Which would be easier on the engine, 1 water decarbonizing or 6 lo-spd ita. tuneups?

[ryan roopnarine]

have done an eye-talian tune up during each work shift for the past week (once the engine has been running for at least 1 hr). is this being too hard on the motor if i do it 10 or 11 times? my procedure is to just drive around town for at least one minute with the car locked in first gear at 45 mph (yielding about 5200 rpm). it has netted me some extra power (and raised the pingband from 2100 rpm to 2300 rpm) but has yielded no additional mpg. the very strong chemical i've been running in the gas for the last 50 gallons or so has raised the pingband from 1700 to 2100, and gotten me an additional 1mpg in real BS proof stop and go (ie, 14.5 mpg to about 15.3), but no additional power. keep in mind that i'm not running synthetic right now, so that might factor into the "abrasive" value of the italian tuneup. thanks.

[ryan roopnarine]

please keep in mind that the professional fuel injection cleaning only moderately reduced the ping, that's why i'm considering desperate measures like the water induction.


have done an eye-talian tune up during each work shift for the past week (once the engine has been running for at least 1 hr). is this being too hard on the motor if i do it 10 or 11 times? my procedure is to just drive around town for at least one minute with the car locked in first gear at 45 mph (yielding about 5200 rpm). it has netted me some extra power (and raised the pingband from 2100 rpm to 2300 rpm) but has yielded no additional mpg. the very strong chemical i've been running in the gas for the last 50 gallons or so has raised the pingband from 1700 to 2100, and gotten me an additional 1mpg in real BS proof stop and go (ie, 14.5 mpg to about 15.3), but no additional power. keep in mind that i'm not running synthetic right now, so that might factor into the "abrasive" value of the italian tuneup. thanks.

[winfred]

i do water treatments with the motor hot and with the motor at about 2k rpm, about a pint at a time, if it farts out a cloud of oil smoke it needed it and i warm the motor back up and hit it again

[bahnstormer]

what is the pingband? the span that it pings? lol i didn't know they had a name for it =]

[632 Regal]

I used to do this with the old carbureted engines with unbelievable results

[ryan roopnarine]

winfred sez that he uses the FPR vacuum line.

[AllanS]

Meaning that he disconnects the end that hooks up to the fuel regulator, and shoves it into water, letting the intake manifold vacuum do the rest, right?

[ryan roopnarine]

Meaning that he disconnects the end that hooks up to the fuel regulator, and shoves it into water, letting the intake manifold vacuum do the rest, right?


yeah, i would assume he regulates it by keeping his finger over the end of the hose. i was hoping it would run without the MAF inline, so that i could use a spray bottle at the throttle body (less chance of me hydrolocking things). but the car doesn't like that, so once i find where the hose connects, ill be doing things that way.

[winfred]

small diameter vacuum line and about 2k rpm help prevent any experaments in the non compressability of water

[632 Regal]

hydrolock is virtually impossible unless your idling at 300 rpms. In other words if it starts to die stop the water from flowing. Do not have it attached before you start it and make sure it doesnt siphon when you shut it off.

[winfred]

well i know that but i gotta add that like a disclamer "do not hook the garden hose to the intake of your car, some dammage can occure"


hydrolock is virtually impossible unless your idling at 300 rpms. In other words if it starts to die stop the water from flowing. Do not have it attached before you start it and make sure it doesnt siphon when you shut it off.

[ryan roopnarine]

decarbonization complete (or maybe round 1 if i find i didn't use enough) on 650 mL of water, i guess i didn't hydrolock :^). this will be the last i speak of this publicly on this board, as learned member bill r. has voiced objections to this procedure previously, and he does this for a living.

[632 Regal]

Bill R's objections to this. Do you have a link to it or can you enlighten me his thoughts?

[ryan roopnarine]

tim collins had asked bill if he could do this to his car using ventil sauber around 2001 or so. bill said he didn't like it because of the way the intake manifold was shaped in an I6, most of the fluid would get dumped into the 2 cylinders closest to the vacuum source (5 and 6) and starve them for oil while you are trying to keep the revs up. the rest of the cylinders would get very little cleaning chemical and very little benefit from it....he felt it was best to use the on rail cleaner or a gas tank cleaner that would be able to distribute solvent evenly. that's me paraphrazing what i remember his objections to be.....

results....somewhat disappointing

didn't do anything to get rid of my 21-2900 rpm ping. strangely, it completely killed some ping i used to have at 4,000 rpm and tremendously cleaned up the smoothness of the powerband around that area. also, a unfortunate side effect for me is that when you engage the forced kickdown switch now, the car will go to about 6700 rpm now, as opposed to stopping at 6400 like it used to, which means i'll have to back off once i pass 6200 or so now. throttle feels crisper and engine is a wee bit quieter. i don't know if i didn't use enough water, or i didn't let it get sucked up fast enough (i went SLOOOOWWWWWW), but i guess it won't kill me to try with 1 or 2 more 600 mL doses and see if it does anything for my ping down low. i hope it gives me some gas mileage impt, but i can't really tell yet.

[632 Regal]

Thanks Ryan, the 5-6 cilynders make a lot of sence. Why dont you do the rail type cleaner and see if that will de-ping your deal?


tim collins had asked bill if he could do this to his car using ventil sauber around 2001 or so. bill said he didn't like it because of the way the intake manifold was shaped in an I6, most of the fluid would get dumped into the 2 cylinders closest to the vacuum source (5 and 6) and starve them for oil while you are trying to keep the revs up. the rest of the cylinders would get very little cleaning chemical and very little benefit from it....he felt it was best to use the on rail cleaner or a gas tank cleaner that would be able to distribute solvent evenly. that's me paraphrazing what i remember his objections to be.....

results....somewhat disappointing

didn't do anything to get rid of my 21-2900 rpm ping. strangely, it completely killed some ping i used to have at 4,000 rpm and tremendously cleaned up the smoothness of the powerband around that area. also, a unfortunate side effect for me is that when you engage the forced kickdown switch now, the car will go to about 6700 rpm now, as opposed to stopping at 6400 like it used to, which means i'll have to back off once i pass 6200 or so now. throttle feels crisper and engine is a wee bit quieter. i don't know if i didn't use enough water, or i didn't let it get sucked up fast enough (i went SLOOOOWWWWWW), but i guess it won't kill me to try with 1 or 2 more 600 mL doses and see if it does anything for my ping down low. i hope it gives me some gas mileage impt, but i can't really tell yet.

[ryan roopnarine]

i already had the rail type service done before, i can't afford to keep having it done until my ping is gone. i'm thinking that if i can tap a closeable hole in the air intake boot and insert water right at the throttle body, i can get a more thorough clean. if i get rid of the ping, ill buy my uncle a bottle of the bg fuel rail cleaner and get him to hook the car up when i go down to ft lauderdale to get a r12 refill, so i won't have to do anything that drastic ever again. right now, i'm somewhat smitten with how quiet the engine has gotten (and strangely, how lighter the steering has gotten)...that i'll give it a try at a better location in the intake path.

[Bill R.]

sauber the procedure is to stick the vacum line into the can of cleaner and run it until the engine sputters and dies, all the while its smoking like crazy , then you're supposed to let it sit for awhile so it soaks into the carboned up parts and after a half hour or so start it and run it until it quits smoking... by this time the epa will be on your ass they smoke so much when you do this..
At any rate when you suck the fluid straight in like the from a port in the bottom of the manifold the fluid follows the path of least resistance and goes mainly to the center cylinders and the cylinders at the outer ends get almost none, so not much cleaning effect there.... Then secondly when you use this solvent to clean all the carbon out and let it hot soak, you dump a carbony solventy mass all at once into the catalytic converter which then does its best to immolate itself possibly leading to a catalytic converter meltdown and failure.... The problem with water is that the method of cleaning that it uses is called thermal shock meaning the water hits the piston top and the combustion chamber top causing them to cool extremely rapidly and shrink which is how the carbon breaks loose and flakes off...
Aluminum pistons and cylinder head surfaces don't always like this , Cracked ring lands can occur from thermal shock.... I personally think you'd be better of using a can of the bg cleaner designed to remove carbon deposits from the valves, combustion chambers and pistons... They have fuel injector cleaners and then they have carbon deposit cleaners , not always the same thing... You just run them through on a couple of tanks of gas and its a slow gradual process that doesn't overload the cat or cause any other possible harm.








i already had the rail type service done before, i can't afford to keep having it done until my ping is gone. i'm thinking that if i can tap a closeable hole in the air intake boot and insert water right at the throttle body, i can get a more thorough clean. if i get rid of the ping, ill buy my uncle a bottle of the bg fuel rail cleaner and get him to hook the car up when i go down to ft lauderdale to get a r12 refill, so i won't have to do anything that drastic ever again. right now, i'm somewhat smitten with how quiet the engine has gotten (and strangely, how lighter the steering has gotten)...that i'll give it a try at a better location in the intake path.

[ryan roopnarine]

sauber the procedure is to stick the vacum line into the can of cleaner and run it until the engine sputters and dies, all the while its smoking like crazy , then you're supposed to let it sit for awhile so it soaks into the carboned up parts and after a half hour or so start it and run it until it quits smoking... by this time the epa will be on your ass they smoke so much when you do this..
At any rate when you suck the fluid straight in like the from a port in the bottom of the manifold the fluid follows the path of least resistance and goes mainly to the center cylinders and the cylinders at the outer ends get almost none, so not much cleaning effect there.... Then secondly when you use this solvent to clean all the carbon out and let it hot soak, you dump a carbony solventy mass all at once into the catalytic converter which then does its best to immolate itself possibly leading to a catalytic converter meltdown and failure.... The problem with water is that the method of cleaning that it uses is called thermal shock meaning the water hits the piston top and the combustion chamber top causing them to cool extremely rapidly and shrink which is how the carbon breaks loose and flakes off...

Aluminum pistons and cylinder head surfaces don't always like this , Cracked ring lands can occur from thermal shock.... I personally think you'd be better of using a can of the bg cleaner designed to remove carbon deposits from the valves, combustion chambers and pistons... They have fuel injector cleaners and then they have carbon deposit cleaners , not always the same thing... You just run them through on a couple of tanks of gas and its a slow gradual process that doesn't overload the cat or cause any other possible harm.


i've tried the bg44k in may, it improved things, but things stood to be improved a lot more, as is evident now. i don't know where to get bg's other products, like the standalone valve or standalone FI cleaner, otherwise i'd have tried them by now (as the 44k worked so well). since may, i've tried

prof. rail service
bg44k
2 bottles of 20gal techron dumped into 1/2 tank gas
1 bottle of redline
ventil sauber
lubro moly's FI injector cleaner
5 cans of berryman's b12 in gas at double rx'd dose (2 oz per gallon)
the water today

the techron, v-sauber and LM products only made a difference for one tank's worth of gasoline, so i've stopped using them. the prof rail and bg44k were about equal in usefulness (the rail service killed ping, and the bg increased gas mileage). the thing i'm going to use from now on in maintainence doses is the berryman's. people tell me its strong....but the only thing i really care about is how much it works (and it does). and its incredibly cheap to boot. the 5 cans cost about $14 dollars and did an incredible amount of good (ping reduction and mpg increase). i can not fault it for not getting rid of my ping, since its only 2.37 per can, but it did better than the 6$ techron and redline and $5 lubro moly products. my mother's car is getting two cans of it on a 1/4 tank of gas before i decide whether i shoot it with water or not (prof cleaning only cuts the ping in half). considering that i've put so much time and effort into trying to get rid of it, might not bother with BG tank products, just giving my uncle a can of the bg motorvac type solution and have him run it....was going to rig up something to run napa's $12 aerosol in my car, but from what you've said on the subject, i think that the berryman's was a better deal in the long run.

not sure what you mean by "least resistance", at least on my engine...the m50's FPR nipple is located pretty close to the end of the intake manifold....are you saying that even in that situation, the center of the motor would get hit the heaviest. i don't really know if i'm doing it "right", as i'm only doing a max of about 7 mL a minute....didn't know you were supposed to stall the car out, perhaps it would work better that way. also.....i make sure that the water going in is at least between 160-180f before i suction it up to minimize shock.