Techron, Seafoam, or Thinner?

[QuirkySwede]

castconcrete, thank you. Added it to the top. Doesn't look much different than Chevron Techron. Interesting what one finds when you get past branding and marketing, isn't it?

precopster and erikv11, by that method, every wire in the entire car should be checked when chasing a faulty brake light. The original post was edited only to add the Gumout and Marvel products as noted -- the questions never changed. There are plenty of other threads to post banter on, nothing wrong with that, but that doesn't mean EVERY thread has to be like that nor technical discussions are not allowed. Please start a different thread versus trying to hijack this one.

[precopster]

Great to see you're taking our comments on board.

This thread's as good as any and I still believe I'm on topic.

[j-dawg]

i ran some techron through my fuel system after hearing a lumpy idle and the idle smoothed out. i attribute this to the techron, but i have no proof. i can post before/after youtubes if it matches the criteria - it's recorded so you can tell the difference, but it's still subjective, and not a quantified improvement. (it's also highly nonscientific; it's possible that in a few more tanks the idle would have smoothed itself out anyway.)

[98T5]

What about Lucas poroducts or ZMax products?

[jimmy57]

I would love to hear from anyone who bought a car, did the crankcase vent box, used whatever additive, and then had intake off later for some repair. That is the only way I can see that we can get any results that are valid. Even this way is open for the fuel used to be the reason it is cleaner and not the additive.
So many things can affect engine driveability besides something dumped into tank. Spark plugs, throttle cleaning, oxygen sensors, new catalyst, and new driving habits (they build a road and you now take an expressway in place of the old route with stops and lots of idling).

We can't disregard how much of our use of additives is psychological improvement.

I do not use gasoline additives and have had no issues on cars with 100K plus miles that I put on them.
Years back I had problems and worked on cars with deposit issues affecting injectors and the back on inlet valve head. The fuel companies were badgered by automakers and detergent additives were added or increased and those issues have been absent mostly for a long time.
I know my experience is not the same as everyone else and my driving is not the same either. I drive hard and don't generally fare too well in MPG numbers so I would assume the extra fuel going through ports and higher cylinder pressures with more air passing through cylinders has affects that someone who drives for top MPG won't see.

[matthew1]

These threads are often Internet rabbit holes because of one glaring, monumental fact: we can't see inside our engines to make a call on if a product has "worked" or not.

It's all second (third? fourth?) order evaluation -- better idle, better power, lower fuel consumption.

Also (ok two facts) any individual here probably has on average 1.5 samples to conduct these tests on. To be scientifically valid one would need hundreds or thousands of Volvos, all the same year. Multiplied times the number of products we'd like to test. Yea.

Now, I'm not bashing the quest for more knowledge or a reasonable debate, this is just my 2¢.

I'll continue to read this with my scientific antennae out, and on, just please everybody pretend you're in some Gilded Halls of Knowledge, where sarcasm, snark and ad-hominems are not even thought of, let alone written, and anything but pure unadulterated respect will get you changed into a pumpkin.

[precopster]

Most name brand fuel cleaners are 100% hydrocarbons with some pretty red dyes added. You pay $10-$12 here in Oz for a 200ml bottle when you can just buy a 4 litre can for $20 at the local hardware. Reading labels is apparently beyond the scope of the average consumer. What a crock!!!

Like jimmy I drive hard, have average fuel consumption figures and use the rev range and performance of my vehicles. I've NEVER had stifled injectors or blown valves I believe because of the extra fuel introduced.

There are some high tech fuel additives made by companies no-one has even heard of which are TUV approved (please look up what this means) and can separate water in the tank and hold it in suspension in the fuel so it can be pumped out. They also keep injectors clean and change the chemical composition of the gas outputs from an engine.

Unfortunately they are not available in the USA. They also reduce NO (nitrous oxide) outputs to almost negligible levels.

I attended a demo where a large diesel van was run in a closed room without the additive (we almost choked on the smell) and then ran with the additive and we couldn't smell the fumes. Perhaps not a scientific test because NOs are deadly fumeless killers however all the other gases apparently had lowered to much lower levels. This coincides with the TUV approval certificates the product had received

I attended other demos of this company's products and tried one of their oil additives which is a halogenated carbon coating for engine parts. The product always achieved its objectives of friction reduction and fuel savings.

[98T5]

I wonder if using compressed air to blow out the "coked up" stuff inside the breather box would work? or maybe a way to suck it out with a strong shop vac?

has anybody tried this?

I was also flirting with the idea of running a hanger down into the black box and wiggling it around in there to knock some of the coke out of the hole. then suck it out with a shop vac.

has anybody tried THIS?

[joe_pinehill]

I would love to hear from anyone who bought a car, did the crankcase vent box, used whatever additive, and then had intake off later for some repair. That is the only way I can see that we can get any results that are valid. Even this way is open for the fuel used to be the reason it is cleaner and not the additive.
So many things can affect engine driveability besides something dumped into tank. Spark plugs, throttle cleaning, oxygen sensors, new catalyst, and new driving habits (they build a road and you now take an expressway in place of the old route with stops and lots of idling).

We can't disregard how much of our use of additives is psychological improvement.

I do not use gasoline additives and have had no issues on cars with 100K plus miles that I put on them.
Years back I had problems and worked on cars with deposit issues affecting injectors and the back on inlet valve head. The fuel companies were badgered by automakers and detergent additives were added or increased and those issues have been absent mostly for a long time.
I know my experience is not the same as everyone else and my driving is not the same either. I drive hard and don't generally fare too well in MPG numbers so I would assume the extra fuel going through ports and higher cylinder pressures with more air passing through cylinders has affects that someone who drives for top MPG won't see.

There's no mechanic in a bottle, I think use synthetic oil to have minimum volatiles in the PCV, change your gas filter, and you are doing the best you can. Eventually you will have to do a PCV service.

[JRL]

I initially said that Seafoam seems to work well on Volvos is because I've used it many times.
My first experience was a car I bought many years ago, a 98 V70T5M with about 150K on the clock.

When it came here and after I drove it, it was very slow.
We took compression and a leakdown test and two cylinders had about 20!
The rest were in the 150-160 range.

After a proper Seafoam treatment we took another compression test and those two cylinders had 140 and 145!
Did a second treatment and to this day after the car was brought back to a good stage 0, it's still running decently and has well over 200K miles now!

So now I incorporate a Seafoam treatment on all higher mileage or poorly maintained cars I sell. After doing a breather and everything else, spending another 15 minutes doing a Seafoam treatment can make a huge difference.