The Challenge: MPG, are you up to it or not!!!

[dogg38]

When are we change the way we think. C'mon guy's, we have to think outside the box!!! Let me try to... No, we need a better fuel delivery system. Carburetors work, fuel injection is better, electronic system's are great, and the digital age is here. But all in all they will not get us the mpg's!!! We need a new fuel delivery system. This is what i propose, a device that can be install or retrofitted to any engine. Okay, okay, after everybody laughs themselves silly. Think about when you see, here, tweet, or get an email. That someone or a group of somebodies (because they will get more than 15 minutes) have changed the way supply fuel to an engine. What is it people say (why didn't i think of that!!! ) You couldn't get up off the floor laughing at, or typing a ( i know ) quick response. I know this is a invitation for criticism, but necessity is the mother of invention. Now that i your attention one way or the other, here goes.

Off the subject a little, you may have started with a (pc or a mac, windows, mac os, Linux or whatever even ie, firefox, or opera ) Sorry rambling, You are not where you started. To the point, ( i ain't no blogger ).

The Project
1.) one internal combustion engine ( even a lawnmower )
2.) remove the fuel line, maybe the carb too

The Concept ( out of the the box )
A.) can you run it on concentrated fuel vapor ( not liquid )

The Problem
B.) safely deliver, regulate, and meter fuel to the induction system to adequately operate said engine throughout it's intended operating range, for whatever its use, or environment

Research and Development ( Let's Open Source it [example: Linux] )
C.) we have information technology at our fingertip's
D.) we can do this, be safe, document, start small, refine, scale up
E. ) the goal, double your average mpg, maintain or improve hp and torque

I might be telling my age, back in the day. Chevrolet did what conventional thinking the said couldn't be done ( Zora-Arkov Duntov and engineers squeezed 1hp per cubic in. out a 283cu. in. engine. ) Hey it even had fuel injection ( i think ). What ever your flavor of auto racing, look at all the improvements in the past 50 yrs. Them NASCAR racers just started going close to 200mph in the late 70's and early 80's.

I'm not sure, how this thread stuff works, but i'm gonna post to several.

Now discuss. Plan, get out the tools, strip it, mod it, let's see some results, record some data, share some knowledge, isn't that why we come together on the net???

[tasdrouille]

Cross posting threads in multiple subforums is not a good thing to do. I removed the other threads to keep just this one here. Which I believe is where this discussion belong.

[Daox]

Current engines do run off of gasoline vapor. Liquid gasoline doesn't burn. As the fuel is injected, typically it is aimed at the intake valve which is hot. The heat from the valve is transferred to the fuel which is then vaporized. The larger droplets soon vaporize in the combustion chamber from the residual heat alone. There are gains to be had from decreasing the fuel droplet size, but it is not anywhere close to 2x, its much closer to a couple percent.

[Christ]

Concentrated vaporous fuel... LPG systems.

/Thinking session.

[DonR]

Running an engine on propane & natural gas is nothing new. Some outfit even makes propane powered weed wackers, they make them for Craftsman also. City buses & gas company vehicles are run on natural gas.

Your fuel has 3 options to get into the cylinder
1 - go in with the air - Carb or manifold injection
2 - Shot directly into the cylinder - Diesel or new gas direct injection
3 - Beam it in Scotty

Making sure it is all in vapor form when it starts to burn is key. That's why you see fuel rails in hot places in the engine bay. Heating a liquid fuel so that it evaporates in the line causes too little fuel to go into the engine, ie vaporlock.

And it's Zora Arkus-Duntov

[bikin' Ed]

Isn't the whole heated (vaporized) fuel idea the OLD idea of Smokey Yunick (?sp)? He supposedly got huge mpg increases over his carb system.

[Christ]

Isn't this the same guy that tried to build something like a 7/8 scale car to enter in a MPG competition?

Smokey's a good read, but you have to filter through it, by necessity, not choice.

[dogg38]

Positive crankcase ventilation valve

1.) emission control device
2.) safety device
3.) to increase fuel efficiency
4.) all of the above

I could be wrong, 1.) recirculates unburned hydrocarbons through the induction system 2.) prevents accumulation of explosive pressure ( blow-by ) 3.) slight increase in efficiency

Carbs, fuel injection, and digital engine management, been there, done that. They reliable, safe its all we know. But hey, you heard the one, about the guy who told you a distant relative. You know, the one that heard abou the miricale vapor carb that made engine seem liked it was running on fumes. The one car compaines bought out and suppressed.

Even back in the day, we were trying to figure out a better way. And that was when gas was about 19 cents a gal. Me an my brothers were trying to come up at least dollars worth of change. That was to put 5 gal.s in the ole 62 Buick Skylark my dad handed down to the oldest. Back when, two gas stations across the street from each other reduced thier prices instead of increasing the price. By the way who came up with that idea. I'm still trying figure that one out, it doesn't seem bother people.

Until the price is somewhere near 4 bucks a gallon. Ever since the infamous 70's gas crisis. The big oil companies have been trying to get the of a gallon of gas around 5 dollars. The news media and government still haven't gotten to the truth yet. Big oil, was making record profit's then too. Oh yea, we in he Detroit had 4 car companies ( remember AMC they brought us the AMX, Javelin, Gremlin, Pacer, and the Jeep ). Just like Chrysler even they got it from somebody like Nash, i think.

Maybe its too late for the gasoline engine i don't know. We own three cars 1.) 85 Monte Carlo SS, 305 h.o. (G), 4spd auto, 3.73 rearend, 2.) 88 S10 2dr Blazer, 2.8 ltr, tbi, 4spd auto, 3.) 91 S10 Pickup, 4.3ltr, tbi, 4spd auto. All have least 200k with out major overhaul. Let's see the monte is on its third trans one original, second was factory rebuild, third a hotrodder hand me down for 75 buck's. The acquired the 88 S10 2yrs ago, for 500 dollars at local auction only above average repairs timing chain an gears, on another occasion one pushrod, valvespring, seal, an keepers. Last but not least 3.) 91 S10, 10 yr.s ago replaced crankshaft, mains, rod bearings, and timing chain.

Fuel economy may not be factory advertised when they came off the line. I due my own maintenance, and use good quality tune-up parts. Lesson learned, working for a Shell service station owner around 1981. He got, his first set of self serve pumps that year. People would probably freak ( can still say that oh, i forgot [ trip ] ). Let me see, you pull in, the attendant ask how ( many gallons before 1970 ) much in dollars after 1973 or '74. While fueling your car, he check's the tires, oil, trans, radiator, brake fluids, and cleans the windows. Oh don't forget wipe the headlight's too, all that service plus fuel for less than a dollar a gallon. Hey, sounds good don't it, why you ask, sale's man sale's!!! Think about it when was the last you purchased fuel. The guy behind the register asked you if the fluids, tires, belts, or if you might be interested in a good tune or winterizaton service.

They might old like me, but i keepum running smooth. That's half the battle, even a dirty vehicle will effect fuel economy ( drag ). I read somewhere in a car magazine years ago. Somebody tried a dimpled surface like golf ball to reduce drag and improve aerodynamics. How he was gonna sell people on it, i don't know.

But i digress, my reason for re-thinking the fuel delivery system is this:

Most of system in the modern automotive system have been improved.

1.) Starting and charging ( better batteries and digital electronics's ( reduced electrical load )

2.) Coolant and climate control ( better antifreeze, radiator's, electric fan's, when was last time you were inconvenience because of overheated car )

3.) Improved tires, wheels, brakes, and traction control

4.) Improved engine power-train management
a.) synthetic lubricant's
b.) better ignition systems ( plugs, wires, coils, and rock steady crank-triggered )
c.) lighter block's, head's, and manifold's
d.) 4, 5, 6spd automatic transmission's and trans-axle's
5.) Computer-aided design, better aerodynamics
6.) Who knows how computer's: 3,4,5,6, ...
7.) The only things left is the fuel system and the lump piloting all this technology on the highways and byways

Oh, I forgot about the DARPA and various higher learning institution with autonomous self drive vehicles project's that are up an running

So basically that only leaves the fuel delivery system lacking. And i'm pretty sure the Corvette and few other vehicles. Even as early as the late 50's, maybe even earlier. Excuse if i misquote or i mis-apply this, ( Akim's razor, i don't know, maybe you will get the gist of it)

Using the k i s s ambient concentrated vapor, delivered, regulated, and metered to the intake valve. Personally i don't there's anybody out there improving fuel droplets size in a fluid medium ( air stream ). Injector's maybe, i might even buy a Volt or a Tesla that time. For me they're good fit, since I'm primarily trained in electronics.

[Christ]

Fuel vaporization techniques are currently about 98% efficient, on average. How much do you want to spend to make it 99.8%?

There is a reason that noone has "upgraded" the fuel system beyond what's already being used...

Read further into Smokey's "Vapor carb" idea... he's not helping to vaporize the fuel much more than the OEM setup did - he's using a glorified warm air intake to reduce the density of air charge in the engine, and using excess heat to pre-heat the fuel system. Among the turbocharger and other mods, he managed to create something that noone thought he could - the most complex hot air intake ever thought of.

It really didn't have much to do with the fuel system, but (my opinion) he thought that if he said something about "fuel" it would catch more attention than just calling it a "hot air intake".

[shovel]

yawn. nothing new here. fuel and air intake systems ARE open source, and there are literally millions of humans worldwide working on them... any time you see some redneck flipping his air cleaner lid or some 17 year old kid screwing boat galley vent fans onto his intake hose, or some jeeper putting mustang fuel injectors on his 4.0L, that's a step in open source innovation. Same with any time any manufacturer comes up with a new twist or turn in their intake/fuel/combustion system... more open source innovation with some smart men and women working on projects that they or their employer stand to gain financially from. It's not like the manufacturers are at war with efficiency and want you to burn fuel, there's no "poor MPG conspiracy".... every automaker would LOVE to sell you a 600 horsepower, 600 mile per gallon econoluxurysportvanwagontruckeverything with four wheel, all wheel, rear wheel, front wheel drive and 279 cup holders. If there's anything keeping them from making all-encompassing changes to their motive systems, it's money. Money to design it, money to risk introducing something so new it might flop (how many times has THAT happened in history..), money to safety test everything ten thousand times so that jerk-hole lawyers can't use a minor design error as an excuse to cost them millions in frivolous lawsuits, money to engineer everything to be tolerant - safety wise at least - of random amateurs performing any sort and manner of misbegotten modifications to the system, again as preemptive defense against frivolous lawsuits.. etc.

so yeah.. nothing new here. when you make engines that don't need a transmission or radiator, that's when you have something new and efficient.