It will not work (unless your car is continuously immersed in a car wash or something). Again, you need an electrolyte to complete the electrical circuit. It is the theory of CP that is used in the components, no matter how vague or special the manufacturer claims their technology is...
As one who was born and raised in Altoona PA, I have known about Rust Evader for most of my life. When the company went down the tubes I managed to get some populated but not-yet-encapsulated circuit boards. The circuit made no sense at all, I think they were buying assorted small components and just filling holes on a single sided circuit board. I think the first link comments on a demonstration where a portion of a car is submerged in salt water and the effects were compared with an unprotected similar piece. The FTC comments about the false impression created by comparing submerged results with dry results. I was engineer at a local radio station and we advertised this product in 1965. The FTC finally put him out of business in 1996.
ddace, you seem intent or convinced that this product is somehow different. The only thing I can say is buy one if you really want to. As far as Canadian Tire being reputable, that is a subject of debate, retailers are in business to make money. The only thing I can try to do is give technical advice on why I think the product will not work based on the specs. Based on what I see from the products web page, the technology will not work as the car is dry and there is no return path to complete the electical circuit. The technolgy is the same on all of these divices, based on CP theory. There is clearly a DC power source with this device that is sending out current to the car where you attach it via stick on couplers. You might want to review CP theory for a little more understanding.
thanks Brimmer for your input. not convinced but maybe intent; else i would not be here checking. I guess somewere deep inside i wanted the guizmo to work. But lets just say i never lose my scientific critisisim
They make it sound like its static electricity that is doing the miracle and I did think that maybe that had not yet been explored for rust protection purposes.
The reason i stated Canadian Tire is because they are very generous and loose on their puchase return policy. I should kwow this because i have returned many items very used and with no bill; and they rarely argue. Now if this blows out wide and the shit hits the fan. Well lets just say they will get sprinkled...
As the saying goes if it sounds to good to be thru it probably is!
Based on my listing in a NACE database, a company sought out my opinion on their product. From memory, it appears identical to the one mentioned above (although I don't recall the brand-name at the time).
The company provided a packet of info for review, and a "promise" of a payment when I provided my review, with the possibility of a second review and payment.
The packette of info actually stated they didn't want my opinion on how well the system worked, because they had lab test data and a patent.
Well, I was honest, and gave them my honest opinion on the technology and application of their claimed technology.
No suprise, I never heard from them again.
...I'm sure some engineers provided a really great sounding review...
I remember discussing these in a class on corrosion.
Anecdotes were given by both the professor and other students were the system acutally appeared to cuase some areas of automobiles to rust out much quicker than normal.
Maybe it interferes with corrosion protection schemes of the car manufacturer?