NJ Trooper,
Actually he offered that I send direct to him.
It was either send to the tech or send it back through the distributor for a new one under warranty. Intellidyne does not sell direct to consumer.
Quite frankly, I would rather ship from my office for a couple of bucks and get it back in a day or two than go the long way.
I was not too impressed with the online distributor.
If I had bought it from Patriot, I would of done an exchange but I did not. I have got great prices and service from them on a well adapter and aqua-stat that others wanted twice the price.

He can flash the chip, test it and I will know that I am at least getting the latest version.
Distributor could send my the wrong one again. Took me an extra 2 weeks to get my DOM sensor which I ordered at same time as HW+.
I am sure he will pay return ship plus I feel I am getting better
customer support this way.

 

I am removing my Intellicon from service and returning both the one i bought and the unit Intellidyne sent me. I haven't been able to figure out why it keeps malfunctioning and intellidyne has been no help. I have checked and rechecked my wiring and sensors and can't figure out why it keeps going into sensor fault and unit bypass. This has been one of the worst consumer experiences i have ever had.

 

I am gonna send mine back for upgrade.
I think it is functioning as intended. Mine is just not measuring RT as it should. If I do my own Fredsave calc as I think it should be done based on my correct burner run time.

Fredsave = ET/(ET + Actual Burner RT) x 100% and I am currently getting a real reduction of 12% less usage all other things remaining the same. And that is with a 30 degree differential. They could make it real simple and allow you to input your nozzle size and calculate gallons saved instead of this percentage BS. Most consumers see a % sign and automatically think they are savings thousands when in reality they are only saving a few bucks.

Insulation contractors just finished today and can't wait to see inspection report with thermal imaging (independent of course) I calc my heat loss on 3000sq ft living to be 59k BTU/hr down from 69k+.
I am currently burning approx 100 gal/month compared to previous owners records of approx 225/month for this time of year. And comfy too.
Can't see reducing that much more.

Maybe I will be able to tuck away enough so that when it is time to retire the old beast, I can afford something that is really efficient.

Am curious, are you wrapping your wires in the insulation.
I bet that is where it is failing. Bet that telephone wire is only rated for 90 deg c or around 194 deg F. I try to keep just the sensor covered and rarely get above 190 deg and am seeing thermal distortion in the sensor plastic.

 

In case anyone misunderstands.
In my case the HW+ has been a toy to help me understand the basics of hydronic heating with oil.
In reality it has only saved me about 30 gallons total or about $70. Since it cost me $150 it will most likely take me two heating seasons before I even see a return.

What I feel are the three major factors that reduced my oil use are.

1. Sealing a 48" whole house fan in the main hallway that was wide open to the attic.
2. Recognizing that my low lim on my tankless was broken and continuously calling for heat. Boiler was bouncing from highlim to 10 deg differential 365 days a year.
3. Installing 3 programable TT's for each floor(zone) and setting back at night and in day when we are gone.

Minor things were setting the low lim on tankless to 120 deg.
who needs hot water at night or when not there. Storage tank holds heat from the evening and morning recovery period.
( I will need to bump up in summer when not using heat, maybe HW+ will save a little here.)

I anticipate additional 25% savings by investing in sealing and insulation to lower my heat loss. Doesn't matter how efficiently you make it if you cant keep it in.

 

Rbeck
Would you be willing to suggest some guidlines for burner tuneup.
I would hire independent pro to do the work but would like have some kind of checklist to know whether I am hiring a tech who knows what he is doing.

Things like what shouild be measured, what are optimal vs acceptable for various readings like CO, Co2, draft, stack temp , etc.
Boiler has a newer Becket AFG burner.

My oilman still swears by the "eyeball" method for old boiler/ burners so I will not use him, so if anything the independent tech will be validating how good of a job he did.

"Curious, what would you say are preferred or optimal reading for my AS Arcoliner.
That way if I hire an HVAC guy to tune it up, I will have some idea if he knows what he is doing."

Thanks

 

Once again, the dissemination of incorrect info is mind boggling, to say the least.

First of all, Intellidyne is very proud of the fact that all of its products are made here in the good old USA. We will never have our products made anywhere that it takes away from Americans working, as some of our competitors do.

As for mr. wornjaws, it started out that he was annoyed that he thought he needed an additional sensor for his installation and had to wait for it from his source. This displeasure was stringently conveyed to out tech support group. Why he is melting sensors we don’t know and can’t explain it until we get something back that we can look at. We probably have more than a half million of those things out there, and sure some have been melted but after analysis and detective work we know why. That aside, while in the process of dealing with mr. wornjaws, he was informed that due to the fact that he has on ODR control already on his system, that his expectation of getting the 10% guaranteed savings was not only unrealistic, but that it wasn’t going to happen. Next, after melting a second sensor and subsequent contact with our tech support, on Feb. 4th, we sent him a new control along with an additional sensor. We circumvented our normal process of handling the return through our normal channels and dealt with him direct. We also sent him a UPS prepaid return shipping label. To date we haven’t received anything back. From a customer support perspective, I don’t think there was more that could be done. He still has the option of returning his unit to his place of purchase for a refund.

As for other things, my invite to NJTROOPER is still open. I am willing to answer any questions you have as long as they don’t request our energy saving algorithm. That secret sauce is not in our patent for obvious reasons. I’m willing to explain the savings calculation (which is patent pending) whatever…… Put together your questions and send them to me……. Or, I'm willing to do a face-to-face.

And just FYI, it is impossible to determine the savings from the ET (economizer time)….Unless you know how much longer the burner ran due to the delayed start, you can’t calculate the savings…….

After monitoring the forum for a while I have gotten a new found respect for NJTROOPER….. I truly believe that his thoughts and conclusions are based on erroneous assumptions of how the HW works, and I’m willing to try and clear those assumptions up.

My mission is to make a believer out of NJTROOPER.

Jack Hammer

 

In my case it is impossible to calculate anything because mine does not measure RT correctly. It measures almost 21 hours some days when my burner only runs 3 hrs.
It is however giving me 34% savings which does not make sense.
I am sending mine back because your tech believes it has a bug in software which I believe. Have not gotten any offer of a free UPS return ticket.

Having said that if it is true that you can not base % savings on Et and RT alone because it does not factor in the extra run time for the recovery burn from the extended delay.

Are you saying that the burn time after ET release is not factuored into RT?

However,assuming it is factored in it can not be more than the ratio burn time delayed to the actual burn as in my best case formula
Fred Save= ET/(ET + Actual Burner RT) x 100%

Re: your algorithum
If no knows how you calculate savings than how do we know it is not BS. If you can not show me than how do I know it is real. Besides, aren't you protected by a patent.

For the record, I do believe in the validity of your product and when I get a version that actually measures my RT to within a few percent of my electronic hour meter, I may be willing to consider the validity of your ASAVE calculation.

Why are you letting distributors sell versions with a known bug anyway. I believe that I am a little above the curve when it comes to data collection and I had to buy an addition meter to confirm that yours was incorrect.

And I am will to bet that Northman is actually the Green Pete guy who sold it to me and never responded to my direct question

 

You need to calculate units of fuel used per degree day. I think that is going to be the easiest way to figure out if you are saving anything.

 

Droolplug,
I am not talking about exact. I am talking about being in the same ballpark.

If JNHammer can explain to me in layman's terms or even scientific (I am an engineer) without divulging his secret algorithm( I do not care how the HW+ decides when it is the optimal time or temp change rate to release burner) how with a recorded RT of 372.5,
a measured actual burner run time of 79.9 and an ET of 14.6, it is tht he can with a straight face tell me that I am saving an average of 35.8%.

One of the basics of scientific method is that if the number is not even close, something does not make sense.

Do I think the HW+ saves money? YES But the actual savings does not seem to have any relationship to the little LCD display on the case.

 

JNHammer said it is impossible to figure out how much you are saving using the ET. I don't know what the ASAVE number is supposed to mean.

Figuring out what your actual savings are using degree days may reveal what those numbers mean on the Intellicon unit. It doesn't require much effort to do so unless you don't have old utility bills to work with.

 

Droolplug,
You are missing the point.
I do not care what he says.
ET is the only thing this device does.
It delays the burner from firing on a heat call.
Fuel savings is directly related to how long the burner does not fire when the TT is calling for heat.

I am saying that in my case the ASAVE does not seem possible based on my actual burner run time and the amount it is delayed.

Again, I am not talking exact figures but RELATIVE.
IF ET is not relative to ASAVE than why record.
Might as well display the time in Thailand

 

Droolplug,
FYI
ASAVE is supposed to be AVERAGE SAVINGS
ISAVE is supposed to be Instantaneous SAVINGS per last savings cycle.
RT is supposed to be CUMULATIVE Burner RUN Time.

In my experience as an engineer, if calcs does not compute or pass simple reality check than either unit is out of whack or does not perform as claimed.

Not to sound condescending but was hoping for a response from the man himself.

 

I've started to reply to this several times... and erased what I wrote, and started over...

I see this turning into one of those troublesome threads that goes nowhere... in fact, I was afraid of this from the outset.

I'd rather not have it be a forum for disgruntled consumers, and defensive business people to take jabs at each other.

Let's keep it OBJECTIVE, otherwise I will lock and delete the whole thread.

My responses to Jack:

Jack, it might be helpful if you were to write a bit on exactly WHAT incorrect info is being passed, and then respond to those points directly.

For that, I have applauded you in the past, and continue to do so!

I know you are a busy guy, and probably have your reasons for not returning to answer the questions I did ask quite a while back, but if you are so inclined to return, I will bring those questions back to light.

Face-to-face? Shall I call the office for an appointment? Or ya wanna meet for Beer 4U2?

OK, now ya got me Jack... I have no idea what you are talking about here! Can you explain what you mean by this?

Oh my... you've got your work cut out for you! It's gonna be a long, hard road... I'm the ultimate skeptic! BUT, I am not afraid to admit when I'm wrong, and I am open-minded enough to listen, and consider all arguments... I CAN change my mind, and I WILL if the facts convice me!

I'll wait to see if you return this time...

So guys, PLEASE, keep the discussion objective, don't attack the guy... let him speak his piece. Jack, likewise to you...

 

Perhaps I am misunderstanding what your goal is here. I thought that you were trying to figure out if this unit is saving you fuel on your system. If that is the case, who cares how relevant the numbers on that display are? Other then being really annoying that they aren't. If it didn't come with that display, would you be as frustrated with it?

I think that ASAVE, in whatever way they calculate it, is indicating a savings of time. If that is true, it would be useless information.

 

NJ Trooper,
I think you meant objective but point taken.
I too had a hard time with

"And just FYI, it is impossible to determine the savings from the ET (economizer time)….Unless you know how much longer the burner ran due to the delayed start, you can’t calculate the savings……"

If ET is not relevant to economy than was display/ record.
Also referenced data is part of RT measurement after release up to hi lim or end of heat call whichever happens first.
I think it was misspoken.

I may have gotten heated because I do not think that that I was disseminating incorrect info other than surmising that the sensors may have been outsourced overseas.
Hey even the famous all American Harley D has foreign parts in it. Just a fact of life. But I am confident in the rest of my observations because I have spend more time hoping that this thing is doing what it is supposed to. Maybe Mr Hammer would be so kind as to send me one that works instead of me having to do all the legwork and sending back defective one.
I also think he has me confused with wornjaws.

 

Droolplug,
I do apologize. Did not mean to direct my frustration toward you.

But yes, I would not have bought without display.
And would never buy a "black box" which one plugs in and assumes is "saving" without any way to determine payback period or to monitor whether itis functioning as specified.

That is what engineers are trained to do.

 

fred, yer right, I did mean objective, and edited my post, thanks!

 

How would it ever have the ability to tell you how much you are saving if it doesn't know the fuel input? It would also have to know how much fuel it would have used if it did not "economize". I don't see how it could produce any sort of data that could be useful in telling you how much fuel was saved.

 

Droolplug,
You are confusing me.
Unit does not keep track of fuel used. That is what your oil tank guage does in a primitive analog way.
What it is marketed as is a tool the guarantees a percentage savings based on the theory that a dynamic differential reduces fuel consumption vs a fixed differential on the hi lim and it does so by reducing firing, standby loss, and short cycling.

It also advertises this little display as compared to the Becket version which didn't and also seemed to require a minimum hi lim of 170 deg.

That said, mine does not measure the burner run time correctly which is to me as irritating as it would be if my gas guage in my car was always half full even though I had to fill up every week.

 

NJTROPER,

I would like to meet here at my office if that would be convenient for you..... anytime after next week works for me.

The beers we can have after, regardless of the outcome.

Bring all of your, or anyone elses, questions... I will be there along with my top technicians.

you can call me at xxxxxxxxxx and we can set something up. ok?

 

NJTrooper,

Myself would love to know how ASAVE is calculated.

What's the point of ISAVE?

How about a recall on units with Standby timeout issue causing incorrect RT calc.

Don't really care about the specifics of algorithm.
But do wonder why it has a 50-50 chance of hitting Lo Lim before release.
Also, how come factory does not handle warranty issues direct.
I doubt distributors will be the same in 15 years.

Thanks in advance

 

And have a beer for me.Beer 4U2

 

Jack, I'd like to take you up on your offer... but since I have no vested interested in becoming a 'believer', fact is that I'd rather not take time off from my 'day job', and spend the gas money.

Why not just take questions and answer here?

And there will be beers for everyone... but I'll be drinking them all! Beer 4U2

 

NJTROOPER:

It is too bad that you don't want to become informed.

While you may say that you don't have a vested interest, I disagree. As long as you moderate a topic such as this, I feel that you are obligated to be impartial (which it doesn't seem that you are) and to give out correct information, not incorrect assumptions.

You answer questions from people with incorrect assumptions, with your incorrect assumptions. The result is ignorance (I didn’t say stupidity).

Anyway, I thought that I could impart the true facts and function of our controls, to you so that I wouldn't have to deal with all the questions.

Every one of these questions can take lengthily responses, and they don’t end there… they go back and forth, and back and forth…. Quite frankly I don’t have the time or patience to do it.

If I thought for one instance that your pursuit of knowledge was genuine and that you would give us a fair shake, I would have paid your gas, and a day’s pay. I would have offered, but didn’t want you to think I was trying to buy you. The offer is off the table!

We have hundreds of thousands of units out there, with 99.99% satisfaction. To be honest with you, the few unhappy customers that subscribe to your blog, or to any blog for that matter, DO bother me. I’m sorry they are not happy but you can’t make everyone happy – it’s impossible.

I guess the independent testing done by laboratories (Brookhaven National Laboratories is one), Utility Companies, and a two-year study (public document) done by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) are all wrong and you are right……..

I will no longer be monitoring your blog.

Take care and peace………

Jack Hammer, CEO
Intellidyne LLC

 

[sorry droop, much as I might agree, your post was sorta non-objective - NJT]

 

Jack, sorry you feel that way, and you won't be back, but I do have a few lines of rebuttal for you.

If you take this definition of 'vested interest':

Then in fact, I have none. I am a volunteer here, with no compensation. I come here to help people, that's all, and I work damn hard at it for nothing but personal satisfaction that I may make some stranger's life a little bit easier.

Neither am I 'obliged' to be impartial. And, in every single one of my posts I have claimed either opinion, or direct observance of the nature of the device. I have only reported what I have directly seen with my own eyes, and the opinion formed thereby.

I assure you that it is, and I would. I wouldn't treat you any differently than any other human being.

Nope, never said that... I did say that I find their testing methods flawed though, and that is my OPINION, which I am entitled to.

Good Luck to you Jack.

 

It is a shame that Mr Hammer never actually answered one single question about the HW+

And withdrawing an offer that was never made is one of the oldest tricks in the book.

Quite frankly, I would think he was trying to insult our collective inteligence. As if we are not capable of grasping mathematical concepts.

Fact is my original concerns stem from the real truth that there are an unknown number units in the field (that I was able to discern through observation) that that have buggy software and while there may be 99.99% satisfaction (probably used the ASAVE calc for that one (humor not sarcasm) it is more likely due to ignorance (not stupidity)

My opinion is that I personally would have had more respect for him if Mr Hammer had one of his techs answer the questions if he personnally finds it tedious. After all he is the CEO.
Instead he takes his marbles and goes home.


There is also no basis for his jab about pursuit of knowledge.
You provided him with a forum that he chooses to refrain from using.

My pursuit of knowledge is probably one of my only obesessive behaviors. Normal people probably would not of given this topic a second thought.

 

Has anyone every do any testing on the Fields OVD.

Claims:
Put a damper on oil heating bills.
Install a Field Controls Oil Vent Damper system on chimney
vented atomizing oil heating appliances.
Reduces fuel
costs by 5% or
more! Increases
AFUE by up
to 2%
Benefits:
• Reduces heating bill
• Improves efficiency
• Increases comfort
• Reduces off-cycle
heat loss


• CSA listed
(Tested to UL standard 17 and CSA B140 Oil Vent Damper)

How would something like this increase comfort?

Nice brochure
http://www.fieldcontrols.com/pdfs/43...ntDamperSS.pdf

No guarantee but can not see how it would hurt for about the same cost as HW+

 

I believe vent dampers are standard issue on new conventionally vented boilers. Mine came with one.

 

Is your boiler gas or oil?
Mine is oil fired and was built in 1964.
I believe this product is marketed as a retro-fit item for boilers without them not as a replacement for OEM equipment.

 

I may have misunderstood this but is the implication that if you have an ODR than your guarantee is void. Never saw that in print before. But it came from the horses mouth (keyboard).


"That aside, while in the process of dealing with mr. wornjaws, he was informed that due to the fact that he has on ODR control already on his system, that his expectation of getting the 10% guaranteed savings was not only unrealistic, but that it wasn’t going to happen.

What else voids the guarantee? Asking questions.

 

Vent dampers are a requirement on gas equipment but not on oil products. It will add maybe 1-2% on efficiency by cutting standby losses.
I have an easy solution to the HW+ control. Forget about all the rubbish on the screen as it does not matter what it says. The important thing is how much it saves not what it displays. Figure it manually and forget the rest. The bottom line is what the savings is anything beyond that is what it is. Nothing in this industry is 100%. I can get 5 water sensor, thermometers, Tekmar controls, OD senors or anything else and they all read different. Even if all the information was displayed properly it still is on the accuracy of the sensors and the conversion to temperature and time. The accuracy of all this electronic stuff is a bit loose. If the sensors are close to accurate the installation on the pipe and either laminar or turbulent flow is going to change their readings.

 

Rbeck,
Actually the sensors are quite accurate and calibrated to each other. Never had an issue with that.Checked them several times.

Most of the discussion has been relative to the accuracy or validity of the savings claim, how it is calculated, and what the potential for savings is on different systems.

From what was stated in previous correspondence, it is unrealistic to expect even the minimum guaranteed savings if you have an ODR installed on your system.This was never stated in any sales literature.

Something that I believe NJTrooper said indirectly when he said that he doubted that it would save on all systems.

Now you say that the OVD only saves 1-2% but the manufacturer is claiming up to 5% plus more comfort. Where do you get your data and how was it measured? I believe that is what I was asking a couple of posts ago.

You are right in that it is more important how much it saves not what it displays but how would a consumer decide whether it is worthwhile to purchase or not. In my case it is saving just about 12% but I have the ideal system for maximum savings. It claims 35%. NJ is saying that his is not saving anything and he is glad he did not pay for it.

Now it may be true that you have seen it save alot on different systems but their is a difference between examples
and evidence.
You just may happen to encounter a lot of inefficient systems with a lot of wasted potential.

As for your statement about electronic stuff.
even though i am old school and a lover of analog, I believe that the opposite is true and electronic is not only more accurate is has better consistency and does not require frequent calibration.

 

I checked out the Intellicon literature and it says that it "reduces fuel consumption - typically 10% to 20%". It also says that it "usually decreases burner cycling 30% or more". Seems to me that it is performing as advertised in your case.

 

Droolplug.

If your odometer was measuring 3 times as many miles as you actually drove , would you say your car was performing as "advertised" because it started in the morning.

How about when you went to trade it in and only got half the value due to high mileage.

If I were make a food serving half size and advertise
" NEW and IMPROVED" Now only half the Fat.

I would be teliing the truth but would you pay full price for this IMPROVEMENT

Some people actually expect FULL FUNCTIONALITY when the pay for something advertised as such.

I bought mine when it was advertized as GUARANTEED to save 10% AND to measure and display my savings correctly.

And some people believe that advertisers and manufacturors should be held accountable for the performance of their product. Otherwise the testing agencies would not exist and no one would buy Consumer Reports.

Can you imagine Toyata saying . "HEY 99% of customers are happy about the way their Prius performs. Can't please everyone"

Sorry,I have to respectfully disagree with your analysis of how my uniit performs because it does not match my 3 months of careful data collection.

 

fredhhh,
Check the link intelliCon-HW it states 10% - 20% as drooplug stated. It is doing exactly what they claim. With all your calculations by your own submission it is doing as they claim.
As far as systems which they are installed on I can tell you a couple of hundred jobs and all are saving money when calculated by "K" factors and DD's. I will admit these are Beckett Heat Managers but same idea without all the displays.
In the last two years I have had contractors install HM's on newer jobs with OD reset to keep the boiler from short cycling and guess what......fuel savings. These were jobs where there was drastic micro-zoning. It was cheaper than a buffer tank. The last one was a Burnham Revolution in an eleven room house and eleven thermostats including the power room in the basement. The boiler was short cycling like no tomorrow. It is now under control with the help of a Heat Manager and guess what....... fuel savings.
After thousands of job sites and discussions with contractors I put my money on results not displays.
There are many installed on new systems which I know are hard to determine if any savings is encountered unless it is after the new boiler is operated for a period of time to determine if it is a benefit. Older systems is a no brainier from all the oil company and customer results I have encountered.
As far as vent dampers go the savings is all over the board. They are rated between 2% and 8% dependent on variables. The age of the boiler, age of the oil burner if oil fired which would determine flame retention or not, cold start or hot, the amount of fireside heating surface, efficiency of thermal transfer, jacket insulation, oil or gas, atmospheric or power burner, use of OD reset, etc. Testing done years ago showed an 8% AFUE increase. Today that number is reduced as the boiler design improved and all is of cold start design. It will change from one design to the next.
I have learned in 33 years in this business that everything is different from one job to the next. There are so many variables in job sites that nothing is definite.
Just an example, about 2 months ago I was dealing with a job site outside of Green Bay, WI. It is 2 million btu's heating a barn. This on one of three barns the owner heats. The fuel usage was over $9K a month where the other two are about 1/2 of that. This one was installed by a different contractor. This was much higher than the owner expected. The flow in the system is set with a variable speed freq. pump. The pump was manually set so did not operate automatically. The system flow on this job was 360 gpm. It was piped p/s. The system temp could not get above 110f. Changed the flow rate to 120 gpm to match the boiler, and system heats as designed, and oh yeah about 1/2 the cost.
So I guess my point is electronics is sort of a bandied. Sure they will save money but what if the boilers are sized properly, pumps also sized properly to obtain the correct flow in the system, pipe sizes are correct, all the adjustments are good how much can be saved before electronic add on controls. The savings from electronics such as OD reset which should be on all boilers would be less but still a savings. Many electronic units on the market came about due to improper installations, changing outdoor temperatures and/or applications which also play a part in system efficiencies.
To quote Trooper "ain't a perfect world"
Amen brother!

 

Rbeck,
A lot of words but not sure what point you are trying to make.

Savings that are not quantified are not savings if return on investment (payback period )does not warrant investing in first place.

"So I guess my point is electronics is sort of a bandied."

Are you saying that electronic technology is a band-aid?

In case you did not realise it was Mr Hammer himself who said "that his expectation of getting the 10% guaranteed savings was not only unrealistic, but that it wasn’t going to happen. " when you have an ODR on your system.
This seems to be in direct contradiction to the literature and to your experience. But since you do not say how much is being saved, you both can be correct. Could be 1% with a payback of 15 years

And as someone pointed out previously, the HW+ website has been revised since myself and others have purchased.

And both you and Droolplug do not seem to grasp my point so I am going to stop trying.

You may want to chech out this product. I heard it is great.
improvegasmileage.com/
but before you buy you may want to follow up to with this website "Gas-Saving" Products: Fact or Fuelishness?

 

That is not even close to being a comparable analogy. A more appropriate analogy would be the mpg display for the onboard computer. Yes, it would be really screwed up if the display said you were getting 75 mpg when you were actually getting 30 mpg. But does it really matter when the advertising said you would get "better than 29 mpg guaranteed!"?

I don't know what the literature said prior to the new stuff. You say it guaranteed 10% savings. You are getting 12%.

The product is supposed to save fuel consumption. It does that.

I can grasp your point just fine. You are bent out of shape because its display isn't accurate. It still does what it is supposed to; save you fuel at a rate of 10% or better.

Here is a cached version of the web page from May 12, 2006. The quote of typical savings is the same.

http://web.archive.org/web/20060512113941/http://www.intellidynellc.com/02_pgHW.htm

 

Actually I am not bent out of shape.
The title of the thread is Intellicon HW+ discussion/debate.

That it what I am doing.

Just because I do not agree with your limited definition of performance you resort to characterizing my state of mind as not normal.
You may not have read earlier posts where the HW+ was recommended over the Becket version precisely because of the display.


"The product is supposed to save fuel consumption. It does that"
Is that an undisputed fact or merely your opinion? Do you mean in my case or in the universal sense?

"It still does what it is supposed to; save you fuel at a rate of 10% or better."

Does stating it make it true over and over make it true?

If you had a vested interest, what would you say to a customer after he questioned the 35% savings and 4 times the actual run time.

"Hey don't ask questions , its working as its supposed to even though I can not explain anything about its functioning.

"Ignore the man behind the curtain"

"JNHammer said it is impossible to figure out how much you are saving using the ET. I don't know what the ASAVE number is supposed to mean." -Droolplug

Maybe you may want to do a little research before jumping into a discussion and making statements without any basis.

I am starting to agree with Mr Hammer on one point

"Every one of these questions can take lengthily responses, and they don’t end there… they go back and forth, and back and forth…. Quite frankly I don’t have the time or patience to do it."

You have not changed my beliefs and I respectfully agree that we don't agree on this issue.

 

Fredhh --

I'm not saying you're right or wrong, the fact is you don't want the thing. Good. Don't use it. You think you're frustrated now? God help you if you calculate the opportunity cost of pummeling a vendor over a $200 device that might have a 2yr payback instead of a 1yr payback. Comparing it to a magnet for your gas tank is just ignorant and inflammatory, but at least it's consistent.

I have no idea why the intellidyne guys were so irresponsible to debate on the forum and feed the insanity but lesson learned for them.

And before you try to add me in to your grand conspiracy ... I don't use their products currently (I installed another vendor's product), nor do I have any relationship with intellidyne.

and no I don't post often I've avidly read the forums since i joined early in 2002 ... ...

Guess what? It was 48' today ... you're saving as we speak.

Moderator ...when is enough enough?