The problem with carbon in the intake track like in my picture above is that it becomes a sponge. The walls of the intake absorb and wick fuel. Same is true in the combustion chamber. So your fine mist spray becomes more like condensate injection.

I also like techron's cleaning ability inside the crankcase. I can testify that it works and gets in there. When I used 3 bottles, i.e. 60 ounces in 60 gallons, I got pronounced valvetrain rattle. And it did make my chain-tensioner problem go away. It wasnt just me my Jaguar mechanic said to I was using the wrong oil- which I wasnt.

 

What????
In business no one invests $43 billion without at least making 10x ROI.
What do you think they took a $43billion dollar gamble to make $10 billion?
Have you seen how much they have already made?
This may explain your skepticism on fuel injector cleaners more than anything.

 

Businesses and Businessmen routinely make investments that garner a TEN PERCENT return. Sure, that's yearly and also a pretty good deal. You say a TEN-FOLD ROI? Sure, maybe in 150-200 years if everything goes absolutely PERFECTLY. It's also a one-in-a-million chance. An absolutely FABULOUS investment DOUBLES in 7.7 years. 10X? Not hardly.
Your numbers are WAY off, by thousands of percents.

 

Oh Jagrag...
I did underestimate its not worth $430 billion, its worth $500 billion

Point is Why would Chevron that has Billions of dollars under its feet and guaranteed employment for 60 years dick with making $2 by selling you a $5 bottle of fuel injector cleaner? And be financially liable if it doesn't work.

 

Cee Jay. In the oil business, 10% is just the dividend paid to common share holders. Chevron pays 4%

 

To pull this back toward the OP's query...

First, thanks to all. This has been incredibly informative. Seriously - THIS is why I love these forums. You could have charged for this information.

After reading more than I ever thought I would on this subject, here's where I come down. I might be wrong, but....

Main takeaway: the "it's essential/it's snakeoil" controversy will not die. Fair enough. I like that people are passionate on either side. Me, I'm on the team, as follows:

- While I understand that a certain amount of carbon buildup is "normal," if mottled surfaces are optimal, engines would be machined with them. I'm a fan of the idea of a "new-looking" engine on the inside.

- I do think Techron is helpful-- IF you use it as recommended, regularly from when the engine is almost new. (I also think the one-tank-changes-everything pitch, which is part of the marketing, is misleading) Dumping a bottle in at 60K miles isn't a cure-all for anything.

- I'm glad I've been using the BG44K.

- I'm also glad that, at 40K miles, I'm going to have the pressurized cleaning. After that, I'm going to use the BG44K a little more than I have been.

At the end of the day, the cost and time commitment is low, and the potential upside seems much greater than the downside. At least for me.

 

But many posts, indeed many of your posts, do not seem to be about clogged injectors. Are they just meant to be but look like they're not about clogged injectors or are you overriding the clogged injectors issue or what?

 

 

 

Wow. 3 HP increase! That's well within the typical margin of error of any dyno and in no way indicative of a true change of performance

I think I've seen enough of this smoke and mirror show. Or is it dog and pony.

 

That video proves something important:
Some of the best lies are propagated by well-intentioned morons.

He is pouring a can of something called "Fuel Injector cleaner"- did you see any images of the fuel injector?? or even any measurement. Do you know why? He only has a hammer. Thats right he does not have the necessary tool. So he is going to make the test about the thing he can measure with his $20 ebay scope.

I note again for those who care. You cannot get carbon off piston heads other than over a very long period of time using a Mannich Detergent.

 

Painful video, I had to stop watching it.

 

lol I know, but it was the lead-on for the second video, which showed the results. (Or more accurately, the lack of any meaningful positive results.)