Yeah, Karl, that reminds me somewhat of the Condensator, in which the crankcase vapors are routed to the yellow canister, using larger diameter longer hoses than stock. These guys used a t-shirt (cotton, I assume) instead of silica beads for an absorber wick. The Condensator works on the idea that heavy gunk/oil etc. gets absorbed or condensed, and lighter hydrocarbons pass thru to the intake manifold.
Analagous to the idea of dropping pine needles onto a burning campfire. The needles will burn readily and fast.while bigger woody pieces would also burn, just much slower. What is different w/ this setup is heat is being added, which boosts vaporization, while the Condensator gets mounted away from heat, to help condense the heavy HC's out of the crankcase gas stream.
I'd call this setup the Vaporator.
Gadgetman Reno, NV
I remember seeing a video by Mike Holler where his company produced a similar item but his was smaller than a soda can. It was installed between the crankcase vent and the inlet for the TB.
Instead of having a plain hose leading from the case to the TB, Mike installed his devise on this hose to treat the gasses. Whether it improved performance or not I don't know but he knew something about those gasses that stirred him to conjure up that device.
Not much study on these things so its basically an open field for experimenting.
Have tried similar prototypes of this but have not seen any results.
What else is new. You cant take that as science that a similar device wont work because the same device rigged on another vehicle may give them stellar results as in the video.
My truck is not one to be using as a test vehicle for results as we have seen.
Back on topic, if you don't mind, gents:
I want to share an event that happened the other night that supports my theory that the engine does indeed run on vapour recovered via the EVAP system.
I have a regular weekend gig in Niagara Falls. Driving there from where I live involves a trip up the hill that the famous water flows over to make the Falls. Saturday night when I was headed home, driving on the long downhill run that I reported briefly hitting 0.0L/100km on my dashboard instantaneous mileage readout once before while possibly drafting a FedEx transport, I achieved it again, for much longer this time - almost the entire run (half a mile or so, about 1km), and then when I did get back on the gas, it came up to 1.2L/100km or 196 MPG. NOTE- my speed was a constant 100km/hr, the posted legal limit on that roadway, so obviously the transmission was keeping things in check along with engine compression. My foot was completely off the gas.
my conclusions are:
1. my readout is based entirely on injector duration, and cannot be completely trusted as accurate;
2. ECU may shut down injectors, but gas vapour can be introduced to the intake stream via EVAP system and is likely the most ideal way to achieve true efficiency;
3. I need to get to know what triggers the EVAP valve, and determine whether it's a binary valve or if it's variable like the EGR, and THEN figure out how to vaporize fuel more consistently and effectively
I wonder if there's a way to make an inductive loop off the exhaust manifold to heat the fuel line so that injector duration can hopefully be reduced under more circumstances; I also wonder if EGR gas can be used to heat the vapours/condensate in a catch-can back up for re-introduction to the intake stream...further, which is better, heating fuel closer to vaporization, heating residual blowby, or both? Can I get 100MPG in this car?
Anyway...that's what happened. the first Zero was pre-groove, this last one was obviously post-groove, which shows that the groove does indeed work at increasing fuel efficiency (in case you're 7 pages deep in this thread on this forum and STILL doubt it, regardless of Karl's poor result with his truck)...
Well, Greg, I think you have had a "Charles Lindbergh" moment now. like: " we know we can fly long distance now, what about crossing the Atlantic?"
You have already seen the equivalent of both Infinite mileage, and nearly 200 MPG, just for a brief duration.
This is both an exciting place to be, and a critical one too. It's where the Imagination really takes wing... Makes me wonder what the Automotive engineers know is possible, what might they have achieved in test programs, w/ stuff the Public never sees...?
Well, I was going to suggest the AGS2000 vaporizer kit from Wyoming Instruments. I tried several searches, no dice Ive known of it and them for years, never got one. They might be gone now...
It always looked like a decent kit, had many testimonials. Rats.
One simple idea, would be to add a pre-heater to the fuel line feeding the injectors. Don't know what is available online now, there may well be something pre-made. This would use coolant heat to heat a metal pipe the fuel goes thru. Involves splicing into the fuel line, adding a section to/from a heat exchanger wrapped up to the heater hoses, or maybe the upper radiator hose, depending. Probably want the splice into the fuel line as close to the fuel rail as can be done, maybe the fuel line from exchanger to rail gets insulated too. This recycles a bit of heat energy back into the system, and obviously improves vaporization.
Man, I wish Ron was here to read your posts!
Gadgetman Reno, NV
As far as using exhaust vapors, I have looked at a few possibilities.
One was hooking up a pipe off the 02 bong and running it where I wanted but ran into a couple of obstacles. One was the thread for the 02 bong is a 19mm which is not a common thread.
Was looking at hooking up a tee off the bong with one male for the bong and two females.
One female for the 02 sensor which has to be 19mm it seems and the other whatever is compatible to whatever pipe you have it hooked up to. But consider the pipe should be malleable(copper?) since shaping it to turn in such tight spaces seems to be a necessity. Also has to be metal seeing the exhaust gas is around 600F+. You can then run this to a catch can or try directly back into the intake manifold for a richer feed. Seeing the last video I posted of the canister, there seems to be a need to separate whats in the exhaust.
As far as the EGR, I have a hookup now running from the pipe off the EGR feed back into a catch can and then into a canister of water to clean and also add vapors to the intake. This has to be run in a circuit that has a manifold vac on the other end or else the EGR feed will not have enough pressure to push thru the piping system. Of course this is giving me a p401 code but when it comes time for inspection, I just hooked back up the original way and within a week the code clears. Had to do this back in February to pass inspection then I hooked it back up to use the EGR gasses again.
So twice now in the past few weeks, I've gotten not only a CEL, but the ECU has put the engine into "Low Power Mode". If you have a vehicle that does this, you know how much it truly sucks (and can actually endanger the occupants of a vehicle, but I'll save that rant for another place/time. Just the facts for now, with a bit of interpretation and minimal editorial)
The first time, simply shutting down and re-starting a number of times was able to store the code, P1516, TAC (Throttle Actuator Control) Module Position Performance.
My read of this is that the Computer doesn't like that it has to move the plate differently than it was programmed, and it thinks something is wrong, so to protect the engine from damage it goes into low power mode.
The second time, I happened to notice that the dashboard readout gave the outside temperature as 10-15 degrees Celsius higher than I knew it was. This makes sense: low power mode would reduce injector pulse durations to the range of hot intake air, hot air being less dense and requiring less fuel for stoichiometry...so it's not a MAF sensor issue. Luckily I had tools on board and was able to reset the computer by pulling the battery cables and jumpering them together and doing a brief re-program so I could drive the 40 miles home.
what I've noticed is that the mileage is as good or better than it has ever been post-groove (by the gas gauge, It looks like I'm on target for about 1000km out of the tank, or 600 miles on 18 gallons), and the accelerator is MUCH more sensitive. A feather's weight of pressure on the gas and revs jump 500-ish rpm and power comes on nicely. Further, I've since had occasion to take that long downhill run where I hit 0.0L/100km before, and it did it again, sooner and for longer, so the instantaneous mileage readout is definitely programmed to over-report fuel delivery and is therefore not to be trusted. Also, my radio's Security light has started flashing again when the keys are out of the ignition, which is what it's supposed to do.
I have a feeling my initial re-learn after I grooved may not have been correct, and that this is the REAL re-learn.
I hope that the code doesn't come back, and the mileage continues to improve; I'm more excited now of what the plugs and wires replacement will do, when I actually get around to doing it!
Well, I may "get it," but as far as having "the touch," I've been lucky with a really clean and solid vehicle and a nice and fairly new mower. Now that winter's on it's way again, I should do dad's snowblower...
If I do have to pull Wendy's TB again, I'll be calling you for that favor we discussed earlier, Tracy...
Since the CEL incidents in the past few weeks, things seem to have calmed down to the prior reliability, and the mileage is up in a rather significant way:
what I've done is added a contemporary of the RVS treatment listed under the fuel savers tab at the top of this page called Cerma (I'd google Cerma STM-3) to engine and transmission. (I also bought their air conditioning product and am looking for the tool to put it in the coolant, but may wait until spring for that). If the truck ran smoothly and quietly before, it's now verging on cloudlike stealth.
I also re-programmed the computer again. The document I found for GM Drive-by-wire TB's in the gadgetman land documents section describes a "drive cycle" to be followed after first start procedures, and I found what seems to be GM's factory approved procedure on another website with GM's approval:
I went over the top with the electrical loading: in addition to AC on high and rear defroster, I had the highbeams on, the 4 ways flashing, the wipers on high with washer fluid pump going and managed to work the power windows up and down during those 3 minutes. I got a look from a neighbor - I think they've now labelled me as the crazy guy on the 3rd floor - but this has shown really gratifying results.
While driving around town, I've noticed my dashboard readout, which only bottomed out on downhill runs, now seems quite happy to reside in the instantaneous 70+ MPG range (albeit briefly, but it fights to get back there) on straight, level and fresh pavement at 30mph. It used to sit in the low 50s at best. This was confirmed at the gas pump this evening: I filled up (just under half a tank, 8 gallons/25 Litres) and had gone 353km/218 Miles for a fuel consumption of 7L/100km or 33.6 MPG combined city/highway including the re-learn. I'm confident that I'll get 500+ miles out of this tank (18 Gal/68L) of fuel. If I hit 620 miles or 1000 km, I'll be over the moon. But I won't rest on my laurels: I still have to make those ignition upgrades (low resistance wires and upgapped finewire Iridium plugs). And THEN I might experiment with the MAP sensor.
And it seems as if it's getting to be time for that kindness you've offered to extend me, Tracy.
Can I take Wendy Rendezvous to a consistent 65MPG or even beyond? Stay tuned, good readers...
The following user(s) said Thank You: Tracy Gallaway