Historical diesel records, with laboratory data and real-world usage reports presented separately.
Web edition edited by NEXT SCIENCE Co., Ltd.
Published: September 7, 2026
Source records: 1983 performance test and 1996 logistics field report
Based on the supplied GERHON Diesel Technical Records (Selected Evidence Edition), this page presents selected records showing improvement-direction results in fuel consumption or operating costs. It does not cover all test results. Laboratory data and real-world usage reports are different kinds of evidence and are presented separately.
The current GERHON Fuel Conditioning for Diesel was developed by improving and building on the GERHON used at that time. To explain its technical background, we present earlier GERHON test and usage records. The figures were obtained using the products and test or operating conditions of that period.
The 1983 test did not compare untreated fuel and the 500 ppm condition in parallel. The 1996 document is a logistics field report, not a controlled laboratory comparison. The published values do not guarantee identical results for every vehicle or operating condition.
Check GERHON Fuel Conditioning for Diesel product information and instructions
1. Included records and categories
| Year | Test or record | Main observations | Category |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1983 | Performance test at the construction mechanization research institute | Lower hourly fuel consumption recorded with a 500 ppm dose | Laboratory |
| 1996 | Logistics field report | Approximately 10% fuel savings reported for three vehicles, with cost savings also recorded | Real-world use |
2. Specified dose and test concentration
Use 10 mL of GERHON per 20 L of diesel fuel: 0.05% by volume, approximately 500 ppm.
This specified dose matches the standard 500 ppm concentration stated in the 1983 performance test. The measurements below were obtained in tests using the GERHON product of that period.
3. 1983: performance testing at the construction mechanization research institute
An Isuzu 6BD1 diesel engine was used for operating-load tests based on JIS-D-1005 and a continuous-operation test intended to represent construction-machinery load patterns.
| Condition | Cumulative operating time | Cumulative fuel consumption | Hourly fuel consumption |
|---|---|---|---|
| No additive: 0 ppm | 50.00 h | 634.02 L | 12.68 L/h |
| Standard dose: 500 ppm | 103.80 h | 1291.93 L | 12.45 L/h |
Hourly fuel consumption was recorded as 12.68 L/h and 12.45 L/h respectively, approximately 1.8% lower under the 500 ppm condition.
Test sequence and comparison limitations
Continuous operation began with 50 hours without additive. Preliminary runs at 600 ppm and 2500 ppm followed, before approximately 104 hours at the standard 500 ppm dose.
The untreated and 500 ppm conditions were not tested in parallel. These values are therefore presented as measurements recorded in that test, not as a promise of the same percentage saving in every diesel engine.
Observations concerning power and torque
The supplied summary states that the operating-load test graphs show improvement-direction changes in the power and torque curves at 500 ppm. Because there is no numerical table for those curves, this page does not estimate or display an improvement percentage.
4. 1996: logistics field report
This real-world usage report covers three tractor units at a logistics depot. It records calculated fuel savings of approximately 10% for each vehicle.
| Vehicle | Reported fuel-saving rate | Reported economic benefit |
|---|---|---|
| No. 5204 | 10.48% | JPY 55,495 |
| No. 5205 | 10.63% | JPY 78,223 |
| No. 6982 | 10.26% | JPY 72,726 |
The total fuel-cost-related economic benefit for the three vehicles is stated as JPY 206,444. The report adds JPY 144,000 in oil-change cost savings, giving reported total depot cost savings of JPY 350,444.
How this field report is presented
This is based on operating records from a depot, not a laboratory test with controlled comparison conditions. We describe it as approximately 10% savings reported in field use, rather than using it as a general guarantee of effectiveness.
The economic figures are the amounts stated in the 1996 report. They are not a cost-benefit calculation based on today's fuel or product prices. The recorded oil-change savings do not constitute a recommendation to extend oil-change intervals in current vehicles.
5. Interpreting the results and evaluation scope
The 1983 test recorded lower hourly fuel consumption at the standard 500 ppm dose than in the untreated condition. The 1996 field report recorded calculated fuel savings of approximately 10% for three vehicles.
The approximately 1.8% laboratory result and approximately 10% field report differ in date, test subjects, operating conditions and evaluation method. They cannot be added together or presented as one range of effectiveness measured in the same test.
These are historical results obtained under the respective test and operating conditions. They do not guarantee the same percentage change with the current product or identical results for every vehicle and operating condition. Diesel records are not presented as evidence of effects in gasoline or kerosene.
6. Sources and product information
Editorial source: the supplied Japanese document, GERHON Diesel Technical Records, carrying the heading “GELHORN | Selected Evidence Edition” (selected evidence for Shopify, Blog and Research & Development publication). This page follows its measurements and notes from the 1983 construction mechanization research institute performance test and the 1996 logistics field report.
This is a web edition of historical material. It does not imply that NEXT SCIENCE Co., Ltd. conducted those historical tests.
View GERHON Fuel Conditioning for Diesel
Read gasoline tests and used-oil analysis on their separate records page
Research & Development: testing, measurement and comparison
Technology: our approach to fuel and combustion