Chevron PurESCAPE
07-06-2007, 12:00 PM
#1
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Chevron PurESCAPE
Just bought two bottles, buy one get one free, of Chevron PurECAPE gas treatment. I've never used an additive before, but this one got a great review--you can actually feel an increase in response, from a Corvette mag. And Chevron was the first to come out with the additive that cleaned injectors back in the '80s. For $3.50 a bottle, figured I'd give it a try next fillup. Anybody else used it/read about it? 
07-06-2007, 02:27 PM
#2
Le Mans Master
I just bought some, $6 a bottle at Pep Boys. I'm not sure I can feel anymore "G's" like the article said, but it may be there. Can you get it on line somewhere?
07-06-2007, 04:18 PM
#3
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
07-06-2007, 04:24 PM
#4
Team Owner
Just bought two bottles, buy one get one free, of Chevron PurECAPE gas treatment. I've never used an additive before, but this one got a great review--you can actually feel an increase in response, from a Corvette mag. And Chevron was the first to come out with the additive that cleaned injectors back in the '80s. For $3.50 a bottle, figured I'd give it a try next fillup. Anybody else used it/read about it?
Just my opinion - sometimes I'm wrong. I'd be surprised if I am this time
07-06-2007, 06:16 PM
#5
Race Director
Snake oil.
If you are using premium brand gas the gas already has additives and cleaners in it. If they are claiming an Octane increase; first, it can't be much of an increase for $3.50 a bottle (Torco Octane booster costs $16 for 32oz. to treat 10 gallons of gas) and second, the octane boost won't do you any good unless your car is tuned for it.
If you are using premium brand gas the gas already has additives and cleaners in it. If they are claiming an Octane increase; first, it can't be much of an increase for $3.50 a bottle (Torco Octane booster costs $16 for 32oz. to treat 10 gallons of gas) and second, the octane boost won't do you any good unless your car is tuned for it.
07-06-2007, 09:14 PM
#7
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Probably right, and if it was anyone but Chevron, I wouldn't. I doubt it will do any harm--and the review was really strong, so what the hell...for 7 bucks, why not. 
I'll post results when I do try it.
I'll post results when I do try it.
07-07-2007, 04:57 PM
#11
Team Owner
Everybody has numbers to back up tests. I don't know what you do for a living, but I've been in sales for 33 years. You'd be amazed at what sales and marketing guys can come up with to back up their claims. Someone once told me "all it takes to make a chart is numbers". True'r words were never spoken.
07-07-2007, 07:03 PM
#12
Everybody has numbers to back up tests. I don't know what you do for a living, but I've been in sales for 33 years. You'd be amazed at what sales and marketing guys can come up with to back up their claims. Someone once told me "all it takes to make a chart is numbers". True'r words were never spoken.
My favorite is "I only state the facts as I make them up". 
Even if the "catalyst" somehow caused the combustion process to happen quicker, it's more likely to cause a reduction in power. There is an optimum point ATDC for peak cylinder pressure to occur for best mechanical advantage/power. Spark advance takes in the ignition delay (the time for combustion to occur) to produce best power...any sooner or later causes a reduction in power. (This assumes no knock present with optimum spark advance. Any knock will reduce timing/power.) If the "catalyst" causes quicker combustion, then the spark advance would have to be changed to take best advantage. With no other changes than adding the additive, peak cylinder pressure will occur too soon to make use of optimum mechanical advantage resulting in a decrease in HP. Cylinder pressure will also increase more as the piston approaches TDC...any increase in cylinder pressure BTDC causes negative work resulting in a decrease in HP. Again, this is all assuming the "catalyst" actually works and the combustion process happens quicker.
If anybody doesn't like these facts, I can make up something else.
07-08-2007, 02:39 PM
#13
Team Owner
Member Since: Jun 2005
Location: Northern, VA
Posts: 46,106
Received 2,481 Likes
on
1,944 Posts
St. Jude Donor '15
"In honor of jpee"
Couldja make me a BLT, please. Thanks. 
07-08-2007, 03:23 PM
#14
Team Owner
My favorite is "I only state the facts as I make them up". Even if the "catalyst" somehow caused the combustion process to happen quicker, it's more likely to cause a reduction in power. There is an optimum point ATDC for peak cylinder pressure to occur for best mechanical advantage/power. Spark advance takes in the ignition delay (the time for combustion to occur) to produce best power...any sooner or later causes a reduction in power. (This assumes no knock present with optimum spark advance. Any knock will reduce timing/power.) If the "catalyst" causes quicker combustion, then the spark advance would have to be changed to take best advantage. With no other changes than adding the additive, peak cylinder pressure will occur too soon to make use of optimum mechanical advantage resulting in a decrease in HP. Cylinder pressure will also increase more as the piston approaches TDC...any increase in cylinder pressure BTDC causes negative work resulting in a decrease in HP. Again, this is all assuming the "catalyst" actually works and the combustion process happens quicker.
If anybody doesn't like these facts, I can make up something else.
