Check out the fuel vapor car (and tell me what you think)
 

I was pointed to this thing by someone on Stumble Upon today, does anybody have any opinion on it/what I should say to the guy: www.fuelvaporcar.com

I'm at a bit of a loss as for what to think about it..."fuel vapor technology"...him.

Doesn't sound like anything amazing to me, but I have done a little reading on fuel vaporization. If anyone digs into fuel systems for cars they know liquid fuel doesn't burn, only fuel vapor burns. When injectors spray fuel some of it is vaporized. In the combustion chamber this vaporized fuel burns and heats up the larger droplets of fuel which then vaporize and burn. This is why fuel injection is superior to most forms of carburation. It splits the fuel into smaller droplets which heat up faster and burn faster. Using 100% vapor does have its advantages, but as you can see, its really not phenominal (10-20%). I would be interested in seeing how they do it. I've seen a few forms of vaporizers while reading up on it. From what I've seen and heard, some engines respond well to fully vaporized fuel, some are already quite effecient and don't see much of a benefit.

If I got one, the first thing I'd do is grill blocks. ;)

I was under the impression that folks who tried vaporizing gasoline in the past, just had trouble regulating the vapor, i.e throttle control. Which, on second thought, doesn't make sense, since engines run on CNG, LPG and even acetylene gases. Anyway, perhaps they have finally figured it out.

Note, their prototype car is not running the fuel vapor system. Hmmm, put a 1.5L Vtec in an aerodynamic three-wheeler, and get 92mpg...

I wonder how much of their claimed 10-20% FE increase coming from the vaporization, and how much comes from the 20:1 air:fuel ratio?

IIRC that is the vehicle that uses either the d15Z1 or the Dual stage Vtec D15B (basically a 8valve/16valve/high profile cam)from Japan. I've seen articles on it before, and obviously you don't get the 92mpg while doing 0-60 in the claimed time....but I can see the 92mpg if the car is driven right.

This reminds me of the CVCC ;)

It's a single seater. I'd be more interested if it was a 2 seater.

Wouldn't this be solved with a high pressure fuel pump and injectors with sufficiently numerous and small ports?

Don't know what it is... But lets just look at "Fuel Vapor" - they quote it in their images, so perhaps it's more complicated than just vaporizing fuel...

1. CNG cars run on vapor... FE isn't astronomically high - it's on par with gasoline and fuel injection
2. Carbs technically produces fuel vapors...
3. FI produces atomized dropslets - according to those working as engineers in industry - almost all of this fuel is burned. There's no mythical fuel losses here (which is why we all don't have black exhaust gasses).

As members have proven here... Those mileage figures are most likely due to aero (for cruising) and low weight (for city driving).

Seriously, the VW 1L blows that mileage figure away. It's a 2 seater tandem, runs on diesel, doesn't have fancy fuel vapor crap....

Personally, I see more potential with higher compression and direct injection... Or dieseling with gasoline (I remember reading something about that not too long ago...)

I'm not saying the car isn't cool or anything... I'm just saying that I smell snakes.

Treb, that snake oil is probably what helps it pull 1.7G in the corners. ;)

I think it is great!

I don't doubt the stickiness of it's tires :)

I'm thinking the whole "vapor" thing is a misnomer. They keep putting it in quotations - which, grammatically, means they mean it sarcastically or they're quoting someone else :p

Just wish him good luck in going for the $10 million. Most likely it is going to get better mileage than the original car the engine came out of. As far as the mileage claims, on vapor, make it so.