TOPIC: Wet weather= Power Increase

Yes it could be simple as a metal pipe from EGR w/ a one way hi temp valve, connected to the metal catch can. Would catch can need to be stainless to live? I would guess it needs a short run to preserve EGR heat, perhaps insulation of the pipe and catch can. Maybe one of those one-way reed valves from the old air pump/exhaust man. air injection systems of 70's/80's for the check valve. Mount/fix the catch can below the one way valve to use gravity to keep liquids out of the valve. Next is question of- is just putting exhaust gas thru the water/oil mix enough, or is some type catalytic material needed to achieve reactions? How high must temps be to achieve reactions? Would we just make some steam maybe boil off the lighter HC's? Might partially cook the heavier stuff making nasty crud. I'm unsure if just diverting some of EGR flow would be enough to work. How 'bout removing EGR valve, diverting ALL it's output, blocking off EGR mounting port in manifold? That requires metal fabrication I can't yet do. Then there's this cryptic thing Dan spoke of- a "magic spot" in the stock EGR external pipe (if so equipped) to do...??
So many questions, what if's, is why I haven't pursued it. Can't tell difference if I'm over-complicating or not. Here's a pic of one of those air pump one way valves. Old cars had a set of air injection tubes that led into each exh. man. port. This valve prevents exh. gas from going up hose to cook the air pump. They eventually would fail, cook the rubber hose and finally the air pump. But for what I'm talking of here, exhaust would enter from reverse side, originally fresh air inlet side. Wonder if this kind of valve would live installed that way? In other words, can something like all this be done/made without going off the deep end?

Tracy G

Ok, it's official: I've been around here long enough now to see everything come back again. And I don't get my bits til Wednesday of next week!

Here's the thread:

Dan was talking about the orifice on the EGR tube of a modern engine. Pressures on either side of that orifice (upstream being exhaust, downstream being vacuum from the intake manifold) are what the computer's DPFE uses to determine how to operate the EGR valve at the end of the tube. I am thinking that simply pulling the hose that connects to the exhaust side of the DPFE orifice on the EGR tube and T- into the existing PCV reroute (with or without AOS) would provide enough heat on top of the existing warmth of the blow by to keep that water in vapour state as it goes back into the input...and plug the factory vacuum leak of the EGR.

PCV gets blowby out of the valve covers, as does the breather line to the Intake tube. For increasing vacuum, we move the PCV tube to ahead of the throttle body, where the breather line goes already...add the exhaust to that already warm blowby that gets sucked in for emissions and I'll bet that's a really good source of moisture to spread the surface area of the remaining hydrocarbons out for cleaner burn, ESPECIALLY if there is that much unburned fuel vapour in the blowby already. (does the breather line actually let fresh air in or is it simply a way to get the blowby out of the valve covers?)

Your opinion, Tracy?

The breather tube in a stock PCV system, is there to provide fresh filtered make up air to crankcase. This replaces blowby crankcase gas sucked out to man. vacuum thru the PCV valve. If PCv was left untouched, and breather hose blocked, it would put crankcase under partial vacuum. If vacuum got strong enough like closed throttle, downhill in gear-"engine braking"-- could cause valve cover and oil pan gaskets and crank end seals to suck in. Potentially ruining these allowing dirt into crankcase if repeated often enough.

When PCV is re-routed to breather hose/tube, and PCV man. vac. source is capped--THEN the breather and PCV become passive crankcase vents to air intake duct.

Important to understand how the crankcase ventilation system works, before modding it.

EGR stuff- if there is computer monitoring of EGR function then modding EGR obviously needs measures to keep computer happy. IF a car was old enough to not have that EGR monitoring, then EGR could be defeated, and the Groove should lower combustion temps to help reduce NOX formation.

Or as was discussed before, why not put that hot EGR exhaust gas w/ HC's and some water vapor to better use.

That's a tantalizing idea, I'm thinking about it again. Dan and Ron sure gave great clues! Several things to consider, I'm going to look again for Stainless containers...

Thanks Soundude for kicking this Can again, it really is one of the best things to ever show up here,

Tracy G

The latest observation of my Subaru rolling test article- So it's gotten midsummer hot here in Reno up to low 100's in past week. Then yesterday (Sunday 6/28) it cooled some and there were brief thunderstorms. And humidity has gone pretty high. Today w/ the elevated humidity I again noticed an increase in engine torque, not Big, but still noticeable. This engine seems to favor cooler humidity, maybe a thought in direction of cool water vapor or very fine mist added to intake air..?
Easier to do on modern cars w/ an air inlet duct tube. The Subie has a small open element Weber air filt. on the carb. The various aftermarket duct adapters out there for this Weber need more hood clearance than is available. I'm pondering on making a homemade duct adapter, to have a good way to add water vapor or whatever to the carb's inlet, we'll see.

Tracy G

Tracy,
Have read/researched this much lately and found some good results from this.
One guy supposedly leaned out his fuel with devices to a point where he was getting noticably better gas mileage but the engine ran rough.
So what he did was add a water mister. Not only did it stop the problem with the rough running engine but his mileage went up considerably after the fogger.
The problem with this is that you have to buy a fogger which is about 10-20 bucks for a small one but you have to rig it up with an adapter and run the plug wire through your fire wall to your cab and plug it in to fog.
I was seriously considering this. Many people have used the water bubbler with success but a fogger just gives much more vapor and in mist form which from what I read is much more effective where a bubbler cant.
Have looked at a few on Amazon. This one seems to be the best with reviews.

Veddy Interesting my friend! And a great price too. Wonder how well it could hold up underhood.

Also I wonder if it needs a special power supply being 24 volt. I'd think it should be referenced to load/RPM's too, just letting it run at max all the time probably has issues. Wonder too if it would like to be powered thru a PWM or not. To date I have not heard if anyone makes one of these adapted to car engine use. In a pond it just runs. Another gizmo to ponder upon1 thanks Karl buddy!!

Tracy G

Tracy,
Here is the link I found again.
Took a little while to find since I search so much and dont know where I read things.
The story of the guys success is on page 3.

thanks again Karl, now I'm thinkin' hard on it..

Tracy G

After scanning the thread, I'm thinking that a stronger MPG Remedy in the fuel tank and heating the catch can to return re-vaporized water condensate to the Intake air stream will have much the same effect without resorting to electronics with limited lifespan.

Isn't this the path that Dan Merrick is on with his cold vapor system? He has clearly offered that the metering is the difficult part...wish he would check/chime in here more often.

Greg,
Have done research on the water being vaporized both ways, cold and also hot as you are referring to. I myself tried cracking the water through a heated copper tube but didnt see a difference but that could just be my truck.
We know the history there.
I would much rather do it the easy way without a more extensive set up with a fogger and just go with heated vapor by heating it from the engine and returning it.
From all the research though, it seems that those who had the most success are the ones using a cold vapor.
Here are the advantages I see for the cold vapor fogger over heated vapor. Again this is my opinion by trying to think logically and sometimes that does not work when dealing with car computers.
One is the volume pumped in with the fogger is much higher than heated. It is condensed and thus more volume.
The second is the cold vapor since it is not heated, enters the piston in a cold form, condensed.
When it enters the chamber, it expands like steam in the hot chamber and the extra pressure of the expansion is what pushes the piston with more force after combustion.
Sorta like leaving a can with liquids in the sun and watching the container expand under the heat.
People wonder why they get feel better response in wet weather and I guess its because of this expansion thus why those with foggers seem to have better results.
Like I said, this is my assumption.
That is why I keep searching.

Hi guys, the issue of adding water vapor in whatever form is a sort of conumdrum to me. I tried years back just making a tall skinny water bubbler w/ an aquarium stone on a thin hose, the hose to man. vac. No Benefit. I bought the Mistyfyer gizmo which is just a big water reservoir w/ a thin pickup tube run to manifold vac thru a metering valve, again no gains.
Like so many others I have felt the benefit of high atmospheric humidity-increased torque and better throttle response. That's the only way so far it has worked.
both Greg's idea ala-Dan Merrick of heating the crankcase condensate/water, and Karl's input of cold vapor, make sense on their own merits.

Simple is better if the simple approach works. IT can be interesting to fashion a system w/ complexity, but often you wind up with something that has the hood up constantly. I like the cold vapor concept, but am skeptical of reliability. I don't really want to add an inverter to power the untrasonic foggers. Plus just having the fogger(s) run at a constant rate reminds me of early HHO systems that had no load/RPM reference to output.

so I'm still interested overall, but am stalled as to approach.

EDIT- after writing the above, I drove to home Depot as we were having a powerful t-Storm. and cloudburst. Again the Subie loved it!

Tracy G

T-storm - added humidity and maybe some ozone from nearby lightning strikes? funny how making one (t-storm) in engines is what we're talking about in this thread, isn't it? The electrical spark from the plugs lighting up the moist, fuel enriched air... and BOOM!

Yeah, I'm not all that hip to wiring an inverter into my vehicle either, to run foggers (plus it would be SUPER easy in my truck to use engine coolant to heat the condensate in a catch can back up to vapor...the only issue I can reckon would be to ensure supply...), which is why I'm thinking along these lines or seemingly advocating this approach. Everyones cars/engines/driving style/gas formulation/all sorts of other stuff are different, meaning this calls for experimentation. As in life, I'm quite certain there is no "one right way"