Haven't been on in a while so just saw this post today.
Have viewed many videos similar to these years ago.
From all that I did view years ago they all had the problem of not being able to get the engine up to highway use.
There are two problems I discovered with this and have applied about 5 years ago on my lawnmower.
One is not producing enough vapors to run the engine up to the 60mph range for any distance and the second
which ties in to the first is that there is a shellac the globalists have placed into our gas allows the lighter chain
hydrocarbons to be vaporized first which is what works and then the gunk binds the rest of the gas so you are left with a
concentrated orange mixture that I have found to be useless. Actually got more minutes of use running my mower the regular way instead of vaporizing since it used all the gas. Running my mower on vapors I only got about half the time on the same gas.
I truly believe this shellac was added back in the early 70's for that purpose. Many were doing similar things with the gas until the "oil crises" hit and then the shellac was added. Gas used to be clear as water and we used to be able to store gas for years without a problem until the devils added the shellac. Now gas goes bad if stored for long periods and engines suffer from this shellac when the gas evaporates.
As I stated in a similar post I ran my lawnmower on gas vapors fine for a while until the lighter HC's were exhausted and the heavier chain HC's and shellac made it impossible to get enough vapors for running the mower. This is where Tom Ogle got his idea of running an engine on vapors. A rock hit his mowers gas tank and the gas leaked out. He then placed the intake hose into the hole where only vapors could reach the hose and he finished the whole lawn on just vapors. Remember, this was BEFORE they added the shellac.
Later on he became famous for running I think a very heavy Ford Galaxy for over a hundred miles on a gallon of gas with the skeptic scientist in the vehicle with him. Word got out quickly and eventually Tom was found on the side of the road dead.
Cant have an upstart cut into the control the globalists have and make us more independent now can we?
Tom was probably the catalyst for the globalists adding the shellac since he was the most prominent figure vaporizing gas at that time.
Just Youtube "Jay Leno Shell" and see the technology we have already where Shell has a car that gets 1,359MPG.
Probably uses some sort of vaporization without the shellac for gas in that car.
Some may consider this a negative post and reject my words of warning/experience but wisdom will see this another way.
If I can show how the idea in its raw form does work but needs to skip the basic stage as seen in all videos I have viewed and tried and go on to the second stage of finding a different form of vaporization that evenly vaporizes all the gas or uses gas that does not have the shellac in it, then I can save people many hours of head banging I already went thru.
You can also distill the gas which I have also done to eliminate most of the shellac but you must use a lower heat or else a higher heat will also vaporize the shellac with the gas or find another source of vapors like alcohol or acetone but I found gas works the best for the reason of 18 hydrogen atoms compared to much less for alcohol and acetone which are also more expensive.
BTW..if one want to get a better understanding of how controlled the oil industry is just get the book "Energy Non Crises" by Lindsey Williams. He worked with the globalists on the Alaskan pipeline and saw that how a group of people control our nation and how we have more oil in Alaska than they do in Saudi Arabia but powerful people shut it down so we cant be independent and have cheap oil.
Dont want to make ones head spin so I will stop here.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Tracy Gallaway
I don’t think you understand my idea, Kman. I’m talking about simply heating the fuel supplied to the rail rather than vapourizing it beforehand. Lacquer and ethanol and all. Exhaust heat reintroduced to the cooling system of the engine should help offset the lesser heat of smaller combustion from less fuel.
Our groove mixes fuel and air better; why not make the fuel a bit easier to vapourize in The chamber? I wager it could improve mileage by 10%
It may be that society is pushing closer to all-electric vehicles and eliminating internal combustion engines powered by hydrocarbon-based petrochemicals, but this knowledge is important to forward, because the people who have done the hard work of research and testing are of an age to be leaving us before that transition is complete. The author of
, a Mr Bruce McBurney, left us a few short years ago. Patrick Kelly (
Read for yourself
) passed sometime over the past year.
our own Ron Hatton is medically indisposed due to a serious accident, George Wiseman of Eagle Research seems to have shifted his focus to longevity/health maintenance, The Lindemann/Murakami team is shifting focus to energy capture/conservation...
it's up to us, here and now, to do something to preserve this knowledge and the technology as long as possible, for the next generations...
(I was interested that Bruce basically constructed and tested what I've been suggesting over the past few posts on this thread...)
Most Active Member
The following user(s) said Thank You: Tracy Gallaway
If you are trying to heat the fuel you can try what I tried which is for diesel engine use in cold weather to heat the fuel lines for faster starting on cold days. People in colder climates use this for that purpose since diesel can gel it seems if cold enough.
What it is is a wrap around coil for the fuel line that works off the battery. You turn on the key and wait for the fuel line to heat up before attempting to start in cold weather which has been a blessing for those who struggle with diesel in cold climates.
It gets quite hot within 3 minutes and if I remember right it was about 150 degrees.
I tried this for the heating of the fuel purposes and didn't see any mileage benefits so I stopped it. Most/all of my failures in gaining MPG I can say is the CPU the globalists have installed and for that very purpose. Here is where an EFIE is needed for all modifications meant for fuel efficiency. The second way of heating the gas which I didn't try for the labor and safety involved, besides vapor lock issues, is wrapping a copper tubing around either the exhaust pipe or the radiator hose. One has to divert the fuel line and install copper tubing(1/4") for conductivity and wrap around either one. If around the exhaust, one MUST weld/solder it on or friction will spring a leak and a potential fire/explosion issue. Again for labor, safety and vapor lock issues, the radiator seems to be a better choice but will not heat the gas anywhere as hot and needs to be insulated or one can opt for the diesel line heater like I did which does cost more.
I remember viewing Bruce's heating device years ago which was quite complex and if I remember correctly heated the gas to over 700 degrees which is around the temp needed for cracking the hydrogen off the hydrocarbon molecules.This was something most people could not construct in ones garage. Remember him also having a sign in his front yard saying "I get over 100 MPG".
That is a threat to to those who control our vehicle/oil industry. Was thinking of taking a trip to meet this man but it was quite a distance for me. He suddenly passed and made me wonder if the deep state "Ogled" him like they did to Tom and also Stan Meyer.
Well, Bruce was literally 12 miles up the road from me, and for all the times I drove past that sign on his front lawn, I never mustered the gumption to stop for a chat.
Natural Causes was what did him in - and I reached out through friends to get that scoop, and I trust it. I was just happy some semblance of his work lives on here on the interwebz. If you click around on the links, you find his instructions to create a Condensator catch can.
George Wiseman is a good cat - he lives about 15 miles past where Bruce did, and I've had the pleasure of meeting him 3x now if memory serves. I have an EFIE of his on my upstream o2 sensor and it works as advertised. (Anyone who uses it should also apply his modification to the MAP sensor, if their car has one)
I don't share your perception that the computer in cars is unbeatable - I just don't think people who go up against one to achieve better fuel economy are too focused on one aspect and aren't taking a holistic approach from a 30,000' view, but I do agree that they mess around with fuel additives.
My idea is to simply warm the fuel with heat from the coolant system, and to keep the coolant system at a temperature with waste heat from the exhaust. no crazy "white vapour" attempts, but those two thing should help maintain efficiency in colder weather (depending on just how cold it gets here, my vehicle drops out of closed loop, so adding waste heat from the exhaust back into the water jacket should prevent that) and the warmer fuel should vapourize more fully under vacuum. It's 2 heat exchangers I envision to achieve my intended result...the one on the exhaust resembling the EGR cooler video I posted - a water jacket around a post-Catalytic exhaust pipe. I've also had ideas about triggering more EGR and EVAP events (those two go hand in hand when you think about it), but I think a little plumbing will be easier than reverse engineering more of the computer. All of these things in combination, applied moderately, is the way forward in my experience and opinion. Just like how a little groove, and small spark plug adjustments and watching tire pressure have given me such good results on my car - I've never taken a sledgehammer approach from the offset, but a "wade into icy cold waters that may be shallow" approach until i go too far and get worse results than before applying changes. All the little things add up, just like watching the pennies keeps dollars in your pocket.
Hi again Greg and Kman! Good to see ya here again, Kman!
Greg, I just sent ya my lengthy reply about making a coolant/fuel heat exchanger. Pretty obvious actually, you route the hot coolant alongside the metal fuel supply line. Easier said than done, but not very complicated, it just comes down to details.
But I do agree w/ Greg, on the point that we here, are ourselves becoming a vanguard to further the concepts of fuel efficiency. Electric vehicles will be increasing. Lots of young people nowadays don't even bother to own a car, what with Uber and the like around.
However still the majority of the public, at least those who aren't Amish, rely on the internal combustion engine for transport. I think that gasoline and diesel will still be with us for some time to come. One reason is Energy Density.
On top of that, consider how many hydrocarbon liquid fuel off road engines exist. Generators, riding and push mowers, boats,,etc.etc. . While there may be new electric versions of most things powered by gas or diesel, it's gonna take YEARS until they are all replaced by electric versions.
Anyone here able to afford a Tesla?
So, our discussions and contributions become ever more valuable. One think I'll add about Mod's in general is- practicality. The Awesome thing about the Gadgetman Groove is- once one is a Gadgetman, it's not very hard to effect this incredible mod.
By comparison, the Plasma Ignition build I did on Subie years back, took many hours to figure out, then implement. Actually, right now Subie is down for repairs, it became a No Start about 2 months ago. I have a replacement ignition switch on order, I hope that's the issue. It's been so reliable for so long, that I forgot a lot of the details of all the wiring involved w/ the plasma mod, so I'm re-learning the whole deal. Subie's engine bay is cluttery and cramped without the extra Plasma related stuff. I still smile, when I remember how two different shops refused to do brake work on it when it had a problem. Both shops lifted the hood, then saw the big Diode block array in the corner, and shrank back...IT looks intimidating, if ya don't know what's up w/ these!
Founder and Constant Aide to Gadgetman
Gadgetman Reno, NV
The following user(s) said Thank You: GregK, CLAUDIO CORDOVA, kman
20% better highway mileage (as long as you stay out of the turbo, I'm guessing)...and that's WITHOUT fuel warming.
Plus faster warm-up time from cold start (where'd I see that before? lol) and lower emissions overall.
This is the right track, I think. Zippitydoodah!
Most Active Member
The following user(s) said Thank You: Tracy Gallaway, CLAUDIO CORDOVA
Or, call it exhaust heated coolant! Would improve cold start warmups, true. and that's Ok in itself.
The part that got my attention, though was him speaking of using less fuel under load. Did I hear him say or imply that this is common, or just this engine?
I thought I caught an implication, (or did I) .that it IS common?
Because that could imply- an indirect validation for using WOT judiciously, more often, to help with MPG's...??
Interesting engine design, this. Wonder how well this will work out in service life? A cylinder head crack in THIS head could be disasterous!!
Founder and Constant Aide to Gadgetman
Gadgetman Reno, NV
I would assume most modern engines are aluminum, so they can probably handle rapid heat transfers, or accelerated heating, BUT I think it’s the rule than the exception for a car to come with a block heater lately...so it might be key from a longevity perspective to plug the car in so that it doesn’t cool to ambient too quickly in the cold or get shocked on a cold start.
Also, to speak to your question about using less fuel under load - in a fuel injected engine, it’s not just MAF and o2 sensors that factor into fuel delivery - if the coolant temp gets too high, the computer can also trim the injectors open (for extra cooling) or closed (so the burn isn’t so hot) and can determine/decide which is appropriate based on knock sensors (I would assume IAT and fan status would factor into the logic tree as well) Right? Eventually an equilibrium point would be found with all the systems working together. It’s a simple machine, a car’s engine computer, but the programming and logic is complex. We’re taking a much wider view on the whole process and machine going down this road.
There is the attitude among some that "the computer is an evil plot by TPTB" but to them I counter that the engineering in them isn't correctly understood or fully exploited to our benefit rather than those of those powers that be, or big oil and banks in cahoots with the car manufacturers themselves and the elected officials who hold large blocks of their stocks...
That VW engine - it should be researched some more before embarking on applying this method. I’m still excited at the possibilities.
Neat video, but I also wonder about the longevity of the engine. Any head work just became infinitely more expensive. He also stated because of cooler exhaust temps the engine does not have to enrichen the mixture for added cooling at high load, which I'm sure is were the efficiency comes from. I would venture a guess that the cooling system is larger than a similar sized engine with a traditional set up.
That being said this discussion does have merit. Speaking from the aspect of an aircraft technician, all turbine engines I have worked on for the last 23 plus years use a liquid to liquid cooler. The fuel is used to cool turbine oil and vice versa heat the fuel for better atomization. Now obviously turbines run at a higher temperature than do our vehicles, but the concept is the same. Turbines also are not water cooled as our car engines are. I think any increase in temperature or any increase we would make, would help. To what degree and efficiency is the question.
Longevity - that's an excellent point and concern.
I tend to think that ICE technology has advanced at a pace to suit the manufacturer's needs to sell product at a predictable rate. but I also tend to think that it's probably about as good as it's gonna get.
For instance, the Aviation engines I'm familiar with (Lycoming and Continental horizontally opposed 4cyl - like those in Subarus with their Boxer engine) haven't changed all THAT much in, what, 70 or 80 years?
the big boys in auto engines may thank us if we can take their designs another inch or two forward in their evolution...or for needing to buy another of their products sooner than later.
but what you're saying turbines do is exactly what I'm considering for my own ride - use exhaust heat to warm the engine coolant and then use that warmed coolant to pre-warm the fuel. To achieve that, I'd have to add significant coolant (mass) to the system (heat exchangers), Preheating fuel will remove some of the additional heat from the coolant, and less of a fire in the cylinders (from any efficiency increase) might translate into a cooler block, so maybe nothing would need to be changed as far as the radiator is concerned. BUT if those hypotheses are incorrect - the fans that draw air through the rad might need adjustment to trigger sooner, which puts a (possibly greater) load on the alternator...unless we replace relays with PWM controlled fans that follow the coolant temp sensor... LOL. I'm thinking it all through, and what I'm after is better mileage without losing power.
the only way to really know is to give a shot. that doesn't mean to aim for the target, close your eyes and then pull the trigger.
Most Active Member
The following user(s) said Thank You: CLAUDIO CORDOVA
I may just apply PWM fan control to my twin cooling fans regardless of if I go down this "use waste heat for efficiency" road:
my research indicates that my Coolant Temp Sensor is a Negative Coefficient Thermistor, meaning that as the temp it senses goes up, the voltage across the sensor goes up (because the resistance goes down). It's easy enough for me to test this, as I bought a replacement for when I replaced my radiator and flushed my system.