On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 13:09:25 -0400, "Tom in Missouri"
<toomuch@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> puked:
>It was a trick with ultrasonics. There had been rumors of ultrasonic
>carburetors in GM for several years, the so-called 30 mpg box, and it was
>supposed to be wired with transducers and such. Of course, the guy I ran
>into who claimed to really have one until the first service on his new
'74
>Impala could have just been describing an early test Q-Jet with the
>electronics plugged in. He claimed he got around 20 mpg with his Impala
and
>then 13 when it was gone.
>
>I positioned an ultrasonic transducer above the barrels and pumped in a
>40khz signal. I really didn't have anything to base it on and was just
>trial and error. The transducers I had were surplus electronics items and
>were not designed for the heat, gas, or anything, so they failed after
about
>a week. I went through 4 of them.
>
>The idea was that ultrasonics let the gas and air atomize better and that
>would improve fuel economy. It appears that it did. With more time,
money,
>and equipment, it might have been a good deal, positioning them under the
>carb, in the intake, or maybe above and below, but I didn't have the
>resources to do all that. I never had the chance to really tune for
mileage
>as by the time I ran enough miles and gas, they had failed. If I had
>transducers that could have lasted, I could have tried turning the carb
for
>the ultrasonics and seen if they actually
>
>Since them, the EFI, TBI, and TPI all have created much better
atomization
>than carbs did so it is academic today. If it improved over the fuel
>injection, it might only be 1 mpg or so, and that isn't really worth the
>effort.
Cool, but there are a lot of carbs still on the road...
>
>
>"lab~rat >:-)" <chase@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:sujhi351unu07fimksd4k5uf3st5td85o4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 01:53:49 -0400, "Tom in Missouri"
>> <toomuch@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> puked:
>>
>>>There are a lot of scams and a lot of s**** oil out there, but one
thing I
>>>did try years ago did actually work. Unfortunately, the parts I used
were
>>>not designed for such use or in the environment I was using them, and
so
>>>after a few days, they failed. But during that time, gas on the test
car
>>>(my daily commuter which was going about 80 miles per day) went from
22-23
>>>to 25. I had only gotten 25 a couple of times before - long flat
non-stop
>>>highway trips at 55-60 mph. This was tested in mostly city driving.
>>>
>>>However, since it involved helping things atomize quicker/better, and
the
>>>EFI/TBI/TPI all does that just as well today, there isn't any point in
me
>>>trying to build one again.
>>
>> The suspense is killing me...
>>
>>>
>>>So occasionally, you do find some of these that do work. You just want
to
>>>not get too involved in expense looking for them, or you could buy more
>>>gas
>>>than you will ever save.
>>>
>>>
>>>"Ric Seyler" <ricseyler@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>news:tlnVi.90$Tl5.16@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> Steve wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>With the cost of crude oil hitting $90 a barrel, this is something
you
>>>>>can't
>>>>>pass up! This is not a SCAM and can save you real money. A quick
down
>>>>>and
>>>>>dirty of how this works:
>>>>>
>>>> Magnets on the fuel line or the "Turbonator" behind the air cleaner?
>>>> LOLOLOLOLOL
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> lab~rat >:-)
>> Stupid humans...
>
--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
|
