Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Arcon Energy (MIDL Presently) The Ultimate Sleeper -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: G. Scott who wrote (588)	5/25/1998 7:52:00 PM
From: jeffrey rainey	Respond to of 4142

The word that I heard was 60 days.

To: G. Scott who wrote (588)	5/25/1998 8:06:00 PM
From: Kurt N	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4142

>>One thing I can't find anywhere is how long has testing by any one company taken in the past?<< It would depend on how many tests and number of times repeated (2,3,4,5). Each test could be done just once, but with sufficient number of tests experimental error is reduced. One battery of tests should be sufficient, but the numbers could be slightly off. Simplest tests could be done in minutes/hours. Take some DF-144, blend it in with various types of gasoline(s), put it in various test engine(s), and take measurements (emmissions, horse-power, total energy, octane rating, etc.). Doing quality labwork (which requires being slower, more methodical, being careful, precision measurement, keeping experimental errors to a mininum) is what will occupy most of the time. Fortunately Exxon has some of the brighest/best chemists working for them. Probably simpler to say I don't know. I think it will take a couple of days (mininum) to a couple of weeks (medium) and being extremely thorough a couple of months (max). Kurt