Not sure what to say. You ask a question, and get several replies. Mine was one of them. Not stated previously, but my background is a degree in mechanical engineering, registered professional engineer, worked as a mechanic many years ago, 20 years working for a company that sells/services engines and related equipment (not automotive), hobby car nut. My comment in the post above was along the lines of "don't believe me, check out the EPA and the California Energy Commisison" They have tested many identical devices. All are crap. Read the stories on the Energycel, and it isn't even about the product, it is a marketing scheme. Once more now: The Energycel is a complete scam. That is as clear as I know how to state it.

So, are you a distributor trying to drum up business? If so, it isn't working. If not, go back and read the posts to the question you asked. Seeing as how you got suckered previously, maybe you just want to base your decision on that experience. Good luck, whatever you decide.

thank you JCL as I did take a look at those articles...i think you were referring to the Fuelmax article since almost all the other articles were written up in the 70s and 80s. The EPA only dismisses the claims of Fuelmax and not any other product it hasn't tested. The other tests were from 20+ years ago and while the conclusion is the same from test to test, technology might have advanced since then and maybe this one works since no one that has used the product has spoken negatively of it. Obviously no one from this board has installed it.......as for being a distributor, no I am not ......the marketing is MLM and I would never join something like that. I'm not asking anyone to go buy it, i'm just wondering if anyone has tried it. And if I was suckered into buying something before, then so were about 15 others on this board that bought the same thing I did. We bought a product that was suppose to just like OEM but better, yet has problems that the OEM one never had, but I won't get into that.

probably because it's such an outrageous claim that there is no point in validating. I smell big time horse shit..

No Xpert here, but my sense is that when a
"breakthrough" or, even any gizmo or process
that provides for considerable improvement
happens, "we" will know about it in half a day
or less.

My point is if/when an advance that is
repeatable, tested and of real value
occurs, the media would be all over it...
no one is gonna hide it under a bushel
basket. Even a car mfg'er would brag
as it would give a slight edge and good
press to that mfg'er.

If a mfg'er could produce the 40 mpg
Hot Rod or the 50 mpg van that holds
8 and is not driven by water buffaloes,
we would hear about it, asap.

All the rest of that stuff that pops up
on the scam/invention radar is crap, imo.

Better to spend that dough on Lotto Tix
or, buy the CEO some flowers and dindin.
BR,mD

Not sure about a Fuelmax article (the only Fuelmax device in the link I provided is a bleed valve that replaces the EGR valve). I provided two links in my previous post. The CEC page lists the following devices under the category of "magnets attached around the fuel line":

These are the same types of devices as the subject of the thread, except for the Wickliff Polarizer, which adds additional magnets to the intake air tract, as I understand it. Bonus.

The above devices are all individually listed on the other link I provided, the actual EPA test results. They had no effect on gas mileage.

While automotive technology has certainly changed over the past twenty years (electronic fuel injection, etc) I don't think magnets are working any differently these days. North is still north, south is still south, and so on. Also, the claims around the ability of these magnets to change the molecular structure of the fuel are lifted from the previous devices, twenty years ago. They didn't even invent new claims, they just recycled them.

Have a great day

Jeff