Interesting

[andytk]

Hmmmmmm

www.get113to138mpg.com
true or bunkum.
I personally belive its true and what's happenend to this guy is worrying. (of course its possible the tale itn't true even it the technology does work)
Now before you say it couldn't happen here take a look at this
www.vlbengine.com
(the VLB site has been on PH before, this is what started it all for me)
Also follow some of the links from this site too.
www.himacresearch.com
Some of the sites are see thu rubbish but some seem (on the surface) to be credible

Now I'm a mechanical engineering student so I understand the priniples behind some of these devices (mainly the complete engines) and they do look credible. I've done a fair bit of searching on the web and the suppressing of technology does seem to be commonplace. One of the most compelling tales was a Canadian called Pouge who in the 1930s developed a bolt on carbuerettor the doubled the fuel economy of any vehicle it was fitted to. The oil companies intimidated him and the device was never seen again. except during world war 2 in North Africa there were severe fuel shortages in the Allied vehicles. Some of the mechanics report having a mod done to thier vehicles that doubled their fuel economy. These mods were covered in black boxes that had DO NOT REMOVE marked on them. after the war the vehicles had normal carbs. These miracle carbs were reported to be Pouge carbs
Interestingly Pouge carbs were patented and there are drawings ciculating on the net. I suppose you could still find the patents but they are in the US.

It is worrying that the oil/car companies seem to be so keen to suppress this technology. They seem to be more interested in promoting their own EFI technology rather than use the solution that has been available for nearly 70 years.

Anyway it really does worry me.

Anyone have any comments?
Also McNab in the VLB thread you hinted at work being carried out in this country about lean burn technology don't suppose you could tell me more?

Cheers all

Andy

[andytk]

I can see this is going to be an all time top thread

also found this

www.fortunecity.com/greenfield/bp/16/supcarb4.html

I really am wondering what is going on.
Oh and those Shell Oil adverts on TV are really pissing me off. why are they advertising, did they just cause another oil slick and are hoping that by the time we all find out the adverts will have brainwashed the masses????
Aaaarrrggg
I hate not knowing whats going on

Andy
(and yes I know its the height of bad manners to reply to your own thread just to push it back on to the front page....)

>> Edited by andytk on Monday 28th October 13:24

[DancingMoose]

The more I read the more this sounds like a conspiracy theory blown out of all proportion. This guy blames the oil companies for everything from corruption to Planet wrecking. As evidence he sites a super-efficeint carb that some Nazi general blames his defeat on.

Leaving the nutty side of this apart, have you considered what this would mean? To run, the carbs' pre-catalyst would need to be at 500 degrees. The catalyst he describes would probably weigh several kilos and hence take an eternity to heat up. Even longer if the engine was running while the cat was being heated. For the average journey (school run etc) you'd have arrived before the thing was running.

Now looking at the chemical theory. What he is talking about with lower boiling points, better, simulateous ignition etc is the difference between deflagration (normal engine) and detonation (the proposed unit). The two processes are totally different and as he says, detonation is a hugely better burn. So much better in fact, that it can vaporise stuff.

I spent much of last year looking into extinguishing detonation/deflagrations in vapour lines. A deflagration arrestor was a beefy device, it had to be, but a detonation arrestor was a mamoth. If you wanted to build an engine to run on detonations for any length of time you'd need one impressive material.

Its late and I can't be bothered to continue ripping holes in his argument, if you want the truth the best idea is to send it to an F1 team, claiming to be able to reduce their fuel load by 1/2.

See what reply you get....

[DancingMoose]

Actually, I haven't made it to bed yet, (I've got a b*st*rd of a cold) so I took the following extracts...

*****************************************************

I read a book called "The Secret of the 200 M.P.G. Carburetor" By Allan Wallace. It explained a simple vaporizing carburetor system and discussed several of the systems from the past. I wanted to see for myself and set out to build my own system.

First I built a gasoline heater, *a glow plug*

then a hot water vaporizer, *a kettle*

then an electrical system for heat control, *a thrmostat*

with a dual disk butterfly mixing control with which I could vary air, fuel ratio from 10-1 to 1000-1. *a tap*

Finally while trying to find in a text book the boiling temperature of gasoline,. I discovered the principles of Thermal Catalytic Cracking (TCC). *GCSE chemistry text book?*

Blah blah blah....

I took all I had learned and designed and built a system on my 1976 360 c.i. Dodge Maxi-van. It had a large catalytic chamber heated by the exhaust and electric elements powered by additional alternators capable of reaching this 747 degrees and beyond. I air pressure tested it at 100 lb. at 900 degrees.

900 degrees!!!! Iron melts around there! Was his catalyst a liquid?


The best I ever got was 72 M.P.G.

***************************************************


Ohhhhhhhhhh kay then.... 72mpg on 80 something octane fuel, in a 46 million tonne truck?

And in an environment of fuel tax, emissions tax, depleting oil reserves etc, NOBODY has seen the potential in a device like this?


Apologies to anyone who read this thread by mistake. I just have nothing better to do than debate engineering.

[Marshy]

Hmmm, the get113to138mpg web site is, er, truly, er, unique.

I'm actually very amused by the fact that part of the device appears to be a 12v to 110v a.c. inverter. Which goes in the engine bay.

Now, my 12v to 240v inverter has a fan, much like the one pictured in the "installations" on the site. Which indicates that it doesn't like to get warm. Indeed, in the footwell of my (old, sob) Chimaera, mine would get upset with the heat and shut down. In an engine bay, the rattle would be out of the pram pretty pronto.

Additionally, car engine bays aren't the driest places on the planet. Inverter meet water, water meet bzzzzt!

Allied with what looks suspiciously like a stock, low-quality 3.5mm stereo jack to twin phono cable, well known for their heat-resistant properties, colour me firmly convinced that it's bunkum.

And, tee hee. One of the pictures of the knackered yellow car (Pontiac thing), shows an AC adapter "plugged" into the same recepticle as the previously mentioned double phono cable.

Nor is the inverter connected to a 12v supply in the Cherokee.

Hilarious conspiracy theory stuff.

For a better researched, but still chin-stroking, book on conspiracy theory and supressed high tech, take a look at "The Hunt For Zero Point", by some bloke from Jane's Defence Weekly. Even if the conspiracy theories are untrue, which they prolly are, there's some interesting history in there.

Edited for ineptitude. It's gone 1am after all.

>> Edited by Marshy on Tuesday 29th October 01:14

[wedg1e]

Pah. The night is young... ;-)

One of the guys I work with came in with a load of shite he'd downloaded from the 'net that purports to prove that Walt Disney in fact ran a child porn empire that continues to this day. I kid you NOT, there was reams of this stuff. I asked why the hell he'd wasted good printer ink on it.

Seems that any old bollocks, if written down and repeated often enough, becomes the truth. Oh hang on: didn't that happen in Germany in the 1930's....
As well as these great automotive technologies, I know a guy who subscribes to the theory that aircraft should be covered all over in small dimples, for the simple reason that it's the dimples that make a golf ball more aerodynamically efficient.
I must apply for a job at Boeing...

Ian

[andytk]

ok ok you've got me convinced. I was fairly suspicious of that particular webshite but the others seemed to make sense to me. I don't know much about petrol or chemical processes all I do is put the stuff in my car.

The VLB engine does however look more promising. All of the technology seems to be plausable. Maybe sometime when I have the means and the time on my hands I'll have a go at converting a car to the "open choke" control method to see what happens.

Still interested to see if you could run your cars on vapourised petrol.

Andy

[sparkey]

Wedg1e, The thing about dimples on an aircraft is actually true to some extent - it upsets the smooth flowing layer of air (boundary layer)on the surface of the aircraft which reduces drag. It's why many old aircraft left rivets proud of the aircraft skin. During WW2 they discovered it when they rushed a few planes out with the rivets all proud and found that they went faster (I'm an ex flight test engineer) - Can't comment on the other stuff.

[alfa dave]

Quote:
"900 degrees!!!! Iron melts around there! Was his catalyst a liquid?"

Catalyst temperatures can comfortably run at 900 deg C. Exhaust gas into a catalyst can exceed 975 deg C, mid bed temps in the cat can exceed 1000 deg C. The grade of materials used in modern exhaust systems has to withstand this. This is why most cats are ceramic, though metallic substrates are on the increase (usually thinner walls and therefore better flow)

(it's my job)


However running on vapourised fuel - Hmmm, I'd let someone else try that first......