ezero1 device (CGON)

[Rustynuts]

I've found it. I've found a web page to a linked comment from Jimmy Sykes (fleet manager at Eddie Stobart) regarding the use of the cgon device on their trucks, as lauded by cgon in one of their multiple press releases. Essentially, Eddie Stobart have never trialled or used this product and he's unaware of how it came to be common knowledge that they had.

Honest.

[mac11irl]

13 minutes ago, Rustynuts said:

I've found it. I've found a web page to a linked comment from Jimmy Sykes (fleet manager at Eddie Stobart) regarding the use of the cgon device on their trucks, as lauded by cgon in one of their multiple press releases. Essentially, Eddie Stobart have never trialled or used this product and he's unaware of how it came to be common knowledge that they had.

Honest.

 

Linky???

 

Also iirc, doesnt @Llanigraham know some people in Morgan? As well as @Tech1e working there? Be nice to have the claims of development partnerships there verified or not too...

Edited 3 February, 2018 by mac11irl
Just an extra thought

[Rustynuts]

15 minutes ago, mac11irl said:

 

Linky???

 

 

You find me a link to an article from Eddie Stobart stating they have been testing the device first, rather than some second hand vague press release implying a working relationship between the two.

 

I'm fairly confident I won't need to reveal my non existent page / article.

[mac11irl]

Yeah, ive done a few searches for info on the stobart trials too,and only results are press releases disguised as news paper articles about cgon, with mentions of stobart trialling it but no further info.

[Llanigraham]

On 03/09/2017 at 21:10, Llanigraham said:

Who paid Emission Analytics for the testing?
Where are the independent test results?

Where is the evidence from Stobbart?

 

I note these questions never got answered!

Currently not in touch with anyone at Morgan. My friend has moved on, but i think Tech1e is still there.

[Tech1e]

I left Morgan in March last year. 

[mac11irl]

Missed that update @Tech1e

 

:(

[Tech1e]

17 minutes ago, mac11irl said:

Missed that update @Tech1e

 

:(

 

Don't get on here much these days I’m afraid. 

[burntcrisps2]

Update on Ford Focus.

Just filled the tank, but this is not a full tank with cgon fitted, only ~80% and I have done a fair number of short runs in cold weather such that the engine never reached anywhere near full operating temperature, which is not normal for me.

I have also done a few long runs on motorways cruising at ~70mph, so both scenarios are worst fuel economy scenarios.

Last few years have seen some regular commutes so including graph for that below as its fairly representative of economy.

Early 2017 shows 3 similar mpgs and this was several days a week runs of nearly half an hour, but only some 13miles distance.

Next 2 include some longer steady 50mph runs down to Swindon and back.

Since the battery was disconnected during cgon fitment, the ECU will probably be in a new learn mode, so that presumably has some affect, possibly adverse.

 

So car achieved 51.3mpg doing 560miles from this tankfull, which is better than I expected for motoring done.

Need to see what a full tank achieves next and will have some more motorway runs as we need to do a house clearance in Berkshire and also a run up to Preston and back so maybe have some more data later in month or so.

 

 

[Rustynuts]

34 minutes ago, burntcrisps2 said:

Update on Ford Focus.

Just filled the tank, but this is not a full tank with cgon fitted, only ~80% and I have done a fair number of short runs in cold weather such that the engine never reached anywhere near full operating temperature, which is not normal for me.

I have also done a few long runs on motorways cruising at ~70mph, so both scenarios are worst fuel economy scenarios.

 

Not too sure about that to be honest. I could sit on the motorway at 70mph in my old Bora and get neck end of 60mpg. Quite easily.

[CWARD]

As per my previous posts and by your own admission the type of mileage you’re doing has changed so the two can’t be compared. You will need to give more data to make any kind of meaningful comparison along with some kind of control measure. 

[Breezy_Pete]

Thanks for the ongoing data.

[Finchy1]

Hi everyone joined as extremely instrested in results of the cgon. 

all I can find is % results rather than hard mpg results. 

So iv got a unit and fitted it to my transit connect 1.8 tdci 

i had an mot test done on emissions then switched unit on results followed 

before (unit off) 1m

after .67 so 33% less tho will test again next  week after a few runs.

Will test with unit on then switch off unit to see if there is a change. 

 I’m really keen to see hard evidence that the unit increases mpg, so my idea is to build a gallon fuel tank to supply engine and see what mpg I get then test again with unit on ! 

Results to follow. 

[Aspman]

[CWARD]

As you’re driving a van don’t forget you’ll need to record the weight carried, average speed as well as just the MPG which can easily vary without strict controls. 

Your emissions test I assume was the smoke test in which case you’d have had better results running some BG244 through the tank

[burntcrisps2]

Update on Ford Focus.

A complete tank full with cgon fitted and active has returned the following results.

Slightly more miles using slightly less litres of fuel.

 

Car achieved 53.0mpg doing 568miles from this tankfull, which is better than the previous mpg for similar mileage and similar travel scenarios.

Updated graph for info..

 

The sceptics among you will draw your own negative conclusions, for sure.

More miles and tankfulls required of course to see if trend is positive, but even if I had a regular commute over 30miles or so, that would not be a scientific analysis as far too many variables, but it would be a real world set of data which most moaners on here seem to forget.

Any lab tests are just that and anything done on the road has many variables also, so the only way to do some truly comparative tests would be to have an underground track at a stable air temp, with autonomous vehicles driving same route repeatedly using at least a batch of 10 vehicles all of same design and batch run. Even then that would not be comparing apples with apples as no manufacturer makes 2 cars that are identical in a batch.

 

No word yet on Yeti case study, but hopefully some progress this month.

[CWARD]

@burntcrisps2 what was your average speed and ambient air temp before fitting and after?

Edited 2 March, 2018 by CWARD

[tubbyleigh]

Thanks burntcrisps for ongoing data. It's useful to me. So that's about a 6% gain on your best of last 2 years (discounting last tank). Not too bad. Now could you do me a quick favour and drive to Scotland and back, 8 times at exactly 55 mph? That would be really useful data. I'll give you a fiver towards fuel. :-)

[Tdi1.9]

The April 2018 issue of Car Mechanics is out this week and mentions this CGON device in "News in Brief" on p15.

 

As is usual for the mag, it seems to reproduce advertising copy from manufacturers, and I found this Briskoda thread by googling CGON.

 

I also found an Advertising Standards Agency ruling, dated September 2017, on a complaint about CGON's advertising.

 

The link is here...https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/cgon-ltd-a17-386763.html

 

I haven't read the whole of this Briskoda thread, but my logic tends to support the snake oil suggestion, or at best a very small and more than likely uneconomic benefit.

 

That's just my guess as to the true outcome.  I look forward to reading the tests and comparisons that will doubtless appear in the coming months.

[Breezy_Pete]

21 minutes ago, Tdi1.9 said:

I look forward to reading the tests and comparisons that will doubtless appear in the coming months.

I doubt there'll be much published.

If there was any merit in the technology it would have succeeded a very long time ago, and be in all our cars already.

[mac11irl]

@Tdi1.9

Yup, the ASA report has been linked previously... 

Every mention of this thing anywhere is advertorial blumpff. Not really much by way of actual info available from anyone...

 

[Tdi1.9]

The Car Mechanics piece starts "With the new MOT regulations coming into effect on May 18th".

 

It looks that CGON are trying to use the MOT changes as a handy opportunity to help push their product.

 

 

Edited 12 March, 2018 by Tdi1.9

[tubbyleigh]

Makes sense that they should push it now if the mot regs change. From what I've seen, it could be a permanent fix for a smokey car that's cheaper than having the injectors/pump replaced. Still expensive enough to be not worth it for a lot of failures though. 

They are going to be doing some advertising soon, and if successful I would expect to see some chatter either way as to its effectiveness (bearing in mind that only people who haven't seen one are criticising it so far). 

They sent an email out to all their fitters asking if any customers had a 4 to 8 year old navara they could do a fit on and film it for the advert. I thought this interesting as they asked for one which was already smokey. If they want to demonstrate its affectiveness I thought they would want to use a vehicle which didn't have a dpf fitted.

Anyway, if people don't like it I'm sure we will hear pleanty soon enough!

[Ootohere]

Obviously if it is about MOT changes then they need ones with a DPF fitted because  the MOT changes are about them and not having 'Any visible smoke'.

Seeing as there is no new equipment in the test stations, visible smoke will mean, smoke that is visible on diesel vehicles with as DPF.

 

Lets see just how many vehicles with the DPF and EGR as fitted at the factory are failing.

[tubbyleigh]

Not one word of that made any sense mate!

Emission limits are changing for both cars with, and without DPF. 

The limits are on metered smoke not visible smoke (unless it’s pre 1978 or something). 

New test equipment is needed unless your machine is pretty new (or do you know something that vosa doesn’t which will save us £8000?). 

And your last paragraph?????

Are you implying that every car fitted with dpf and egr will pass it’s mot? 

Lol.