MAGNETS ON FUEL LINES

[jenevers]

Has anyone found these to be effective in improving performance/efficiency?

[Dalslandia]

They are just as effective as magnets around your wrist, if you beleve in it they work, and don't want to edmit you got fooled, others it is just BS.

[Davidss]

Has anyone found these to be effective in improving performance/efficiency?

Yes, I have. I also know one other person who could detect an improvement on a repeat basis.

In a thread on a small mailing list, he was the only other person to admit using a fuel line magnet.

The two installations were magnets from different suppliers, but were sold for this particular purpose.

However, these were fitted to diesel engined cars, with 'plastic' fuel lines.

 

I'm not sure a UK narrow-boat diesel engine has the same scope for improvement; to my mind they are not expected to deliver the same performance (which I suppose can be classed in this context as 'they don't flow fuel at the same rate or quantity').

I'd expect steel fuel pipes to have a detrimental effect on the strength of the magnet field the fuel actually passes through (the steel would effectively route the magnetic field around the fuel).

 

As a matter of interest, I inadvertently made an experiment.

I trialled the installation using the standard 'plastic' fuel line, let's say 6mm ID, but there was a concern that the weight of the magnet might mechanically stress the fuel line and cause it to crack.

Having noticed an improvement, I mounted the magnet on the engine, which necessitated installing a longer (plastic) pipe line. I noticed that the improvement seemed to have diminished or even disappeared, but couldn't explain why.

As you will note, most respondees will be inexperienced, but sceptic, so I didn't ask for assistance.

 

Ironically, some time later my new pipeline fractured, as it was not a plastic intended for the use I was putting it to. My fault.

For the repair I used the correct grade of plastic pipe, of the original diameter, but routed through the magnet.

The improvement returned, which caused me to consider the problem again.

My first pipe fitment was, for various reasons, 8mm ID, and at first glance this doesn't seem much different to the original 6mm.

Only after fitting the second pipe did I do the maths, 6mm = 28.28 sq mm, 8mm = 50.27 sq mm, a considerable increase.

 

Note that the void between the magnets was not altered. I doubt whether the amount of fuel flowing through the 'magnetic void' increases as the pipe diameter increased, although it must be borne in mind that this fuel flow is not just what the engine burns, but includes the fuel that eventually passes back down the spill line.

 

I'm not sure quite why the greater amount of fuel in the 'magnetic void' should have such a marked effect; I can only think the magnets were only just strong enough, although they did seem very strong.

 

In previous discussions, elsewhere, some people doubt the effectiveness of magnets on fluid that is not obviously magnetic, but I can only point to the effectiveness of Magnetic Resonance Imaging used on human bodies. The magnetic void is obviously larger, but I don't know how strong the magnetic field is; possibly the measuring equipment is very much more sensitive than a 'mere' engine operator :-)

 

HTH.

 

Hopefully, any sceptics, inexperienced in this field, will excuse me if I don't bother to respond to every slight on my sanity, truthfulness, or other personal quality they wish to call into question.

 

If you have a technical query, by all means ask.

[Tony Brooks]

 

If you have a technical query, by all means ask.

Yes, do you still have the Dynamo meter data from your tests, including the fuel consumption date and method of measuring it.

 

This could be very interesting.

[blackrose]

As a matter of interest, I inadvertently made an experiment.

I trialled the installation using the standard 'plastic' fuel line, let's say 6mm ID, but there was a concern that the weight of the magnet might mechanically stress the fuel line and cause it to crack.

 

What is a standard plastic fuel line?

 

You mean a flexible rubber fuel hose? How does one of those crack unless it's already perished?

[nicknorman]

Yes, I have. I also know one other person who could detect an improvement on a repeat basis.

In a thread on a small mailing list, he was the only other person to admit using a fuel line magnet.

The two installations were magnets from different suppliers, but were sold for this particular purpose.

However, these were fitted to diesel engined cars, with 'plastic' fuel lines.

 

I'm not sure a UK narrow-boat diesel engine has the same scope for improvement; to my mind they are not expected to deliver the same performance (which I suppose can be classed in this context as 'they don't flow fuel at the same rate or quantity').

I'd expect steel fuel pipes to have a detrimental effect on the strength of the magnet field the fuel actually passes through (the steel would effectively route the magnetic field around the fuel).

 

As a matter of interest, I inadvertently made an experiment.

I trialled the installation using the standard 'plastic' fuel line, let's say 6mm ID, but there was a concern that the weight of the magnet might mechanically stress the fuel line and cause it to crack.

Having noticed an improvement, I mounted the magnet on the engine, which necessitated installing a longer (plastic) pipe line. I noticed that the improvement seemed to have diminished or even disappeared, but couldn't explain why.

As you will note, most respondees will be inexperienced, but sceptic, so I didn't ask for assistance.

 

Ironically, some time later my new pipeline fractured, as it was not a plastic intended for the use I was putting it to. My fault.

For the repair I used the correct grade of plastic pipe, of the original diameter, but routed through the magnet.

The improvement returned, which caused me to consider the problem again.

My first pipe fitment was, for various reasons, 8mm ID, and at first glance this doesn't seem much different to the original 6mm.

Only after fitting the second pipe did I do the maths, 6mm = 28.28 sq mm, 8mm = 50.27 sq mm, a considerable increase.

 

Note that the void between the magnets was not altered. I doubt whether the amount of fuel flowing through the 'magnetic void' increases as the pipe diameter increased, although it must be borne in mind that this fuel flow is not just what the engine burns, but includes the fuel that eventually passes back down the spill line.

 

I'm not sure quite why the greater amount of fuel in the 'magnetic void' should have such a marked effect; I can only think the magnets were only just strong enough, although they did seem very strong.

 

In previous discussions, elsewhere, some people doubt the effectiveness of magnets on fluid that is not obviously magnetic, but I can only point to the effectiveness of Magnetic Resonance Imaging used on human bodies. The magnetic void is obviously larger, but I don't know how strong the magnetic field is; possibly the measuring equipment is very much more sensitive than a 'mere' engine operator :-)

 

HTH.

 

Hopefully, any sceptics, inexperienced in this field, will excuse me if I don't bother to respond to every slight on my sanity, truthfulness, or other personal quality they wish to call into question.

 

If you have a technical query, by all means ask.

Interesting. Could you confirm what you mean by "an improvement" and how you measured it?

[RLWP]

There was a fascinating article in The Human Zoo on Radio 4 about peoples attitude to climate change. Basically, human beings will discredit or ignore experts and data that don't support their opinions, and over emphasise the ones that do

 

Magnets have a very long history as the source of mysterious improvements, largely replaced over time by electricity, then radioactivity. I'm not sure what the latest miracle is

 

I can confirm that if you fit magnets to your fuel line, you will definitely increase the number of magnets on your boat

 

Richard

Edited July 3, 2013 by RLWP

[Jambo]

Has anyone found these to be effective in improving performance/efficiency?

 

Save your money, stay well clear.

 

The US EPA tested a load of supposed fuel saving / emissions reducing devices used in an automotive context. You can see the results in the links below. Regarding fuel line devices I've excerpted their comments from the summary below.

 

Importantly there is no plausible mechanism by which magnetism could affect fuel consumption - essentially the devices make claims that are magical and have no scientific foundation.

 

Of course many people report fuel savings after fitting them and they may well see fuel savings but that's due to subconscious behaviour change which leads to more efficient driving or possibly a change in route which leads to lower fuel consumption, not due to magnetism.

Fuel Line Devices

You may see advertisements for devices that heat, magnetize, ionize, irradiate, or add metals to your vehicle’s fuel lines and purport to increase your vehicle’s fuel economy and reduce exhaust emissions. EPA testing and engineering analysis of such devices to date has shown no substantive effect on fuel economy or exhaust emissions. Installation of devices that retard timing or adjust the air-fuel ratio of the vehicle may be considered tampering.

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/consumer/420f11036.pdf

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/consumer/reports.htm

[Bobbybass]

I heard an owl hoot three times..and my fuel consumption improved...

 

I 'think' that if you did this test with a sample of people who had the plasebo ..'magnet..no magnet'...then the results would be vaild.

In my opinion (only opinion)...you cannot produce valid data..if you know that the device is present. If you have spent time fiddling with fuel pipes..and buying magnets...you will 'want' it to work...and your throttle use will subconsciously reflect this no matter how hard you try.

 

The USA program mythbusters....tried various devices but applied scientific principles...there was no difference. They simply ran an engine on a more accurate 'rig' monitoring RPM etc ...passing the fuel through plastic tube past a variety of magnets and magnetic devices. There was no improvement.

 

In my 'opinion' again....the only variable that can be introduced that can increase the fuel economy..is the unregulated hand on the throttle

Edited July 3, 2013 by Bobbybass

[Davidss]

Yes, do you still have the Dynamo meter data from your tests, including the fuel consumption date and method of measuring it.

 

This could be very interesting.

I agree, dynamometer data could be very interesting, but I don't have any.

I can't claim an increase in outright power, which is what is normally measured on a dynamometer, because I had no means of measuring it.

The improvement I did notice was smoothness and pick-up at low speed, typically first or second gear, from tickover or just above, when the engine was cold.

My colleague also noted an improvement while the engine was cold. In his case he did a regular commute over minor roads, (thus little traffic to influence behaviour). The automatic gearbox would not lock-up in top gear until the engine was warm. The lock-up state was identified by comparing rpm to road speed. With the magnet in place, lock-up occurred earlier in the trip, attributed to the engine warming more quickly, which he attributed to the engine burning 'magnetised' fuel more efficiently.

 

In my case, fuel consumption was measured by recording the mileage completed when refilling the tank; I tended to go from tank full to tank 'almost empty', which was generally around 80 litres. Easy enough to arrange while commuting, but deviated from when long trips were planned / undertaken. Obviously there were many factors affecting the fuel consumption over the 400 - 500 miles between each fill. There was no obvious 'step change' in my recordings.

 

The magnet was in place from late 2000 to November 2009, during which time 95 thousand miles were travelled. I don't appear to have a record when the fuel pipes were changed.

 

The original question was "Has anyone found these to be effective in improving performance/efficiency?".

I am answering in the affirmative, and explaining the circumstances why I got the same answer twice.

I make no claim about cost-effectiveness, as this can depend so much on the purchase price. Expensive UK pricing in my case, cheap China / Ebay in the case of my colleague.

 

I no longer use that car, but I still have the magnet. If I was running a diesel car with plastic fuel lines I would install it again.

 

HTH

 

What is a standard plastic fuel line?

You mean a flexible rubber fuel hose? How does one of those crack unless it's already perished?

 

In my experience, 'standard plastic fuel line' means as fitted on the supply side by BMW to their diesel engines, and as Land Rover fitted to their 2.5 NA and TD engines. They perhaps still use it on their current engines, I have no experience with anything more modern.

These are very stiff 'plastic', black in colour.

Perhaps the BSS regulations don't allow their use in boats?

 

Flexible rubber fuel hose does perish and crack. This type of hose is frequently used in the spill rail assembly, with perished hose being a common cause of air leaks.

 

HTH

[John C]

Hydrocarbons are non-polar in character, therefore passing diesel through a magnetic field will have no effect.

 

John

[Grace and Favour]

If fuel line magnets worked - the world's engine manufacturers would all be fitting them as standard OEM as part of their quest for improving fuel consumption.

 

It may be noted that none of them do (AFAIK)

[Davidss]

Hydrocarbons are non-polar in character, therefore passing diesel through a magnetic field will have no effect.

 

John

How do you answer the point about MRI being an effective tool?

If fuel line magnets worked - the world's engine manufacturers would all be fitting them as standard OEM as part of their quest for improving fuel consumption.

 

It may be noted that none of them do (AFAIK)

I am told they do, inside some high pressure distribution pumps. Here they have the advantage of collecting the very small particles of steel that come from normal wear.

 

I don't work on HP pumps myself, so haven't seen inside one.

Edited July 3, 2013 by Davidss

[Jambo]

How do you answer the point about MRI being an effective tool?

 

MRI scanners have immensely powerful and very finely controlled superconducting magnets:

 

http://science.howstuffworks.com/mri1.htm

 

ETA: with a powerful enough magnet you can even levitate a frog, but these kinds of magnets are very very different to the ones used in these products.

Edited July 3, 2013 by Jambo

[Grace and Favour]

 

ETA: with a powerful enough magnet you can even levitate a frog, but these kinds of magnets are very very different to the ones used in these products.

Could this system be further developed for removing some French people when pushing into queues?

[Paul C]

How do you answer the point about MRI being an effective tool?

 

All elements, in theory, are magnetic. Organic elements such as found in diesel and the human body, are VERY WEAKLY magnetic. All that MRI does is align the magnetisation temporarily, which is then sensed. Note that an MRI scanner needs a very powerful magnet, and a very sensitive scanner, to do this. However as soon as the magnetic field is turned off, the elements return to as they were, which is the key advantage of MRI - its completely harmless to living things. In the same way, if you flowed diesel through a magnetic field, whilst its magnetisation may become aligned whilst in the field, it would lose this as soon as it was out of it - hence completely unaltered.

 

Thanks for bringing up the MRI scanner analogy, its a good illustration (because MRI scans are safe) of how these fuel magnets do nothing.

 

Regarding the issue of retaining very small metal particles, there's some merit in this. I think its down to the size of the likely particle vs the ability of the filter to capture these vs size the smallest constriction in the fuel system (probably the injector) can pass. Of course, fuel pump manufacturers ensure that their pumps don't shear off metal particles, hence they feel there is no need to incorporate magnets to catch these. If you're saying some do, can you list or cite any further info on this?

[Guest]

This magnet on fuel line thing has been doing the rounds for years. As has been stated, It is not unusual to place magnets inside machines to catch steel debris (some of my Jap bikes had a magnetic sump plug.) Until I see some meaningful data about fuel treatment via magnetism, and it is fitted on my vehicle by the manufacturer after much money spent on R&D, I will assume that it is not as effective as it is claimed to be by some. Why would manufacturers spend a fortune on precise engine managemnet systems, if they could bung a magnet on the fuel line and save a substantial amount on each car. Imagine the saving on a production run of millions of cars? Not convinced.

Scanners BTW are hugely powerful magnets; When I am due to go in them I have to sign a dsicalimer because I got metal fragments in my eye some 40 years ago. In cases like this, so strong is the magnetic field, that the fragments of metal have been known to have been dragged out of the eye, removing the retina with it. Put a magnet this strong on a fuel line, and just like a scanner, it will need an electrical substation to supply the energy.

Edited July 3, 2013 by Guest

[Albion]

I can only add what I did when I was running my garage business and tried out a device with magnets and a 'fuel catalyst' (magnesium nodules from memory, possibly zinc <it was a long time ago>) in the late 80s. It was sold as improving economy, engine smoothness/performance and emissions on petrol engines. The device, a metal tube with the nodules clearly audible, rattling when you shook it, was plumbed into the fuel supply pipe to the carburettor of the (newish) Fiesta van which was our company van and test bed. I logged the fuel economy over many weeks and also the engine emissions on a regular basis (being a Bosch agent we had a four gas analyser and engine diagnostic equipment as part of our standard engine tuning equipment). As I drove the van daily I was well placed to comment on any improvement in engine performance or flexibility.

By the way, I had been given the unit to try by the company that produced them as we had a good reputation for engine tuning and they would have liked our endorsement, so I have no axe to grind as it wasn't my money that was spent on buying the device.

In conclusion, after weeks of testing, there was NO improvement detectable at all in any of the readings that I took for economy or emissions and no detectable 'feel' difference to the driving. I fed back my findings to the company that sold the device who claimed that perhaps the unit that I tried was faulty (faulty with some magnets and metal nodules....huh?). The device soon disappeared from the market and, to my knowledge, isn't available any more.

This, of course, was with a petrol engine and not diesel but I can't help feeling that the same results would be experienced.

Roger

Edited July 3, 2013 by Albion

[Davidss]

Paul C, you bring up various points; for clarity, I'll deal with them individually.

 

All elements, in theory, are magnetic. Organic elements such as found in diesel and the human body, are VERY WEAKLY magnetic.

I brought up MRI to show that Magnetism could have an effect on 'matter' which is generally considered non-magnetic.

Thankyou for endorsing that.

 

... if you flowed diesel through a magnetic field, whilst its magnetisation may become aligned whilst in the field, it would lose this as soon as it was out of it - hence completely unaltered.

Can you cite supporting evidence that the effect is lost as soon as the diesel passes out of the magnetic field, or is this your opinion? Perhaps an American TV show dealt with this point.

 

Thanks for bringing up the MRI scanner analogy, its a good illustration (because MRI scans are safe) of how these fuel magnets do nothing.

That's YOUR conclusion, I don't think your arguments support your conclusion.

 

Of course, fuel pump manufacturers ensure that their pumps don't shear off metal particles, hence they feel there is no need to incorporate magnets to catch these. If you're saying some do, can you list or cite any further info on this?

I said I'd been told some pumps had magnets fitted, it was 12 years ago; after this time I can't cite further information on this.

 

To turn the question round, YOU say 'fuel pump manufacturers' feel there is no need to incorporate magnets, but do you KNOW that? Perhaps you work on HP pumps fitted to car / boat engines?

Please don't forget a lot of installations have lift pumps before the HP pump, and the supply to the tank is delivered by a means unknown to the HP pump manufacturer, so a magnet in the HP pump could be collecting particles delivered to the pump, not always from the HP pump itself.

 

Automotive automatic gearboxes are an instance where plate magnets are fitted in the sump, as well as a physical filter. I think it reasonable to claim that ZF and others don't 'design their goods to shear off metal particles', but they do fit magnets.

 

I'll just point again to the original question, although I realise it's common CWDF practice to ignore these as a thread progresses.

 

Has anyone found these to be effective in improving performance/efficiency?

To me, the phrase 'anyone found' implies personal experience required; I appear to be the only one with personal experience.

It happens to be positive.

All the negative views appear NOT to be based on the writers personal experiences of 'fuel magnets'.

EDIT to say my post has crossed with that of Albion, who has also some personal experience.

 

This magnet on fuel line thing has been doing the rounds for years.

Yes, but as computer hard drives have shown, there has been continuous development in the area of magnets, becoming stronger and smaller as the development continues. So the 'performance' given by fuel magnets years ago may well be superseded by more modern developments.

 

Scanners BTW are hugely powerful magnets; When I am due to go in them I have to sign a disclaimer because I got metal fragments in my eye some 40 years ago. In cases like this, so strong is the magnetic field, that the fragments of metal have been known to have been dragged out of the eye, removing the retina with it. Put a magnet this strong on a fuel line, and just like a scanner, it will need an electrical substation to supply the energy.

No-one, least of all me, is claiming comparability between the magnetic strength of fuel magnets and MRI scanners. As already stated, I merely introduced MRI scanners to illustrate the point that

Magnetism could have an effect on 'matter' which is generally considered non-magnetic.

Thankyou for apparently endorsing that.

 

Regards

Edited July 3, 2013 by Davidss

[Jambo]

I'm afraid personal experience is not a good indicator of whether these technologies work or not. Establishing whether they work is very simple though: they just need to be tested under controlled conditions in accredited laboratories.

 

These tests don't cost much (can't be more than a few grand I would think) and if the manufacturers of these products stumped up the cash to test them and they were shown to work they would sell their products in their hundreds of millions. But they haven't tested them because they know they don't work.

 

As mentioned above, if they worked they would be used by the world's car manufacturers like a shot. They're spending a fortune on R&D in order to comply with emissions legislation and if spending a couple of quid on a magnet knocked even just 1% off fuel consumption they would be doing it.

[dor]

I always find these sort of threads entertaining as people try to justify the money they have wasted on some gadget, usually accompanied by some pseudo-scientific junk originating in some marketing department.

 

The claims are up there with psychics and spoon-benders and other charlatans who make claims to fool the gullible. Non have ever stood up to objective investigation. There have been several attempts to sell fuel enhancers, whether magnets or special pellets, over the years. These are some of the easier tricks to show up as it is relatively simple to measure the parameters of an engine with and without the magic ingredient.

 

I'm glad to believe that the magnetic fields used in MRI scanners, many million times stronger than any magnet you can hold in your hand, let my body molecules revert to their previous position once the field is collapsed.

 

And don't confuse magnets used in things like sump plugs to pick up swarf with anything that has an effect on fuel.

Edited July 3, 2013 by dor

[Tony Brooks]

 

And don't confuse magnets used in things like sump plugs to pick up swarf with anything that has an effect on fuel.

I would suggest that the attempt to imply the magnets in autogearboxes are not there to attract wear particles indicates a poor understanding of engineering so it would follow that other assertions from the same source should be treated with scepticism - especially as they seem to have no definitive data to back them up.

 

I just knew what the reply to my dynamometer and fuel consumption data would be. Still if fitting one keeps the OP happy then I am happy for him.

[Grace and Favour]

I've read that fitting a magnetic 'Arab strap' to one's groin will render the use of Viagra (and similar 'enhancing' drugs) completely unnecessary.

 

Should it be the same type of magnets as are fitted to fuel lines, and will the benefits be as noticeable?

[Davidss]

I would suggest that the attempt to imply the magnets in autogearboxes are not there to attract wear particles indicates a poor understanding of engineering so it would follow that other assertions from the same source should be treated with scepticism ...

I agree entirely, but of course I don't have your professional experience.

 

Regards

[Paul C]

Paul C, you bring up various points; for clarity, I'll deal with them individually.

 

I brought up MRI to show that Magnetism could have an effect on 'matter' which is generally considered non-magnetic.

Thankyou for endorsing that.

 

Can you cite supporting evidence that the effect is lost as soon as the diesel passes out of the magnetic field, or is this your opinion? Perhaps an American TV show dealt with this point.

 

That's YOUR conclusion, I don't think your arguments support your conclusion.

 

 

 

No-one, least of all me, is claiming comparability between the magnetic strength of fuel magnets and MRI scanners. As already stated, I merely introduced MRI scanners to illustrate the point that

Magnetism could have an effect on 'matter' which is generally considered non-magnetic.

Thankyou for apparently endorsing that.

 

Regards

 

So are you claiming that the diamagnetic properties of diesel have an effect on the efficiency of an engine?

 

Or are you saying that diesel exhibits ferromagnetic properties? If so, how does this influence efficiency of the engine?