Most effective anti-vibration yet.... (tweak)

penance, as with audio tweaks, you'll see all kinds of "performance enhancing" gadgets out there for cars, usually with associated dyno plots etc but that's no real indication that they work.

A prime example is the Ecotek CB-26P device which looks like it has all the mags raving over it, lots of happy customers and apparently lots of data backing up it's claims. Unfortunately, it's all bullshit. See here where someone has actually looked at it scientifically.

If they really worked so well then why don't car manufacturers fit them as standard? ;)

Michael.
 
Tim, I don't know how much attention you paid to my rack when you visited, but you've hit on the principle behind it.
 
Might that particular tweak be more easily and neatly done with large bubble wrap? I mean just cut out a few large bubbles and place them between the cable and the floor
Click to expand...

Sorry Martin,
I missed this earlier :o
Yes , its a good idea , it,ll certainly be more discreet than what I was using .Whether one is more effective than the other is another thing .
For the cost involved I,d try them both .
 
penance said:
Oh, and as to why the dont fit them in the factory, cost!
Click to expand...
These things (the Ecotek devices) cost about £50, that's for one, to a private buyer. If a manufacturer wanted to fit them they could probably bring that down to about £10 a pop buying bulk etc. Do you really think that Ford, VW or BMW or whoever would skimp on £10 for something that claims to make such radical improvements in fuel economy and performance? They spend millions of dollars in research and in labs trying to eek out that last MPG or BHP. Believe me, if the device worked, the manufacturers would all be fitting them as standard.

Michael.
 
Shakti stones eh?, personaly I don't the weight issue is the reason for using them :D
I've had 4 in my system for best part of 1/2 year and an extra one more recently, It sits on the CDp at the front right hand side seems to like there :)
Please do carry on with urine extraction, I'm a bit pooped so need some light entertainment :D
 
michaelab said:
Do you really think that Ford, VW or BMW or whoever would skimp on £10
Click to expand...

Yep i do.
For any large company every saving counts. If it cost them 10$ to fit to each vehicle and they made say 50,000 of that model a year, it makes a considerable saving for them.
 
and then of course there's the opec/car manufacturers secret accord saying that average fuel consumption won't go above a certain value. it's the aliens fault really they're trying to change our atmosphere for colonisation purposes. the illuminati are in on it too. just watch they live - it was a documentary not fiction goddamnit.
cheers


julian
 
penance said:
For any large company every saving counts.
Click to expand...
Precisely. If the Ecotek product did what they claim it does then it would be a huge saving in R&D costs for the car companies, money they would have spent trying to get the same economy and performance gains by conventional means. £10 per car to get those kinds of improvements would be a miracle and they'd jump at it. But they don't ;)

Michael.
 
Sorry Micheal, but i think from a business point of view you are wrong.
Also, when oil companies are taken into account things become clearer.
I wonder why the auto industry never accepted the high efficiency carb design and chose to stick with the old in-efficient type..
 
penance said:
Sorry Micheal, but i think from a business point of view you are wrong.
Click to expand...
Why? There's no doubt that if this device (and similar ones) did what they say they do they'd save the auto industry millions.

Also, when oil companies are taken into account things become clearer.
Click to expand...
You don't seriously believe that stuff about the oil companies "making sure" that little devices which save fuel don't succeed? That's just conspiracy theory stuff cooked up by the inventors/makers of these gadgets as to why they haven't been successful :rolleyes: .

I wonder why the auto industry never accepted the high efficiency carb design and chose to stick with the old in-efficient type
Click to expand...
I never heard about that, what are the details? However, it's likely that they knew that fuel-injection would soon be mandatory so no point in changing things for just a couple of years (assuming what you're talking about happened in the 80s).

Michael.
 
Micheal, do you seriously believe auto manufacturers give a damn about the end user, they just want your cash. Same in all industries.
With that in mind, i dont see how the device would save them millions, they still have to pay to fit it.


Looks like the carb story is false anyway.
 
penance said:
Micheal, do you seriously believe auto manufacturers give a damn about the end user, they just want your cash. Same in all industries.
Click to expand...
I think that some car companies do give a damn about the end user but that's beside the point. They do want your cash, that's correct, and if they made a car that was far more economical than their competitors with no loss of performance and for a similar price, which car do you think people would be handing over their cash for?

Michael.
 
from what i can work out the device in question (and the mythical carb) both work by making the fuel more of a vapor. modern computer modeling, and design coupled with ecu controlled fuel injection already optimises this for a given cylinder head / compression ratio etc. for example the reason why diesel engines have improved so markedly over the past few years is for precisely this reason. this is probably why manufacturers don't fit the device as standard. however nova ned and his mates will get an improvement as these things weren't possible when their rusting kak heaps were made.
cheers


julian
 

Latest posts

Back
Top