mesh

Hi Everyone,

I'm a newB from Australia, trying to do some searching on Broquet products, and it seems you guys have it well covered in the UK & scoobynet. I have recently been asked to trial the Broquet fuel cataylst B40 on my R33 Nissan Skyline GTR. I know it's not a WRX, but hey I used to own a Rex so cut me some slack .

A quick run down on the car,
The car currently produces 320Kw at the wheels (appox 430hp)
I am running a numner of mods inc HKS GT2530 turbos, Apexi Power FC + Hand Controller etc etc

The beauty about the Apexi Hand Controller is I can monitor live Knock readings. In Australia we have access to Premium 98octone Fuels. One thing I have noticed since installing the Broquet B40 is my knock readings have definately reduced considerably. The car does start much easier, and does feel alot more responsive, fuel savings don't seem that great so far, the car normally averages between 16-17Litres per 100km, and our last report after the Broquet install showed a flat 16litres per 100km. An interesting note is GTR's normally are tuned to very very rich, and being a white car the rear bumper tends to turn a cloudy smokey colour after a week or so from the exhaust fumes. But since the broquet install it this isn't happen as bad, and seems to have reduced "leaned out the AFR ratio's" dramatically to a point were the bumper looks like it could go another 2 weeks before a wash, rather than every week.

I have to say that sometimes these things can be deceiving as you expect "something" to happen when you test a new mod. And like many I am still very sceptical about this product, however we are planning to run the car on the dyno in the next few days and compare it to our previous run without the broquet, once we have travelled at least 1000km (600miles).

I will post up the results as they come.

Cheers
Simon

**************************
UPDATED RESULT - SEE BELOW
**************************
Allright... we did a some runs tonight on the dyno. And sure there were a few "ok! maybe alot" of laughs about these "Stealth B52 Uranium Bombers"..and with possibly goods reason. It was best to be sure and dyno the units, than assume the hard to prove "seat of your pants feel"..

We tested all the units within a 2-3hour period tonight, doing around 4-5 runs per test with about 15-25minutes between each procedure, the tuner was also wearing his "ear phones" to monitor knocking, and "just in case his girlfriend called to say dinner was ready"

The test we did were:

1) Broquet B40 (retails AUD$500 fitted) Unit connected between the fuel filter & engine to manufacturers specs.

2) Broquet Top Fueller Competition (retails AUD$1200 fitted) Unit connected between the fuel filter & engine to manufacturers specs.

3) Non of the above, back to stock standard fuel line.

A couple of things, we generally spoke about, were maybe these units don't have the same effect on cars pushing higher HP running Premium ULP. In our tests it failed to show any conclusive difference, and we decide to return the car back to normal.

I have attached the dyno sheet.

The 3 test are as follows:

1) fuel check
This test is done without any fuel catalyst, with the cars fuel system returned to stock

2) big red check
Nige decide to call this test Big Red, coz the unit looks like a uranium bomb. This is the apparnent top of the range unit "Top Fueller" retailing for $1200. see pic below. It is supposed to handle upto 1000hp.
http://www.broquet.com.my/images/topfueller-pic.jpg

3) AFC Tune
This test was done using the B40 unit retailing for $500.

http://www.broquet.com.my/images/boostmaster-pic.jpg
I'm not too technical on the dyno graph reading etc etc, but on the advice of the boys, we concluded the unit had no real effect as claimed by the manufacturer.
In fairness to the monufacturer, they did say give the car around 3-5000Km and see if there is any difference without the unit...

DYNO SHEET:
http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/pho...t_dyno-med.jpg

T5NYW

iTrader: (4)

Simon,
Hi and welcome, there's always plenty of slack here, well in the noose LOL

This may be of more use to our JDM "Imports" owner 100 ron 98oct + OCT Boost. Ther UK cars are tuned to 95-98 ron and those of us running 280 + are using 98ron.

Please post again when you've finished your Trail

Regards,

Tony

Old_Fart

God bless Broquet. Regardless of what you find I'm afraid you'll change very few opinions on the product...there just isn't enough independent clinical/scientific proof to support it's claims, so you end up deciding on faith.
Rgds
Chuck
(Broquet fitted as standard in the car, apparently, yet still detted it's **** off prior to addition of octane booster, that's the summary of *my* personal experiences with the product in a 22B Type UK)

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

Our Jag XJS V12 had 2 broquets fitted when they stopped producing 4star leaded fuel.

It currently runs on either Super 98RON or Optimax. But the idea of the Broquet was to allow it run on normal 95RON (which is why we were recommended it). But, to risk 12 pistons running lean on a very high 12.1:1 compression ratio is a recipe for disaster, so it still runs on 98RON+. The thing still guzzles fuel, and still likes to have it's spate of miss-fires every now and again.

So IMO it was a waste of money. Not to say it doesn't work, just I don't trust it!

Spoon

I had 2 10's fitted to my ex touring car engined Cossie running 500+hp and ran it on normal unleaded for 5 years without a problem.

Broquet (In writing) did offer to pay for any engine damage should there be a problem so I gave it a go.

That's all I have to go on.

Brendan Hughes

Hello Markus, hello David

David Lock

Hi Brendan, I am keeping out of all this (probably)

Spoon

In that case, hello Harvey.

chiark

What's that? A broquet discussion with no input from Mr Lock? I'm astounded!

David Lock

Bob Rawle

Interesting feedback, the comments relating to combustion/afr almost exactly mirror my own findings.

bob

wideybrook

Come on Bob, what findings my friend, do you think Broquet might help then, most 'tuners' have little faith.

Lee.

http://www.wrx.co.uk

Bob Rawle

I've posted at length in the distant past, its all there somewhere.

I did some very controlled experimentation using two different cars, STi2 Wagon with a 9:1 compression engine and my STi5 when I first aquired it. The thing that was most obvious to me was the effect on the combustion process, I had to redo my fueling on both counts.

bob

David Lock

These were Bob's comments as posted on SN.

"I have used Broquet in both Imprezas that I have owned. I too got curious about what it was claimed to do and invested really to find out. At the time I had Sti 2 Wagon running with Link ecu (later Motec), HKS Hiper, Scoobysport downpipe, HKS induction kit etc. I was really interested in seeing if I could use Broquet to increase fuel quality enough so that I could run more ignition advance. The reduction in Ron rating from 98 to 97 (SUL) had necessitated my retarding my timing by several degrees and I was keen to get it back.
I installed the Broquet with a virtually empty tank for safety reasons, drove to the nearest garage for SUL (round trip of 20 miles or so). Driving back I started to notice differences, idle quality improved, engine ran more smoothly, car felt more willing to pull and more flexible. Over the next few weeks I monitored fuel consumption and did get an improvement, not by the 9% some people have mentioned but I certainly got 5%, bear in mind that this is over my "normal" terrain where I use the performance of the car to the full as well as cruise. I found that I had to reduce the fuel map values in order to maintain my optimum AFR. Timing ... well I tried to advance it up, the engine had a higher compression ratio than a saloon so as soon as I pushed it the big red light went off, it was purely down to charge temperature increase due to the boost I was running (1.4 bar) and the small early intercooler. Then I started to use booster as well and was able to make small increases in timing but the charge temperature of the small intercooler was still the limiting factor. I covered some 35000 miles with Broquet in the tank with that car.
I now own a STi 5 four door running with programmable engine management and other goodies. I installed Broquet two weeks ago.
I had already mapped the ecu with as much advance as I reasonably could and was again interested in whether Broquet would make a difference to this car. Same installation process, drive to the same garage after and got exactly the same improvement in all areas on the way back home, car was very much smoother and really felt willing to go. I had already taken a dyno curve of the "before" and waited a week to get the "after". I did the comparison with exactly the same map in the ecu. I was hoping for a power improvement ... I didn't actually get that, what I did get was a very quiet Knocklink, before fitting I would get a couple of steady lights up above 5800 rpm, now nothing. So no increase in power but I felt the opportunity to raise the anti by increasing timing. Since then I have changed the turbo again and so maybe this is not a fair statement but I have been able to increase timing since then and the car is now producing some 20 odd comparative horsepower more than before (lots more torque though). As I say, I am not sure how much of that is down to the turbo change but what I can say is that I certainly was able to advance it up by 1-2 degrees.
So sorry for the epistle but having spent quite a lot of time and effort in attempting to determine its benefits I though that some of you may find this post of interest.
My conclusion is ... engine runs more smoothly, fuel consumption improves in like for like driving situations, performance may be increased if programmable management is used. In short its a benefit and worth the money IMHO.
BTW, Broquet in P1’s? The P1 is quoted as having 276 bhp at 6500 rpm and 259 ft lb at 4000 rpm "using 100 Ron fuel". Given the best UK fuel is 97 Ron and I have established that Broquet will allow an engine to run more optimally then I would say its a fair bet, Subaru quote "only" 3 degrees of det retard when running on 95 Ron, that means yes it dets but that the ecu compensates, given my own experience of mapping for 95 Ron use then normally going from 97 to 95 Ron means approx 4 degree retardation is required, as the car is obviously optimised for 100 Ron then something like Broquet must be used to achieve the desired result in the UK. Just my opinion.
Bob

One or two further comments.
You need to do circa 200 ish miles or so to get the pellets working fully, I noticed it after 30 miles but waited for the 200 minimum before doing my "after" tests.
The main reason that I did not get a "power increase" after fitting was that I kept my ecu maps the same. As I run from the maps the timing does not alter under most conditions (dependent on my temperature compensation settings of course) so I was not surprised at that. What I have been able to do is run more timing up to the det limit than without it so in "real" terms and if I was using an ecu that always tried to advance up (i.e. Bosch management) then there would be a power increase.
Shaun, I can't say whether it increases Ron, its certainly worth installing though IMHO. I actually use booster to ensure that is the case in addition to Broquet but the Broquet is allowing me to take some extra steps. I did try that experiment with the Wagon and wasn't able to compensate with Broquet alone. Unfortunately it would take too much work to try it again with the "5".
My cruise area of the fuel map is now running at a slightly lower level than before, as I run that closed loop then it would be self compensating but I ran it straight off the map to see and was pleased to be able to repeat the results that I had when I put it into the Wagon.
As a last ... yes I know it’s hard to understand how it works and I was as sceptical as anyone, I do not endorse/recommend or criticise anything that I have not tried and tested. In this case I think it provides benefit and I have twice carried out similar tests on two different cars to achieve similar results. Bob"


DL

StickyMicky

you said you were keeping out of it

dowser

I guess I have a baggie whacking around inside my tank too - do they slowly dissolve?

I think I fitted mine before I was able to remap the ECU (was running a PPP ECU at 1.3 bar...). Main thing I noticed was improved cold start/running and general off boost smoothness.

Richard

David Lock

StickyMicky - LOL. I am just reporting what others have said

Richard - no they don't dissolve. I used one for 12 years in the same vehicle and they remained unchanged. Incidentally that test vehicle would just pass the 'cat MOT exhaust even tho' it was an old non-'cat vehicle. D

Andy.F

Interesting that Bobs posts were both on the 1st of April

Andy

wideybrook

Great thanks to David and Bob, never thought much of the device, mainly due to the over exaggerated claims of the people selling them, but I am now having a rethink!!

Lee.

jameswrx

iTrader: (4)

lol @ Andy

harvey

iTrader: (48)

If it is that good/easy why don't car manufacturers fit them?
They spend millions on fuel economy and emmission testing and if Broquets or fuel line magnets or any of these other wonderful smoke and mirrors devices worked they would have the resouces to know and make use of them.

Markus

Brendan - You cheeky sod

Hi David Don't blame you for staying out of this, I remember the grief that you got last time.

I've not read all the responses, here's my 2 cents worth.

I've tried Broquet in my modified MY94 WRX Wagon and I did note better fuel ecconomy, I did take figures, but they are somewhere in my old place in the UK, and I'm not in the UK, so it's hard to track them down. Some will no doubt comment "oh, how convenient! you can't provide any evidence"

I know for fact that the devices were fitted to P1's, and *maybe* the new age UK spec STi's (can't confirm this, any STi owners want to open up their fuel tanks and have a poke around to confirm or deny this)
If IM/Prodrive fitted them to P1's does this not say that they must do something, why else would they fit them? I can totally understand why there was no publicitly about it being fitted, and how many can claim they are not fitted, but I've seen inside the tanks of a few P1's and yup, they are there.

Another reason I thought I'd give them a go, is that Bob has used them. I respect Bob's knowledge on things Subaru related, as do many others. One could say this is possibly a very naieve reason to use a product, but if somone who is greatly respected in the community says it does work, then that is good enough for me.

The problem I have always had with this whole broquet 'debate', which is probably the most polite phrase I could use to describe the previous threads on the subject, is that there are those who slag the product off and yet they have not used it. I can partially understand this, as who wants to be a guinea pig in the subaru community, however, if some of the more respected people actually put their money where their mouths are and actually tried it and then commented, positively or negativley on the results, then it'd be better for the community as whole.

I can sing it's praises from the rooftops, but I'm not a well known or respected member of the community, so my comments/views aren't going to be accepted by many.

David Lock

Hi Harvey

Or why don't importers of high performance cars use them to overcome problems they experienced running on 95 Ron European unleaded? D

David Lock

Hi Markus, sorry just saying hello to Harvey before I saw your message. I'm not doing very well at keeping out of it am I Gather you are over the pond at the moment. Thanks for the post. David

mesh

UPDATE: Well, we still haven't dyno'd the car yet but have travelled approx 800Km since the install of broquet. Fuel effeciency is still averaging around 15.5-16.5ltr per 100km (a minimal saving of less than 1ltr per 100km). Again fuel effeciency is not really what we want to see, what we are looking for is the "claimed" advantage to reduce knock, increase octone, and be able to advance timing for more power. The knock levels still seem consistent but not the "as claimed wonder" by the sales rep...who compared it to "Water/Methanol Injection".

We are starting to wonder whether the Broquet B40 unit is too small and perhaps we may need to go for the largest model "Top Fuel", but the cost of this is riduculously high for the average consumer, being twice the price of the B40, @ approx $1000AU Dollars, or ($400UKpounds).

With many club members pushing over 450-500hp, and performace enthusiasts alike, waiting to see our results, it's looking very hard to convince them to outlay $400UK pounds for a "slight gain". We are not biting the bullet just yet, and will have some more result for ou all as they come in.

mesh

Thread updated.. see original post #1 for results.

StickyMicky

intresting