EPA-AA-TEB-81-30
Evaluation of the
Super-Mag Fuel Extender
By
H. Anthony Ashby
August 1981
Test and Evaluation Branch
Emission Control Technology Division
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Office of Air, Noise, and Radiation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Background
The Environmental Protection Agency receives information about many sys-
tems which appear to offer potential for emission reduction or fuel econ-
omy improvement compared to conventional engines and vehicles. EPA's
Emission Control Technology Division is interested in evaluating all such
systems, because of the obvious potential benefits to the nation from the
identification of systems that can reduce emissions, improve fuel econ-
omy, or both. EPA invites developers of such systems to provide complete
technical data on the system's principle of operation, together with
available test data on the system. In those cases for which review by
EPA technical staff suggests that the available data show promise, or EPA
is requested to test the device by other governmental agencies, attempts
are made to schedule confirmatory tests at the EPA Motor Vehicle Emission
Laboratory (MVEL) at Ann Arbor, Michigan. The results of all such test
projects are set forth in a series of Test and Evaluation Branch reports,
of which this report is one.
In the case of the Super-Mag device, the request for EPA evaluation was
made by the Consumer Office of the Metropolitan District Attorney for
Denver, Colorado. The testing load at MVEL was such that several months
would elapse before the device could be tested there. EPA management
therefore decided to conduct the evaluation at the facility of an EPA
test contractor, Hamilton Test Systems, in Portland, Oregon. The tests
.were directed, and the device installed per manufacturer's instructions,
by the on-site EPA Project Officer.
The Super-Mag is a retrofit device marketed by Valor Enterprises, Inc. of
West Milton, Ohio. It consists of a set of magnets and sheet metal
plates that are installed around an automobile's fuel line near the car-
buretor in a box-like arrangement. Valor Enter-prises makes no claim in
the installation instructions nor in its packaging for increased fuel
economy or reduced emissions. On the package label, this statement
appears: "Transforms Molecular Properties of Liquid Fuel to Maximum
Combustion Efficiency."
The conclusions from EPA device evaluations can be considered to be quan-
tatively valid only for the specific test vehicles used; however, it is
reasonable to extrapolate the results from the EPA evaluation of other
vehicles in a directional manner, that is, to suggest that similar
results are likely to be achieved on other vehicles.
Summary of Results
Neither fuel economy nor exhaust emissions were affected by the instal-
lation of the Super-Mag device on the cars used in this evaluation.
Any differences between baseline test results and results from tests with
the device installed were within the range of normal test variability.
-------
-3-
Device Description
The Super-Mag Fuel Extender consists of two magnet assemblies, two steel
plates, and two plastic ties. Each magnet assembly consists of a rectan-
gular magnet with dimensions of 1.87" X 0.87" X 0.38" bonded to a steel
plate 2.67" X 1.14" X 0.04. The two magnet assemblies are placed on
opposite sides of the fuel line with the magnets on the inside, about 3
inches from the carburetor. The two steel plates are placed at the edges
of the magnet assemblies and at right angles to them to form a sort of
4-sided box, enclosing the fuel line. (See illustrations in Appendix 1,
which is a copy of the installation instructions that came with the
device.)
Test Vehicles
Three test vehicles were chosen for this evaluation. The intent was to
test a fairly wide range of model years, vehicle sizes, and engine sizes,
and to have each major American manufacturer's products represented. The
following vehicles were chosen:
1976 Chevrolet Malibu equipped with 350 C1D V-8 engine and automatic
transmission. Exhaust emission controls include exhaust gas recir-
culation (EGR) and oxidation catalyst. At the beginning of the
evaluation, there were 75,810 miles on the car's odometer.
1978 Plymouth Horizon equipped with 105 CID in-line 4-cylinder engine
and automatic transmission. Exhaust emission controls include EGR,
air pump, and oxidation catalyst. There were 34,210 miles on the
car's odometer at the beginning of the evaluation.
1981 Ford Fairmont equipped with 200 CID rn-line 6-cylinder engine
and automatic transmission. Exhaust emission controls include EGR,
air pump, three-way catalyst, and oxidation catalyst. At the start
of the evaluation there were 8,830 miles on the car's odometer.
Test Vehicle Descriptions may be found in Appendices 2 through 4.
Test Procedures
Exhaust emission tests were conducted according to the Federal Test
Procedure (FTP) described in the Federal Register of June 28, 1977, and
the EPA Highway Fuel Economy Test (HFET) described in the Federal
Register of September 10, 1976. The vehicles were not tested for evap-
orative emissions.
Prior to baseline testing, each vehicle was given a specification check
and diagnostic inspection. The ignition timing, idle speed, and fast
idle speed were checked for agreement with the manufacturer's specifica-
tions given on the Vehicle Emission Control Information label affixed to
the engine compartment. The vehicles were also inspected for engine
vacuum leaks, proper connection of vacuum hoses, functioning PCV valve,
oil and coolant levels, and general condition of engine compartment.
-------
-4-
Repairs on each vehicle were as follows:
76 Malibu - Steam-cleaned engine, changed engine oil and filter,
changed air filter. Replaced spark plugs. Replaced air cleaner hot
air duct. Rebuilt carburetor (installed new needle valve, seat,
power valve, gaskets, and fuel filter). Adjusted idle air-fuel ratio.
78 Horizon - Changed engine oil and oil filter, changed air filter.
Replaced spark plugs. Replaced carburetor, checked choke operation,
idle speed, ignition timing, idle air-fuel ratio.
81 Fairmont - No repairs or adjustments were necessary.
After repairs, the Malibu and the Horizon were driven on a 100-mile
urban/suburban route in the Portland area to condition the engines and
stabilize emissions, and then tested on the FTP and HFET. This sequence
was repeated on the Malibu to ensure that the emission levels had stab-
ilized. Because the Fairmont has just been used in a sequence of several
consecutive FTP's, HFET's, and other dynamometer tests, it was felt that
the road route driving was not necessary to stabilize its emissions.
At least two tests were conducted on each car in each of these configura-
tions: baseline, with device installed, and final baseline. After the
last emission test an engine diagnostic check was conducted to assure
.that the engine state of tune was still at manufacturer's specifications.
Results and Discussion
Composite FTP mass emissions and fuel economy, and HFET fuel economy, are
listed in Table 1 for the 76 Malibu. Data for all seven tests plus
averages are shown. The differences in emissions and" fuel economy
between the baseline tests and test with the Super-Mag installed are all
within normal test variability, with the possible exception of NOx emis-
sions. The NOx emissions averaged 1.97 gm/mi in baseline tests, and 2.14
gm/mi with the device installed, an increase of 8.6%. That dif- ference
is greater than two times the standard deviation on the baseline
results. Normal variations in the operation of the EGR or ignition
timing systems on this five-year-old car may be responsible for the dif-
ference.
Test results on the 78 Horizon are listed in Table 2. The differences in
fuel economy and HC emissions between baseline tests and tests with the
device installed are within normal tesitng variability.
CO and NOx emissions differences between baseline and with-device tests
are somewhat larger. CO emissions averaged 15.9 gm/mi on four baseline
tests and 14.1 gm/mi on two tests with the device. This is a reduction
of 11.3% from baseline. This may appear to be a significant reduction,
but the coefficient of variation of baseline CO is 11.9%. Thus, the CO
difference is within normal test variability for this car.
Average NOx emissions increased from 1.70 gm/mi at baseline to 1.88 gm/mi
with the device. The difference is about 1.5 standard deviations of the
baseline results and is considered to be within normal test variability
for this car.
-------
-5-
On the 81 Fairmont, essentially two evaluations of the Super-Mag were
required because of a step-change in CO emissions during testing. (Fuel
economy was unaffected.) As shown in Table 3, baseline CO emissions
averaged about 2.7 gm/mi. CO emissions with the device averaged about
3.3 gm/mi, within the range of test variability at such low levels of
emissions. However, the post-device baseline tests gave CO emissions of
about 6.1 gm/mi. A thorough engine diagnosis and fuel system examination
revealed no deviation from manufacturer's specifications. An additional
set of two tests confirmed the new baseline CO level of over 6 gm/mi.
Those four tests were used as the baseline for another evaluation of the
device. The results from these four baseline tests, two tests with
device installed, and two more baseline tests after removing the device
are listed in Table 3 under the heading "2nd Evaluation". Any dif-
ferences in results between baseline tests and those with the Super-Mag
are well within normal test variability.
Conclusions
In tests on three cars representing a range of model years, engine sizes,
and chassis layouts, the Super-Mag Fuel Extender had no significant
effect on the emissions of any pollutant nor on fuel economy.
-------
Mass Emissic
Baseline
with Device
Post-Device
Baseline
Average of
5 Baseline
Tests
HC
1.24
1.26
1.3A
1.36
1.27
1.31
1.39
1.31
r JLr r,mj.s>t
CO
2A.12
27.06
28.22
30.18
26.91
28.69
30.95
27.81
-6-
Table 1
>ns and Fue
'6 Malibu
sions, gpm-
C02
658.0
643.3
632.4
662.9
663.6
653.2
655.7
648.5
1 Economy
NOx
2.01
1.86
1.95
2.16
2.12
2.04
1.97
1.97
Fuel Economy, mpg
FTP HFET
12.7
12.9
13.0
12.4
12.5
12.6
12.5
12.7
18.0
18.3
18.4
17.6
17.8
18.1
18.0
18.2
Average 2 Tests
With Device 1.32
% Change
From Baseline
+ .8%
28.55
+2.7%
663.3
+2.3%
2.14
+8.6%
12.5
-2%
17.7
-2.8%
-------
Mass Emissi
Baseline
with Device
Post-Device
Baseline
Average of
4 Baseline
Tests
KC
.75
.80
.69
.70
.64
.81
.75
r ir jc.rn.LS
CO
16.6
16.9
14.9
13.3
13.1
17.1
15.9
7
Table 2
ons and Fue
'8 Horizon
sions, gpm-
C02
332.1
322.6
328.0
325.0
331.9
320.8
326.9
1 Economy
NOx
1.73
1.78
1.63
2.17
1.78
1.50
1.70
Fuel Economy, mpg
FTP HFET
24.6
25.2
25.1
25.5
25.0
25.3
25.0
34.6
34.4
34.2
34.1
33.8
34.4
34.3
Average 2 Tests
With Device .70
14.1
326.5
1.88
25.3
34.2
.% Change
From Baseline
-6.7%
-11.3%
-0.1%
+10.6%
+1.2%
-.3%
-------
Table 3
Mass Emissions and Fuel Economy
81 Fairmont
Baseline
Average of
2 Baseline
with Device
Average 2 Tests
With Device
% Change
.Baseline
With
Device
Post-Device
Baseline
Average of
6 Baselines
Average 2 Tests
With Device
% Change
HC
.30
.28
.29
.30
.34
.32
+10.3%
.52
.54
.60
.56
.54
.56
.54
.56
.55
.55
0
tir tmiss
CO
2.57
2.72
2.65
3.20
3.34
3.27
+19%
2nd
6.12
6.15
6.91
6.47
6.26
6.79
6.58
6.91
6.52
6.53
+ .2%
ions, gpm
C02
513.5
513.3
513.4
510.3
511.8
511.1
-.5%
Evaluation
499.7
508.4
517.3
508.8
514.4
508.2
507.0
509.3
508.4
511.3
+ .6%
NOx
.87
.80
.84
.73
.72
.73
-13%
.80
'.73
.77
.61
.80
.75
.94
.71
.76
.78
+2 . 6%
ruc-L JLC
FTP
17.1
17.1
17.1
17.2
17.1
17.2
+.6%
17.4
17.1
16.7
17.0
16.9
17 -. 0
17.1
17.0
17.1
17.0
-.6%
uuuuiy ,
HFET
23.3
23.1
23.2
23.4
23.0
23.2
0
23.5
23.2
23.2
22.7
22.5
22.9
22.0
22.6
22.9
22.7
-.9%
from baseline
-------
MODEL SM101
"By VALOR the Innovators in Energy Saving Devices "
INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS
Congratulations! You have just purchased the Super-Mag Fuel Extender
a break through in a Fuel Saving Device.
Remove all parts trom package
1 2 yEach Super-Mag Kit contains:
Two (2) magnet assemblies.
Two (2) plastic lies.
Rr'nove air breather.
Check to see where fuel line enters
carburetor. (Line will come from fuel
pump to carburetor.) If your luel
line has a rubber hose, it must
be removed and a steel or copper line
added.
Where room is available, Extender
can be installed using the
Three Plates or Box Method.
Install the Super-Mag Fuel Extender
approximately 3" from Ihe carburetor.
Position between the carburetor and fuel
filler on luel line. (For proper
installation, magnets must attract
eack olher.)
Super-Mag
Fuel Line
AirBrealher
Engine
Secure Super-Mag Fuel Extender
with plastic lies placed through
holes in each end ol plate.
(See illustration.
Preferred installation is lo use
the Four-Plate or Box
Method. Using the Plate
Method will amplify the
magnetic field.
Completely tape the Super-Mag
Fuel Extender for a cleaner
installation.
If carburetor has a built-in
filler or screen, it must be
removed. Then install Super-Mag
NOTE: ' V as in Step 5.
Always install Super-Mag Fuel Extender with magnetic force attracting each other.
loslarl (Belorc installation of Super-Mag Fuel Extender)
Note temperature, barometic pressure and humidity.
Dole the beginning and end time ol test, and the miles traveled. This will enable you to calculate your
average speed
T op-of I lank (Shake car to eliminate air pockets in tanks.)
Drive car 80 to 100 miles.
Relill tank (Top-oil)
Divide miles by gallons o! fuel this will give you Ihe miles per gallon
Install Super-Mag Fuel Extender as per instructions on reverse side.
Re-lesl car duplicating conditions as in Section t as closely as possible.
These Factors Will Ailed Fuel Mileage.
Air Temperature Headwinds Road Condilions Condition ol Engine Tire Pressure Hilly
Terrain Driving Technique
PRODUCT LIMITED WARRANTY
Valor Enlerprises. Incorporated warrants all products lor thirty days Irom date ol original purchase against.
manulaclurinr) delecls in material and workmanship in accordance with the following lerms and conditions. This
warranty applies to Ihe original purchaser only and is not translerable.
1 During warranty period. Valor Enterprises will repair without charge valid delects m malenals and workman-
ship. Warranty does not apply to units thai have been damaged through accident, misuse, negligence, modili-
cation, abuse, normal expected wear, installation, and weather or act ol God. Damage that is determined lo be ol
this nature will be repaired at consumer's expense. Warranty does not apply to labor and repair expenses not per-
formed by Valor Service Department, such as repair, removal, and installation. Missing accessories will be
replaced at a charge to the sender Not in warranty il not properly installed, resulting in any damage lo the vehicle
2. The exlent of repairs or adjustments covered under this warranty are to be determined by Valor Enterprises ^
Valor Enterprises reserves the right lo make linal judgement as to causes ol delects. >rj
3. For you protection, we require proo! of original purchase date lor warranty determination-sales invoice or A;
cancelled check is satislaclory evidence. This procedure insures thai you receive lull-term warranty Irom the oa'te -^
ol original purchase so that the time the unit remains in dealer stock is not deducted. ^
4 All packaging and shipping charges to return units lor repair are the responsibility ol Ihe customer Pack units ^^
carefully lo eliminate shipping damages It is wise lo insure shipments against loss or damage. Return units lo'"
Valor Enterprises. Incorporated. 185 West Hamilton Street. West Milton. 45383. AUeniion: Warranly Repair |~
Department, Please include a detailed description ol the problem along will proof ol purchase II the unit is under
warranly. Valor Enterprises will return it prepaid. Inquiries concerning Ihe status ol a warranly claim may be di-
rected to the above address, or by telephoning (513) 698-4194 and asking lor Customer Service.
5. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL VALOR ENTERPRISES. INCORPORATED BE LIABLE FOR
ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF THIS WARRANTY OR OF ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTY.
6 Consumer may appeal product repair charges by stating the complaint in writing to Valor Enterprises. Remedial
action requests will be answered within three weeks alter receipt. Consumers are required to seek remedial action
lo Valor Enlerprises before resorting to a Ihird party.
7 This warranty gives you specific legal rights, and you may also have olher rights which vary Irom state to state.
The Model SM10I Super-Mag Fuel Extender will work on any Combustion Engine: Lawn Mowers Snow
Mobiles -- Boats Rototillers Motorcycles Garden Tractors Vans Pickups Trucks, etc.
Special Note.
Please write to us at Valor Enlerprises, Inc. and tell us the results of your use of
the Super-Mag Fuel Extender. Your letter may be used in our National
Advertising Program.
VALOR ENTERPRISES,
185 West Hamilton Street
West Milton, Ohio 45383
INC.
-------
-10-
Appendix 2
TEST VEHICLE DESCRIPTION
Chassis model year/make: 1976 Chevrolet Malibu
Vehicle ID No.: 1029V6ZA73383
Engine
type spark ignition V-8
bore x stroke A. 00 in. x 3.48 in.
displacement 350 CID/5.7 liter
compression ratio 8.5:1
maximum power @ rpm 1A5 hp @ 3800 rpm
fuel metering 2-venturi carburetor
fuel requirement Unleaded gasoline.
Tested on Indolene HO.
Drive Train
transmission type 3 speed automatic
final drive ratio 2.56
Chassis
type A-door sedan
tire size not recorded
curb weight not measured
inertia weight A500 Ib
passenger capacity 6
Emission Control System
basic type EGR
oxidation catalyst
-------
-11-
Appendix 3
TEST VEHICLE DESCRIPTION
Chassis model year/make: 1978 Plymouth Horizon
Vehicle ID No.: ML 44A8D235515
Engine
type . . spark ignition in-line 4
bore x stroke 3.13 in x 3.4 in.
displacement 105 CID/1.7 liter
compression ratio 8.2:1
maximum power @ rpm 75 hp @ 5600 rpra
fuel netering 2 venturi carburetor
fuel requirement Unleaded gasoline.
Tested on Indolene HO.
Drive Train
transmission type 3 speed automatic
final drive ratio 3.48
Chassis
type 4-door sedan
tire size P165/75R13
curb weight not measured
inertia weight 2500 Ib, 7.0 ahp at 50 mph
passenger capacity 5
Emission Control System
basic type . .- EGR
Air pump
Oxidation catalyst
-------
-12-
Appendix A
TEST VEHICLE DESCRIPTION
Chassis model year/make: 1981 Ford Fairmont
Vehicle ID No.: 1FABP21B3BK112840
Engine
type spark ignition in-line 6
bore x stroke 3.68 in. x 3.13 in.
displacement 200 CID/3.3 liter
compression ratio 8.6:1
maximum power @ rpm 94 hp
fuel metering 1-venturi carburetor
fuel requirement Unleaded gasoline.
Tested on Indolene HO.
Drive Train
transmission type 3-speed carburetor
final drive ratio 2.73
Chassis
type 4-door sedan
tire size P175/75R14
curb weight not measured
inertia weight 3000 Ib, 10.7 ahp at 50 mph
passenger capacity 6
Emission Control System
basic type EGR
Air pump
Three-way catalyst (open loop)
Oxidation catalyst
------- |