Originally Posted By: kschachn
But if you "try" something, there has to be a conclusion. Even if your conclusion is that it did nothing, that may or may not be true depending on how you arrived at that conclusion. I can say I tried an additive and conclude that it did nothing. However, it may be that I was looking at the color of the oil during my trial and this is not a reliable indicator of performance.
Take this thread for example. The OP tried Archoil. Besides stating that he thought it didn't do anything, he also mentions a 1% increase in mileage. Now 1% is meaningless in a real-world test. The prevailing winds here in Milwaukee during my morning commute (on the lake, off the lake), coupled with the changing time of sunrise and the presence or absence of holidays all would contribute to any mileage variation that is impossible to factor out in this example.
So am I to conclude from this one trial that on a global scale Archoil is worthless? Or do I say this is a meaningless test and no conclusion can be made?
If no conclusion can be made, and if this trial is no different than any other trial here on BITOG, why should anyone alter their opinion based on these results?
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Tried means just that, tried. Tested would open up a whole big can of worms, just like it did here. People would like to see how the test was conducted and if it was valid or not, then systematically pick it apart. If someone tried something it is a lot less formal IMO, and lets the guy off the hook for those looking to attack, question, challenge, or even praise the results.
I tested mos2,running a new to me vehicle on my commute which is flat and 30+ miles each way. I established a baseline after 3000+ miles,tracking every tank of fuel,then added mos2 and again tracked consumption for a total of 10000 miles all told.
I used cruise control,bought fuel from the same station and pump every time,so the only actual variable that was uncontrolled was wind speed.
And even then my observations weren't good enough.
All I wanted to to was to test the stuff objectively and see if there were any changes in fuel consumption that could be considered more than just tank to tank variation.
I also wanted to see if my observations in my other vehicles were more than just in my head.
And I proved it to myself that the stuff worked. I gained iirc 3-4mpg consistently,on the highway.
City mileage wasn't noticeable one way or the other however on the highway the increase was significant enough that 1 tank of fuel savings more than covered the cost of the additive,which I call good return on investment.
Now if all my miles were city driven I'm confident there would be little to no fuel economy improvement because of how traffic works,constant stops and starts but when on the highway there was a significant,repeatable improvement.