Fuel Vaporization System - Over 100+ MPG on a 1970s V8 Ford Sedan

The oil companies bought the rights to it and have all the working versions of it and the design data locked up in a warehouse on the dark side of the Moon where it it guarded by Storm Troopers from Apha-Centari.

 

reminds me of the guy who made a car that ran on water, he mysteriously died after being deemed crazy.

 

Gas? Vapor? Old school stuff.
I can do 100+mpg in my Prius (not a PIP) right now. How you ask? I place two powerful magnets in my car; one in the front, and one at the rear. When traveling north, the front magnet's south pole is facing forward, and the rear magnet is also facing south. The simple tech is that the front magnet attracts the northerly direction, pulling the car forward. The rear one repels, similarly aiding propulsion when driving north and forward.

The magnets are simply flipped the other way when traveling south. The obvious caveat of this system is when driving east or west -- the magnets don't help a whole lot. For that reason, my workplace must be either north or south of my home to achieve real savings.

 

I'm pretty sure Stanley Kubrick hid some secret message about this technology in the film "The Shining".

I think it was the deleted scene where the little boy cricked his finger and exclaimed "Fill Er Up!"

 

just a thought a modern ice acording to modern science is rated anywhere from 20 to 30% efficient, in other words 100 kw of fuel enters, 30 go towards foreward motion and 70 out the tailpipe and radiator combined, even in a prius, with all the hibrid teck and regen ( extra source of energy ) at 100% efficiency ( which is fizicly inposible ) you're looking at 150 mpg, in a 70's v8 aerodianamic as a brick, yeah sure, furthermore to the best of my knowledge gas is pretty much vaporised before it enters the engine, even in the carburated old cars, you have liquid gas in the floatbowl, but it gets vaporised in the intake before it enters the motor, the closest are those latest direct injection models which prove more efficient go figure. I've come across these videos before lots of talk none scientific, sure I am curious in the matter, but give me something that makes sense,
same with hho for example , watter in, watter out, theres a simple fizics princypal, work=energy in - energy out, its been a while since I've been in school, if you want the actual formula look it up, for hho the potential energy difference is zero, if the system was 100% efficient you would acomplish absolutely nothing, but it is not, all energy conversions are done at a cost, watter to hho, hho back to watter, come to think of it cold watter enters the system, vapour/hot watter exits, the later has more potential energy by its speciffic heat it caries, so the potential energy diference is actualy negative.
on the other hand if you really want some good examples there are some out there, I dont remember the exact name "Cowler" I think 6 stroke cycle, this actualy works, but as the name entitles you need a specially designed motor, part diesel, part gas, part steam, in simple words, it employs 2 extra cycle to scavange the residual heat in the cylynder, which would otherwise be vented through the rad, those 2 cycles are the steam cycle, tiny watter droplet, turns to steam at 1 to 1600 ( if I remember corectly ) expansion ratio, also, cooling system is not necesary any more as that heat is put to work, there is also a simple watter mist ideea, simple $10 worth works under the same princypal produces some gains, however within reason, if anything the hho setups, mayproduce some gains under this princypal, I havent looked any of the specifics ( density of hho, versus watter vapour), the electrolite part is just a loss no secret there but while in the chamber it may scavange some of the waisted gas energy, these inventors have not been deemed insane nor killed by the goverment.
I could go on forever, bottom line there are some good Ideeas floating arround but not many care enough to implement them, I tinkered with the 6 stroke Ideea, the difficulty I found is to get a proper dynamic balance ( I'm sure I lost you here) out of any setup, 3 -4 -6 cyl, now how many of you are actualy going to look up some of those princypals I mentioned, show hands, not many if any I'm sure, there seems to be a lt of talk/interest on these matters, a lot of futile efforts ( hho on you tube, for the life of me I can not understand what sparked such an interest ) no iniative thou most certainly not from those that are paid for this ( automotive engineers ).

 

On another forum, a person put a vapor system on their lawnmower. Also came across a site were a guy intalled one on his truck. It did improve fuel economy. There are some issues to consider though.

It is a lean burning system with all those issues(hotter burn, more NOx). The lawnmower was getting an EGR system help there.

Gasoline isn't formulated for it. A portion of its heavier compounds that don't go into the vapor. These need to be disposed off. The little produced from a lawnmower can just be mixed into a fill up for the car. Those from a car need to go to a hazardous waste facility for a fee.

Under materials used, the truck had fire extinguishers listed in case of back fires. But these are simple systems.

These are carbeurated engines.

I believe Ogle's design preheated the fuel. Which would mean no heavy gas to dispose off, but heating gas to up near boiling temps outside the engine block is probably not a good idea.

 

I don't know the specifics of those systems I haven't come across them, nor cared to look them up, if you have any sources please point them out, I'm curious to have a look, particularly that blue opel featured in the video the op posted, I saw that video, and their measuring glass, I also saw the size of that engine and the old school distribuitor, also, as they were screwing with it, looked like an electric motor kicked in, there is also a 500+mpg prius on you tube, that is if you dont count the electricity as fuel, like I said details please, lots of talk, no specifics

 

The only source I know where is at is the lawnmower one.
Running an engine on nothing but vapor (video) - Gas Savers - Fuel Efficiency Forum
The videos may no longer be up, but he claimed a 250% increase in economy for the mover.

 

The part of the story about patents expiring and then the govt and companies buying up the patents is a giveaway.

The point of patent expiration is that you can't buy the patent after it expires. The technology becomes free for anyone to use.

 

+1
Some simple mental arithmetic showing that their claims require the repeal of the laws of thermodynamics is another giveaway.

 

+2 I'm no expert but last I checked patents are good for 10 years, after that its everybody's game, ex : nextel 2 way connect, as for the lawnmower, just speculating here, say its efficiency is 20%, which I'm probl overestimating, 250% which he's probably overstimating, brings it up to 50% efficient, plausible, thou unlikely, 15mpg in a 1970 v8 ford pick up truck, on a good day at say 20 % efficient again I'm pretty sure I'm overestimating, 150mpg in the same vehicle, woawwwwww 200% efficient, that must be the discovery of the century, but likely they are overestimating a bit, compared to the lawnmower example if this vaporisation, ( which a carb does anyway ) 250% inprovement would be 37.5mpg, which todays trucks are pretty close, the 150mpg claim is 1000%improvement, sure, with minimal upgrades, no cost, dreamt at night invention, there is also a possibility I messed up the math, I do have the comonsense to consider in, I doublecheckd everithing and if I'm wrong pleaase correct me, how ever those that made those claims did not consider the possibility, something else that just dawned on me there is a huge elevation drop from az to nm, I'm sure they haven't consider it, If I cared enough I would look it up and calculate the potential energy it adds to the ecuation, count for some wind pushing you from the back, come to think of it you might actualy be able to document that, heck, you may be able to coast that rout with the engine off, they may have a point but its not the vaporizer

 

that video its gone but watching the others I got the Ideea, funny thing is I had used this method on a few occasions, not to the tee, and with not so many ducts, coupe years ago I had a mower with a funny carb, inpatient as I am I rigged up a plain watterbottle, instead of the air cleaner perfect diameter fit right over the carb, with a couple caps of gas in it, and a hole about the size of my thumb on the topside where the bottom would have been, bottle was layng on it's side, no doubt it works and I used it a couple times like that, not for fuel savings or experiments just too lasy to clean the carb or get a new one, the only downside it would stop every couple passes and I had to put couple more caps of gas, I have a simmilar trick I have been using for ever, most recently, this spring, bought a used rottotiller, carb was all gummed up, I've done this many times, stuff a soaked rag instead of the cleaner, it will start easy and run for a little bit, till the rag dries up, but usually its enough for the engine vacum to pull some fresh gas throu the carb, solvent as it is cleans the carb and I dont have to rebuild it, usualy it takes a few tries, repetedly soaking the rag, at some point it will bearly iddle, but within a half hour, it clears up, and sometimes you just got to rebuild it period, I've done this on cars, I bought bunch of projects with the fuel system just plain varnished, its a quick trick to hear the engine run befor you buy, I've been dared that it wont start that the mechannic could not figure it out and it costs thousands to fix, to me its a cool trick, I never noticed any efficiency with my mower, its not like I mowed the lawn twice with only a bottle cap of gas, I never measured either, but on that opel I call horseshit

 

The efficiency estimate was based on how much yard a tank could mow. It's rough at best considering you have to account for grass height and thickness. Another variable is that it is only burning the more volatile portion of the gas. Is that the more energenic portion of the fuel. I'm guessing it is. So what is the efficiency per btu?

Any gains of fuel vaporization is mostly, if not all, do to the fact it results in the engine running lean. The federal Honda Civic VX and original Insight pulled the high mpgs because they made use of lean burn. It has been used on other cars to improve economy at various times and locals. It is also a part of why diesels got better economy in that past. There are two big issues with running an engine lean.

First is that it results in the engine running hotter. Unless the heat is controlled or materials are used that can with stand the higher temperatures, the pistons will eventually burn out. The second is what keeps lean burn systems from coming back to the market. The excess oxygen in the cylinder just becomes fuel for NOx. The economy gains aren't worth the effort of controlling the NOx under today's regulations. Compare the new diesels with their earlier, pre-catalytic convertor counter parts. The fuel economy has greatly dropped or they now have an extra maintenance item in the urea solution.

 

lol. I've got some water driven engines for you if you think this is true. The most efficient way to get gasoline to burn in a cyclinder is with direct injection stratified charge.

When you think about efficiency in the 1970s, many cars were operating around 15%. The vw tdi is about 42%, much more efficient than gasoline carurated cars of that era. If you claim a 70's ford gets better fuel economy than a bmw 320d, because of the engine its got to be from low rolling resistance or aerodyanmics. After that you need a hybrid system to grab power back, something they didn't mention. 100 mpg, sure its possible, if you rigged it to go in a gear at full throttle low rpm around 20 mph.

 

I've been you tubing bored out of my mind, my god what a talented bunch, 5 galon buckets, drier vents and pvc, ducktape and zipties, there may be something interesting they have to say but I dont have enough patience, next, crap, next, crap

 

...another way to look at it is look at Civic GTX Nat Gas car.
It fills up with about 8 Gallons equivs nat gas an you only get about 28 MPGe maybe 250 miles range.
All vapor.

 

actually there is a 100mpg car, seats for and it has a trunk, its called the eddison II I believe, it von the xprize few years back, plain 4 stroke but thats where simmilarities end, no hybrid hho not sure about the vapor but I know there is an extensive egr system, I haven't got any speciffics, if any of you come across any good reading on it please point it out, but that was achieved with state of the art lightweight materials, built from scratch by the brightest minds, your average 70's ford alignment would kill any shot at it in the first place