Is This the Most Eco-Friendly Car Innovation Since the Hybrid?

"...will cost you only $20 per month to replace the filters after that." Video says $20/year after year two. I think there is a typo in your blog.

OK, I am flabbergasted. How can something which, by nature, restricts exhaust more than the stock system, cause the engine to burn more efficiently and increase mileage? Better yet, as this device is 4+ feet behind the CAT, how does it somehow "improves the efficiency of your catalytic converter to lower emissions".

These claims are so out there in Kookoocrazee land that I really hope they are too blatant not to be true.

But even if they are, notice the monthly filter changing? Either the author of this post got stuff wrong, or something does not add up. If the filters last a given number of miles, why is there a time limit of months placed on these filters? At least get that straight and update the post.

I think tree hugger has started to sound like an evil website. Pls, don't lose your credibility.

When could a little lame gadget be able to solve the rendering of the planet obsolete? Kind of make me cringe.

Another big industry for the evil corporations our there?
Pls, the issue of global warming should be tackled from the roots. Stop blowing away the smoke thinking that you are putting out the fire.

The use of fossil should be stop with immidiate effect.
Thanks

i pretty much agree w/ everything Willy Bio says... those claims seem a liitle too good to be true (other than just being an addditional filter that is).

so are the filters $20/month (which is probably more than the net savings produced by supposed increased gas mileage), or are they $20 a piece and you have to replace them every 3 or 10K miles, depending on model year? Cause i can do $20/year for a 10% increase in fuel efficiency...

Snake oil

A restriction in your exhaust pipe is not going to increase the efficiency of your engine.

Okay, I have to point out that you guys are all wrong about promoting this device.

First, by eliminating all that particulate exhaust the air will be cleaner and we will lose the protective "blanket" that shields us from inestimable amounts of radiation and heat from the sun. This will obviously lead to more global warming.
Second, with all that clean air people will live longer healthier lives. The problem with that is clearly overpopulation which will overburden our medical system and outpace our ability to produce more food and ultimately lead to global financial collapse and an ecosystem armageddon.

Instead of heralding this product you should be warning of the obvious dangers.
;)

Oh well, I usually don't believe this stuff simply because, if those silver bullets were so easy and cheap, car manufacturer already did this in the factory.

They are so eager nowadays to claim lower emission .. you know

Assuming this works, how would you properly dispose of the old filters to replace each month ? Interesting questions indeed.

Please be advised that the website for this product has removed the actual test results pdf page link so you can not see the lab test report, only the company summary which is not supported by the lab report. I tracked down the lab report and it shows an INCREASE in CO and NoX emissions, not a decrease. And the part I saw had no report on the gas mileage. I think this is just another snake oil device. The EPA does not list this as a tested device on their website. The EPA has tested similar devices, none of which worked as promised. Where is the warranty page on their site, wait, there is no warranty! Where is the recommendation from third party tests like the EPA or California Air Resources Board, wait, they do not have any. The testing lab was certified, that is all, and the test report which they do not link to does NOT support their claims. They have a slick presentation that, like a magician, does a good job of distraction. Use your money for synthetic oil, which the EPA says does improve both emissions and mileage, and drive less and drive gently.

The first thing I thought was that this would lower your fuel economy because you basically have to push the air through the filter. But then when I read that it actually increases fuel economy, I was puzzled. I still am.

Per Willy Bio's comment about the catalytic converter... That claim makes absolute sense. It doesn't necessarily improve the efficiency of the cat, it just works with the cat to improve the end result.

My biggest concern with one of these would be theft. A 200 dollar item hanging off the end of your tailpipe held on with bolts? Seems really easy to steal.

This thing reeks of snake oil. A tailpipe restriction improving the efficiency of your cat and your engine? No freakin' way.

This is absolute BS. It's a scam. TH shouldn't be posting this junk.

The Blade website explains a little further about how it works. From what I can gather it smooths out the 'pulses' in the exhaust, and lower the thermal loss at the tailpipe (but I don't know how really). I think independent gas mileage testing would be extremely useful.
Fuel Economy aside, FINALLY someone is paying attention to PM and non-greenhouse air pollution. As important as climate change is, we have been ignoring the old-school air pollution worries that directly make us sick. If this or similar devices are eventually required, maybe we can get cities with breathable air again!

I've read the website and it still seems backwards.
Ok, heat up the Cat and it will go to work sooner but restrict the exhaust to increase you efficiency? Show me because it doesn't jive with common practice (Race engines are ported to improve air flow and reduce pumping losses resulting in more peak power and better fuel economy) and basic functionality(you need to get exhaust gases out before new air and fuel can come in).
As for the 'pulse' theory of the exhaust, I think they are refering to the fact that as sound waves fly up and down your exhaust system they create areas of higher and lower pressure. Something that can theoretically be exploited to reduce pumping losses by turning the size of the exhaust system. It is insanely hard to achieve because my engines are 4-6 cylinder and are running between 1k-4k rpm so the odds of finding that sweet spot are not worth the effort.
and what happens to this filter when it is spent? (Landfill or recycle)

two word for ya...

Snake Oil

I still don't believe the claims. Show me. Show me data, measurements, not just claims. Measurements by an independent entity. The claims are so remarkable that they have to be verified, especially the part about CO2 reductions

Sounds way too good to be true. Celebrity endorsements don't count. DB

$20 per month?! I hope that's a typo, that will help offset any fuel savings pretty quickly. For $200 you get one that lasts for 2 years, after that it's $20 a month, i.e. will only last 10 months before you've spent double? Best to just buy a new one and skip buying a new filter.

My apologies, there was a typo in my copy. After the second year, the replacement filters cost $20, which should last you a year if you're driving a new car (10,000 miles), rather than the month that was originally posted. I've changed the copy to reflect.

Rachel

what is the end life of these filters? Are they stored somewhere? Are they cleaned out and put back into the market? Are we creating bags of particulate matter? Just curious.

Unless of course this thing works by killing your performance. If you can't go faster than 35 mph, you'll save gas.

Car makers spend billions of dollars a year on research. If reducing emissions was as simple as putting a fancy metal filter cap on the end of the tailpipe, they would have done it years ago. Unfortunately, this looks like the technical equivalent of stuffing cotton wool up the tailpipe.

This looks a bit scammy to me. I could be wrong, but if installing a filter on the exhaust or otherwise restricting the flow helped, wouldn't it have been obvious when car makers and car modders started adding tubochargers, or those whistles in the Bubb Rubb youtube clips?

Any links to independent tests? Also, those CARB and EPA licensing/approvals sound more like they are allowing it be legally sold than an actual endorsement. Am I getting the right feeling about this?

I have to call BS on this article despite celebrity endorsements because celebrities are known for their in-depth scientific research. *rolls eyes*

There is no mention of Sabertec on the EPA website or the California Air Resources Board. Perhaps if the Sabertec company could actually link to the test results, which the websites make available they'd have a better case.

On the Blade website they use the argument that fuel efficiency is increased by adding more oxygen to the fuel mix. That was the same argument made by Tornado Fuel Saver which was a lot of bunk as well. Auto manufacturers are already aware of the concept of combustion and oxygen entering from your tailpipe doesn't do anything to add to the process.

Catalytic converters warm up rather quickly and do not play a major role in increasing fuel efficiency. If you feel the need to insulate your converter then get some insulation tape to make yourself feel better.

Putting a carbon filter on your tailpipe is not an invention worthy of shelling out $200 for. The air filter in your car does the same thing, the only difference is it is being attached to your tailpipe.

This article is merely a rehash of a press release and takes the company at it's word without doing any actual research. Adding to the poor journalism is the backing of celebrity endorsement which means nothing unless these celebrities are in the engineering field. You can get better results from a tune up but if you are inclined to put something at the end of your tailpipe the traditional potato can produce similar results.

I checked out their claims with a physicist/engine enthusiast I know and his comments were in line with the other comments above -- this device appears to make it harder for the engine to vent exhaust and therefore will reduce the performance of the engine. I'm waiting until I see independent confirmation.

How can I say this politely?

This product is a blatant rip-off. Spending money on it promotes more fraud, and your car will suffer for it.

First off...let me say that I would love to believe this, but I don't.

There are a couple of comments this guy makes in his video interview that kind of disappoint me...especially considering they consider themselves as an "Environmental company".

First quote: "This is the most environmentally friendly thing you can do with your car"...actually it's not...that's a pretty bold statement...what about not driving your car? Or keeping it tuned up, tires enflated, responsible driving habits, car pooling, etc...

Second quote comes along while he's talking about the packaging for this product. "This is the most environmentally friendly packaging you can get."

Dude...seriously...if you're using plastic, recycled or not...it's not very environmentally friendly. First off, your assuming that everyone recycles...and I happen to know that most people don't...some cities still don't have recycling facilities and when you boil it down most people are too lazy to recycle or just don't care.

So knowing that, the most environmentally friendly packaging would be none at all, or packaged in something that would bio-degrade or compost over a short period of time after the typical do-it-yourselfer throws the packaging in to the back alley behind their house when their done installing it.

Like I said, I would love for this product to be real, I'll wait for valid tests and proof though.

$200 for a bit of cloth in a tube? I'd need two of them for my car. Assuming their dubious claim of 5 MPG extra, that means driving my current 10,000 miles a year, starting at 25 MPG I would burn 400 gallons, and with this device giving me 30 MPG I'd burn only 333 gallons. Overall savings: 67 gallons. At $3.50 a gallon that's an amazing $233 savings, for an initial outlay of $400 plus additional filter costs. Remind me again, why would someone want to waste their money on this?

Here's a thought - someone wanna buy one of these, take it apart, and figure out how to build one yourself for $5 and post the results on www.instructables.com?

Awesome...after reading this i just punched some holes in a coke can and stuffed a sock in one end as the filter. I attached it to the back of my veedub...my car looks totally rad now and I'm getting like 70 MPG!!!!!! Not only that my exhaust smells like meadow fresh Downy...the kids next door come running when I pull into the driveway and always ask if they play next to my tailpipe.

HEADLINE FAIL. The first hybrid was made in 1901. http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/1131/

This is such a blatant scam.

Why would something on your tailpipe improve the engine efficiency ??
It might clean up particles, but the rest is just nonsense.

Snake oil.

SNAKE OIL SNAKE OIL SNAKE OIL.

I think this thing has actually been on here before - how can you fall for it AGAIN?

I don’t buy it. If it really improved fuel economy at the levels claimed, or functioned as claimed, it would set off a sensor on your motor causing the check engine light to come on. I would also be concerned that it would cause the catalytic converter to run hot and burn up pre maturely.

I'll let you in on a little secret I've learned from working in the automotive industry: If you want to know if a product is total garbage and not worth the money all you have to do is look to see if there are any cars sold with the device attached!

The volume in the industry comes from selling to a carmaker, without volume you're not going to make any real money.

Chances are one of two things happened,
a) these guys tried to sell this thing to a carmaker, but no one would sign up. Carmakers have VERY sophisticated senses of what will and will not sell cars, so this indicates its not worth it.
b) They already new it was crap, so they skipped that step and tried to sell it directly to the gullable public (indicating its REALLY not worth it)

While I agree, this reeks of snake oil, and I can't think of a single physical reason why filtering tailpipe emissions could improve engine efficiency, there is anther even more glaring reason to doubt they're claims.

They say it will reduce GHG emissions 34%- this necessarily implies you'll be using 34% less gas (50% higher fuel economy). They also say these devices will save $42 billion annually. But 2/3 of US oil is used for vehicles; 2/3 of our oil is imported at a cost of $700 billion/year. You reduce fuel use 34%, and even if you're paying $20/month for filters you'd save a LOT more than $42 billion/year.

Case closed. If they can't get their numbers right when doing so would be in THEIR favor, then something is clearly wrong.

Let me get this straight...each model yr the auto industry spends billions per yr in order to increase mpg by 1% each year, but this after-market gadget will increase my Camry's MPG by 20%+?
Don't you think the US auto companies who will be backrupt within the next two yrs would strick a deal to license the stupid gadget and the company wouldn't be relegated to youtube promos.
Where's Ron Popeil?

Rachel,

Take ownership of your mistake. Please respond to all the points above. Its ok to have been snookered, as long as you are adult enough to admit it when that embarrassing fact bludgeons you over the head. Respond with an update/edit to the post itself, not down here. Otherwise, by leaving the post as is, you give it false credibility and therefore are complicit in others being snookered.

Waiting with baited breath.

If this isn't snake oil, it should be developed for all the gas lawnmowers and leafblowers.

@Shaun

Your claims sound crazy garbage.

TH, don't ever post this BS

I had no idea eco-nuts were this stupid. I think I'll create some mpg adding fuel line magnets or something and make myself some $$$$

One major problem with this...a simple concept called back pressure. Why do you think performance exhaust systems increase fuel economy....they reduce back pressure on the engine. Same for high flow catalytic converters, much less engine pressure. This device would greatly increase back pressure on the engine, thus substantially dropping fuel economy and most likely wrecking chaos on you oxygen sensor. So add this to the list of rip offs taking advantage of stupid Americans.

This is a very good reason why NOT to get engineering news from a hippie website. Jesus you people are stupid. Please don't tell me you ACTUALLY think this will increase the efficiency of the vehicle.

-You're oxygen sensor and computer work together to choose the most efficient fuel/air mixture.

-Adding any filter to a tailpipe will not cause the exhaust gas to "want" to all of a sudden leave the car.

-All you need to know: the best retrofit to any car to improve fuel economy is to get a new driver who doesn't romp on the gas and slam on the brakes. Here's where your 30% is.

Is it possible this REPLACED the Catalytic Converter and thats where the savings come in from ?

I suspect this has already been pointed out, but there's no way to improve volumetric efficiency of an internal combustion engine by further restricting exhaust flow. This device will cause additional back-pressure in the system and REDUCE volumetric efficiency. This article is committing an egregious basic thermodynamics error. Please publish a correction.

I'm skeptical too, but I'm not convinced by all of you who say it can't work. Lots of conventional wisdom on cars is based on maximizing power, not maximizing efficiency. For example, race engine experts will tell you that cold air in the intake is best. But in fact warmer air in the intake is better for efficiency (at typical operating points); colder for maximizing power. This could be a similar effect. No auto manufacturer would be interested, because if you are building a car and you want to sacrifice power for efficiency, it's trivial--just put a smaller engine in.

Linked from my name is a blog that looks pretty independent that reports a 2-3 mpg improvement for city driving, more hwy.

All:

I’m the CEO of Sabertec, the manufacturer of the Blade. I’ve been reading your comments, and I understand your skepticism. We see it often for two reasons. First, we’ve all been conditioned to believe anything that seems too good to be true probably is. Not much we can do about this one.

Second, many of the comments and therefore disbelief come from common misunderstandings of how an internal combustion engine works, and thus, confusion on how Blade works. I’ll try to address them shorthand here, first by summarizing some of the issues, then providing a short answer to them.

This said, I don’t expect we’ll turn you all into believers today. But it’s worth providing more information to get the conversation going in way that’s productive and open:

In fact, if you like, we can arrange a webcast to turn this forum into a real time discussion on the blade, the technology, independent tests results and input from experts on the subject. If it’s okay with Treehugger, we can use this space to specify the details of when this can happen.

For now let me address some points:

#1: The Blade Blocks the Tailpipe: It’s a common perception, but not true. In fact, it’s fundamental to the design and abilities of Blade. What we are talking about is backpressure. In short, Blade does not create backpressure. Blade has built in pressure release (V-Cut) that allows the product to have the positive effect of exhaust scavenging without the negative effects of backpressure. In fact, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) requested that Sabertec do a backpressure test as they equate backpressure to NOx increase. The backpressure tests show no significant backpressure increases whatsoever and have been cleared by CARB to sell the product.

# 2: How Can a Filter Work on My Tailpipe?: This gets a little tricky, and if you like, you can delve into it more on our website. For now, it’s important to understand that Blade is more than a filter, it is a device that changes how exhaust moves from the engine through the system. Though I must admit that I got a laugh from JF’s comments, Jeremiah and JayDubWye are closer to the point: it’s about changing the physics of the process. In short, by changing the amplitude of the sound waves produced by the opening and closing of the