See that Mark, you've got sm p**** at you.

Sm, as indicated by BobWilson, all you've got to show for your, "product" is a number. Who knows if that number is real.

Another point/question: How does one go about ascertaining a 7%-14% increase in fuel efficiency? Define, "fuel efficiency". On one trip I averaged 55 mpg, on another I averaged 48 mpg. Now, how do I determine any increase which might result from the use of your product?

Reduction in emissions in a car which is considered to be 0 emission, or nearly so? How are you measuring that?

And, as pointed out earlier: Why not patent the product?

Who would have thought that one could read the same kind of promise in a Pulitzer Prize winning novel written in 1939?

Tsk. Tsk.

 

Our hybrids are already star athletes. They shouldn't become junkies. Sm has no particular insight or interest in hybrids.

It's disturbing the kind of generalizations made from the product manifesto, as if all engine blocks, fuel systems, and gas & diesel fuels are equal candidates (and according to Sm, have been so for the last 30 years). I guess they never heard of the Top Tier Gas detergency standard, Ultra-Low Sulphur Diesel, aluminium engine blocks, common-rail diesel injection, piezo-electric injectors, pre-combustion burn, etc.

In my mind, as a consumer-level additive naysayer, it's not a question of whether the stuff works, but whether it is the right thing to do. I can't in any good conscience go about second-guessing the operating parameters of a vehicle that professionals have invested years of R&D to deliver to me.

This product is all about the naiveté of consumers.

 

Well, there you go, Sm. From Steinbeck's observation in 1939 to a verry scientific put-down it seems you've ridden into the wrong town.

So, take my advice stranger - "Saddle up and move out!"

 

You are very right. It was incredibly stupid of me to think that anyone on this forum was actually interested in the environment. It is truly a shame that we, as americans, are given an alternative and because we can't and won't go outside the norm, we can only put it down. No worries though. I will only post one more response on your forum. I am awaiting an email back from Jerry Lang, for Bob to get an answer for his "test". Mark, you are also correct, I apologize for name placing. I thought that I could get a word out to people who supposedly care about the environment and are not radicals. I was mistaken and will take no more of your time. Bob, as soon as I get an answer back from Mr. Lang, I will post it for you to see.

 

Check out this site, it helps all those failed FFI schmucks learn the real way to earn millions, you know, the secrets that the heads of FFI don't want them to know.

Sounds like this dumb farmer has a secret that can help any MLM dupe.

http://www.fuel-freedom-mlm.com/?gcl...FSkUiQodVyWnIw

Smdickens, can you verify the 98% FFI MLM failure rate the dumb farmer is claiming?

Unfortunately I have a father-in-law that hasn't met a MLM health product he didn't like. To him testimonials are better than any science, and MLM is absolutely the best way to buy/sell. We screen his calls since it's inevitably an attempt to expand his downline with a great new health opportunity.

 

I looked up Jerry Lang on Google. He did perform 2 tests on Mercedes which he reports showed increased gas milage. He goes on to point out one looks for a red deposit on spark plugs which indicates the cylinder and piston are coated. I always thought that one wanted to keep crap out of the combustion chamber. And now I wonder if your product violates the Law of Conservation of Energy.

On the other hand, one can go to the following website to read what actual users or participants discovered about FFI (I've always associated those initials with the Free French of WWII). http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/...Off0198149.htm

Remember what John Steinbeck wrote in Grapes of Wrath, p66, 1939: Drop one of these pills in your gas tank and you'll get 10 more miles per gallon.

You guys been around for 60+ years?

Oh, by the way, we're probably more reactionaries than radicals. But mostly we're realist who know a screwing before it happens.

And Sm, if you're one of the participants in this MLM? Bail while you can.

 

<GROAN>I should not feed the troll but it makes sense to do a line-by-line answer to this latest hybrid skeptic / 'magic pill' advocate:
This is a common misconception, a prejudice shared and fostered by automotive and copy-cat journalists. It seems that lacking an ability to understand the technology, they spread a lie that we are all "eco-nuts." This leads to a lot of foolish and useless efforts and a few spectacular failures in the market place: (1) Insight, (2) Silverado FAS hybrid, and (3) Accord hybrid. We can now add the FFI fuel pill.
The norm here is empiricism, the scientific method. Spin, advertising, and claims not backed by solid facts and data are abnormal . . . more propaganda and smoke.
Please don't for my sake. If Lang wants to come here and post, we'll have a fine discussion but we don't need an intermediary.
That remains a prejudice, a bit of nonsense spread by hybrid skeptic journalists. Unable to understand or appreciate the technology; unable to understand why we might want a fuel efficient vehicle that isn't a rolling piece of sh*t; they attribute what they don't understand to an exaggerated sense of 'eco.' You don't get it, they don't get it, but then there is no requirement in life that skeptics nor 'pill pushers' understand anything but a simple, "no sale."

I know real "eco" scientists and technologists and one thing for sure, you can't 'green wash' them. They are much, much brighter than the hybrid skeptics could ever imagine. The stupidity, the pure foolishness comes from those who think that 'green washing' works with the hardcore.
Invite Lang to post here and we'll have a fine discussion. If he doesn't have time, OK, but there is no need for follow-up.

If I ever decide to test your pill, it will be with a disposable engine, say a lawn mower or generator. I'll simply measure how long a quantity of fuel lasts using the exact same test conditions with and without the 'pill.' This is Engineering 101.

Bob Wilson

 

I say, bWilson, well done.

 

Jerry Lang, Randy Ray Nom Schwarzkopf were on World Business Review.

But I want to pursue the metaphor of the pill. That is, after all what Randy Ray called it - a pill.

So, to begin with in medicine a pill is tested in what we know is the scientific approach, the gold standard, of a product which will be used by humans. The double blind test. In effect, nobody knows who is getting the active, the cure if you will and who is getting the placebo.

Eventually, sooner rather than later the research is labeled succesful and the pill now gets its real test. It goes on sale, and sale here is the key word, it goes on sale to the public.

Now the research no longer has to be paid for by the pharma co's. The best of all possible world for them is that the research now is carried out on the public at the public's expense.

Over time, as the co rakes in money, some people are helped, some people it doesn't matter, some people are harmed and some even die.

It appears that not all people respond to the medication in the same way.

Now let us look at MPG-CAP. Jerry Lang carries out the research on two Mercedes. The pill works.

Sm tells us he uses the pill in his, "fleet" of 8 cars/trucks. The pill works.

However, there are other reports from users that the pill doesn't work, and indeed in some cases the car is harmed/damaged in some way. Perhaps with with drawl of the pill the engine returns to its former pristine condition. Perhaps not.

So, even attributing the best of intentions by FFI and Sm, what assurances are FFI and Sm giving us that the product will even do what it purports to do? Or can either assure us that our cars would not be damaged?

A money back guarantee? What happens if it's determined that the pill actually damaged the car, what will FFI and Sm do?

 

No, sm, that STATEMENT was incredibly stupid. Most of us care, some care a great deal. If you knew our forum at all, you would already know how stupid your assertion was.

Your powers of persuasion are very lacking. You may have a great product. We may all benefit from its use. With your "condemn us to convert us" mentality, rather than a "convince us to convert us" mentality - you have lost ANY potential interest and any potential sale.