Quote:
Originally Posted by RedDevil
It claims to reduce friction.
It can only raise power by 10% if engines now waste at least 10% of their power to friction at WOT. Which is not the case for almost any engine.
It can only raise fuel efficiency by 15% if engines without it waste at least 15% to friction under light load. Don't think so.
Their claims are extraordinary, but there is no scientific proof for that.
They do provide an angry looking cat and a lot of boll power though.
Wikipedia makes no mention of boron in lubrication appliances, but boron is used in some abrasive materials. Hmmm. Something rhymes. |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) The referenced research papers offered later here at BORPower all referred to the orthoboric products as a 'friction-modifier' (FM), added to some 'lubricant', whether, 'water', 'oil', 'grease', 'mineral oil', 'raw polyalphaolefin', metallocene polyalphaolefins, commercially-produced mineral oil-based motor oil,' or ' commercially-produced, synthetic motor oil.'
2) As a 2% improvement in fuel economy must be accompanied by a 10% reduction in engine parasitic friction, a claimed 15% improvement in fuel economy would necessitate a 75% reduction in 'friction.'
3) This magnitude of 'total' engine friction does not ever occur under any circumstances of 'Normal' vehicle operation, or fuel economy testing conditions related to EPA, NEDC, WLTC, or CLTC protocols.
4) The 'sliding' ( boundary friction ), and a portion of 'mixed-film' lubrication which could be affected by a reduction in 'friction coefficient' constitutes less than one-third of all friction, so, if 'boron' was attributed a 15% improvement in fuel economy, it would be required to reduce friction into 'negative friction' coefficients in order to overcome the 'hydrodynamic' friction which is unaffected by the coefficient of friction.( clearly 'snake oil' territory ).