From another shareholder. This was posted previously on the board.
Your analysis is erroneous and misleading. That's what happens when you mindlessly copy & paste from another website (seewww.bgsoflex.com/mpg.html ). Look familiar?
The website you copied from uses Engine Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (BSFC) measured in gal/hr-hp.
The CAD Railway Industries test report used BSFC measured in lb/hr-hp. In other words, a 2.2% fuel savings per pound of diesel fuel consumed.
A gallon of #2 diesel fuel weighs 7.15 lbs, plus or minus. So, (7.15lbs x 2.2%) = 15.73% fuel savings per gallon, or 15.73% increase in MPG, when the additive is used. This is “statistically significant” as the CAD report states. Now there's a “fact”!
And please note that the CAD report says the 2.2 % BSFC reduction came with the engine “at full load” (page 4) and near maximum engine RPM (page 3). Who consistently drives their car/truck/locomotive/ocean liner/diesel-powered generator under full load at top RPM? 19% fuel savings is totally reasonable and exactly what “real-world” users/product evaluators are seeing, including one who posts on this board.
Too bad the CAD lab didn't use the gal/hr-hp measurement for BSFC which easily translates into MPG savings. Maybe the marketing would be easier.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
