.

All I can see here is a device that will probably keep your fuel from going south when storing the vehicle for months at a time. For a couple bucks worth of fuel stabilizer bought at any auto parts store you can have that. For $230 plus shipping plus vehicle installation you get that from the Fitch. Over the life of a vehicle, how many bottles of stabilizer would you have to buy, and would it add up to $230?

[MattRobertson]

And on a separate matter, the vitriol in this thread has to stop. Stick to ridiculing the product if thats your point of view, but ridiculing the people here using it -- even back-handedly so the attack is indirect -- is over the top by the standards of this forum and unacceptable here.

http://foohbar.com/ul/modhat.gif

[netnathan]

Thanks Matt for coming back with civilized discussion.
Now back on topic.
And you are right, I rarely go by what si said on vendor sites. Obviously they are not going to print anything negative. But the distribution list tells a rather powerful story.

[netnathan]

You do have to search to find someone that is not a rep for Fitch Fuel for a good review. It seems almost everyone that has good results becomes a rep.
However...
On a $200,000 grant to investigate the Fitch Fuel claims....
" Lakeville, CT (May 26, 2006)…The Department of Chemistry at the
University of Connecticut recently released the result of three
studies that proves conclusively that the Fitch Fuel Catalyst
suppresses the growth of bacteria in gasoline, as well as DF-2, and
B20 bio diesel fuel. For anyone that relies upon these fuels for
commerce or pleasure, the impact of this finding is significant. By
suppressing bacteria in fuel, combustion is improved providing a host
of gains in performance, fuel economy and reduced gums."
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2006/05/26/008747.html

It is given a nod here:
http://www.motor-oil-engineers.com/Motor%20Oil%20Engineers%20PDF.pdf

[Husker]

I am wondering if this *MIGHT* add some value to someone like me who spends alot of time driving on the freeway..it would be a interesting test...

[MattRobertson]

Like I said, I think it does probably help preserve fuel... but is the time frame meaningful for the most of us, and can we get the same benefit from a fuel stabilizer that is far cheaper individually and over the life of the car?

And read that story you linked, Netnathan... its all about fuel storage over the long term and the improvement is shown with fuel thats already contaminated. We don't get that from the pump.


ooh. ooh. wait don't just read the story you linked. Go to Langmuir -- the actual scientific source journal -- and read the abstract of the study (I'm not paying $25 to read it all).

Effect of a Metal Alloy Fuel Catalyst on Bacterial Growth (http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/langd5/2005/21/i23/abs/la050912k.html)

The abstract is short enough, but some of it is worth ... abstracting ... here for a nice little sound bite:

"The growth of the bacteria in the water and mineral-supplemented gasoline mixture over 6-8 weeks was monitored by the viable plate count method. While an initial increase in bacteria occurred in the first week, overall bacterial growth was found to be suppressed in the presence of the alloy. "

OK so what its telling us is that, first and foremost, the material actually makes the problem worse than untreated gas in the short term, but over the long term ... a six to eight week period ... its better versus an untreated control.

So much for this stuff helping the fuel of a daily driver.

And there seems to be a correlation with another study. Remember I mentioned the CARB exemption test? Read that and note the difference in the 500 mile test versus the 1000 mile test... and while you are at it wonder why they never ever mention the mileage results of the 1000 mile test.

Remember... claims require proof and proof is not anecdotes.


EDIT:

Mallory Marine Fuel Stabilizer (http://store.summitracing.com/partdetail.asp?autofilter=1&part=MAA%2D9%2D82200&N=700+324643+115&autoview=sku): $5.98
Stored fuel can deteriorate in 60 days, causing gum and varnish buildup in the fuel
system, hard starting, and poor performance. Mallory Marine fuel stabilizer keeps fuel
fresh for easier starts, less maintenance, and improved performance. It also helps
prevent your carburetor and fuel system from varnishing during storage or extended
out-of-use periods and keeps fuel fresh for up to one year.
http://static.summitracing.com/global/images/prod/norm/maa-9-82200_w_m.jpg

[netnathan]

I wonder about the test Horsepower TV did on a dyno.
http://www.fitchcatalyst.com/automobiles.php

It was only a couple of HP but it did take less fuel to do so.

[InferAl]

Is it something like this http://www.de-bug.co.nz/ I came across this a couple years ago when I got a algea in the tank of my truck. I must have picked up some bad diesel and I could not get rid of it. I was changing fuel filters every 3-4 days and using Biocide to try to kill it. It went on for weeks and I finally got rid of it. I almost bought one of these units

[netnathan]

I wonder about the test Horsepower TV did oin a dyno.
http://www.fitchcatalyst.com/automobiles.php

It was only a couple of HP but it did take less fuel to do so.

Let me be clear.
I don't give a lot of kudo to SOME of Horsepower TV adds and claims. I mean they claimed the Airaid CAI with the scoop was worth 20% TQ and 15% HP. I think they should have seen something wrong with this before they stated it. Maybe 15HP and 20TQ is a little more feasible but using % is ridiculous. If I have a 426 with 500HP on a stock airbox all I have to do is add an AirRiad and I get a 75HP adder (15% of 500). What a joke.

However, recently HP TV has started usng a dyno for testing and it has made things a lot more believable. They are very good at this they as they do 3 pulls allways making sure temps are the same....they have done their howework here. Now I don't believe in buying a $200 mod for a lousey 2hp but there seem to be fuel savings here which at $4.15 a gallon in CA, it is hard to ignore. If you plan on keeping your car for a few years, this device may well give you cleaner fuel train components.

[MattRobertson]

The only independent tests of any repute said nothing about fuel economy.

Does HPTV accept advertising from Fitch? Do they do segments for pay? A few weeks ago my company was approached by a n automotive cable tv show that offered to showcase my product in a segment ... for a price, where part of the price I was paying would allow me to re-use their 'A' footage (the stuff that is the broadcast segment) and 'B' footage (the stuff they cut out) in my own advertising... as in a little window on my web site. And to be able to say "...as seen on BlahBlah". Just like Fitch. All I had to do was write out a fat check and -- in this case -- make myself available for an interview.

TV shows are a business and what they show, one way or another, is a part of their bottom line. I don't buy a word of what I see on commercial television as independent unless there's a lot more info that establishes that independence and exposes their methodology.

[desquirrel]

1) If you do a search on Fitch, you get 60 billion hits, all from Fitch websites around the globe and their dealers. That should tell you something.
2) If you failed HS chemistry, you should still realize that catalyzing long chain organic molecules into smaller chains takes a bit more than a tin tube with some copper gauze, etc in it. Odd that such a reaction occurs without the need for replenishment. Sort of a perpetual motion machine.
3) As to "you mean to say such and such who tested it is lying" Yes
4) Most people have no idea how to conduct a test never mind interpret the results. In one test of the Fitch (Australia??) they tested it and the numbers increased. Before the brigade watching could chant, they took it off and retested and got the same results.

This is just another in a long line of crap. One used to advertise "used by the RAF in WWII". Sadly, the RAF seems to have lost track of it.

And it is indeed hard to find anyone who has tested this thing. You know why? Because anyone who knows ANYTHING about what it CLAIMS to do just can't stop laughing. Why don't the "we could give it a try" proponents here rip the ad out and send it to school and have their kids show it to a science or chemistry teacher and report back the results?