11-05-2014, 02:55 PM
|
#11 (permalink)
|
ecowannabe
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 64
Thanks: 2
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedDevil
So... it is a fuel preheater.
I don't see how a catalyst could do anything here as there is no reaction to catalyze before the fuel comes into contact with the air.
I doubt any bonds in the hydrocarbon chains will get broken. They will be weakened a tiny bit though - but that is due to heating the fuel, not any catalyst.
|
Has there been any substantial evidence yet in favor of fuel preheaters in a gasoline engine?
|
|
|
Today
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
11-05-2014, 03:59 PM
|
#12 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 982
Thanks: 271
Thanked 385 Times in 259 Posts
|
Heating gasoline in and of itself is not an answer to economy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmedia
Has there been any substantial evidence yet in favor of fuel preheaters in a gasoline engine?
|
Coupled with other modifications to air heating, turbulence and lean burn and you might be able to see considerable economic benefits.
|
|
|
11-05-2014, 04:17 PM
|
#13 (permalink)
|
Master EcoWalker
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
Posts: 3,999
Thanks: 1,714
Thanked 2,246 Times in 1,455 Posts
|
Of course, if the fuel is heated it will evaporate slightly easier so it will burn cleaner in a cold engine.
Only problem is that when the engine is cold, so is the coolant and hence the fuel...
It will help. A bit. Even though they name it a fuel converter instead of preheater and charge 10 times what it is worth.
I don't call my HIDs luminosity boosters, my grill block an airflow optimizer or my LEDs candescenses. Though I might in the future
__________________
2011 Honda Insight + HID, LEDs, tiny PV panel, extra brake pad return springs, neutral wheel alignment, 44/42 PSI (air), PHEV light (inop), tightened wheel nut.
lifetime FE over 0.2 Gmeter or 0.13 Mmile.
For confirmation go to people just like you.
For education go to people unlike yourself.
|
|
|
11-05-2014, 04:21 PM
|
#14 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Dallas
Posts: 26
TDI Cup - '10 Volkswagen Jetta TDI Cup Street 90 day: 50.3 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
Phoenix Power Converter claims there is no consumption of the catalyst. Their primary claim seems to center on the breaking down of C13 hydrocarbon molecules (Kerosene) into something that burns more freely, freeing up power/energy in the fuel. what they are broken down into is not explained and it doesn't show up in the C1-C13 data in their independent test data.
|
|
|
11-05-2014, 04:39 PM
|
#15 (permalink)
|
Not Doug
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Show Low, AZ
Posts: 12,230
Thanks: 7,254
Thanked 2,229 Times in 1,719 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cobb
|
So, the coolant goes in and out one set of fittings, the fuel goes out the other, presumably one spirals around the other inside, and they charge $850 ± 150 for something that small? Is the catalyst their profits?
|
|
|
11-05-2014, 04:52 PM
|
#17 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dallas Fort Worth
Posts: 259
Thanks: 223
Thanked 23 Times in 22 Posts
|
There is youtube on 150mpg (Honda Insight)2001 with AquaTune.
If two and/or three first person with validity and experience came forth. I may give more interest. Other wise and just like HHO I have real concerns about credible and valid economy and or performance gains..............
|
|
|
11-05-2014, 08:24 PM
|
#18 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: May 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 2,643
Thanks: 1,502
Thanked 279 Times in 229 Posts
|
150 mpg isnt unheard of from a first gen insight. If this was a mustang or service truck, that would be another story.
|
|
|
11-05-2014, 10:04 PM
|
#19 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Dallas
Posts: 26
TDI Cup - '10 Volkswagen Jetta TDI Cup Street 90 day: 50.3 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
Looking back through the test data it doesn't answer or back up the claims of this device. the claim is that this catalyzer converts the Kerosene (c13) hydrocarbon in fuels to a more combustible hydrocarbon, however this conversion is not accounted for in the test data in the above report, nor in the graphs and examples provided in their demonstrations.
In the narration by Foose in their video touting this device, he states:
"The Fuel Converter Breaks apart the molecular structure of the C13 carbon (or Kerosene as you know it) and other large hydrocarbons allowing them to burn more efficiently."
The assertion is that the more combustible fuels are smaller hydrocarbons (C1-C12, things like Methane, Ethane, Propane, Butane, Hexane, Heptane, etc.), however this converted fuel does not show up any of the test data. It doesn't show up in the charts in the video and the graphic demo of the catalyzer at work does not detail this either. This is a significant flaw in the test data and explanation being used to assert the value of this device. After seeing what is claimed to be scientific data, I am only more convinced this device is actually snake oil.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to jdub For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-06-2014, 01:21 AM
|
#20 (permalink)
|
(:
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
|
They wanted Foose on board for his name and his swoopy sketches. BTW, Did you know that sketches with arrows showing airflow have made wind tunnel testing obsolete?
|
|
|
|