121MPG, Gimic or what?

[fireguy12117]

So my boss said he came across an article in a popular science magazine about a pre-iginition catalytic converter system. sounds interesting, so i took a look: www.picctv.com

Whats everyones thought? Is this something thats been discussed here already?

i don't really know what to make of it yet, but i do love the simple fact that when there is enough of a demand for anything, there are just as many crack heads as there are ligit people trying to fill that void...

 

[86isuzu]

I couldn't find anything on the popsci website.
But there is a money back guarantee on that hafc thingy...it's tempting

 

[86freebie]

if crap like that worked, BOB would be a porn star "if you have to ask DONT"
and there would be one on half the cars built.

 

[thegoat4]

That's crap. Sure, gasoline vapors make it to the exhaust system, but they're miniscule compared to the amount of gas that actually gets burned. Recovering and burning those vapors will add squat to your fuel economy.

Their "scientific testing" does not seem to be documented. Why did a (simulated) Chrystler V8 van get 200mpg when a Honda Accord only got 56? Seems awfully inconsistent.

Then there's the HHO sales pitch.

Plus it's got gas magnets. Voodoo horseshit is a bad sign.

And what does that "covalizer" cost?

 

[LearjetMinako]

So it vaporizes the fuel before being burned. The fuel injectors achieves the same thing by forcing fuel through tiny port holes. Dirty injectors means less atomization and poorer gas mileage. Recovery of the HC after its burned is almost pointless. If the engine didn't burn it off, the CAT will. And if its running pass that point, something in the engine burning process is letting too much fuel through.

Now the hydrogen assist gimic seems possible. But you gotta remember something about water. It takes energy to get the energy out of water. So if energy output is anything less than 100%, you are wasting energy to get that energy from water. Solar power electrolsis seems to fix that equation, but it takes a while to get enough hydrogen to burn for a considerable distance.

 

[Carlos Murphy]

121 mpg?

We'll never see anything like that on the open market because some oil company would have bought rights.

 

[Vonrak]

Thou as many are, I am extremely skeptical of this product. I work in a manufacturing plant and break-thru's like this happen alot in different aspects of product creation and processing. The higher gas prices go,the more companies and individuals will pursue ideas like this.

The technology for ideas such as this has existed for quite some time. But it wasnt until a few years ago that it became viable as a profitable market. Oil prices are what is driving the development of these things.

About 25 or so years ago, my uncle worked for Delco Remy. One of his friends was a engineer for the company. He told me a story,no way to validate it thou, that the engineer guy had developed a type of carb for gas engines that would give 50+ mpg. He sold the idea to a undisclosed auto manufacture and signed a contract to not develop the idea any further. The idea was mothballed due to some kind of monitary arangement between oil companys and the auto company.

Even thou the details could easily be inflated for a good story, I have seen practices like this in manufacturing of all kinds of products. When company A buys out company B and elimates items company B makes to increase company A's sales/profitablity. Regardless if company B's product is better or more functional.

Just my 2 pennies worth on the topic

Vonrak

 

[srteach]

Can you say FRAUD?
On the website, it says you will get twice the gas mileage, then the NEXT sentence tells you it is guaranteed to give a 50% increase. WTF? First they say double increase, then guarantee half increase? That whole website is full of double talk and counter claims, sometimes in the same paragraph.

 

[mhagedon]

I have a friend who works for a ford dealership in marshalltown. He is getting 38 mpg from his '88 2.3 tempo 5 speed. His '03 2.3 focus gets 32. Obviously there's a reason for that, maybe the focus weighs more and i'm sure the 2.3 is putting out way more power than the old tempo. But still, why? Why can't 50 mpg be the benchmark for boring econo commuters? Honda civic did 46 with TBI in 1990.

I'm not trying to rant or whine here, i'd just like an informed answer. Smog equipment choking mileage? What?

Why did the 3.8 N/A OHV in the pont/chevy get replaced with the 3.5 DOHC? Reliability surely is not the issue. As for power the gains were paltry in comparison to the mileage losses. And the 3.8 S/C made way more power in it's final year with the revised eaton supercharger than the 3.5 and got better mileage while doing so. Why is the focus not on efficiency? Why why why

Anyways, I'm a doubting thomas when it comes to water powered cars and the like, but show me and i shall believe. Nikola tesla may or may not have discovered alternating current, but the shit works. You're using it to read this. But this? This is crap

Matt

 

[Bryan22]

If theres all that fuel wasted going out the exhaust, how come an EGR system dosen't increase milage?

 

[f1502rngr]

I would like to see one of the patents bought by big oil start being used now. Big oil sues for copy right infringement, then the real war starts..............

 

[Iron Ranger]

Power is only a fraction of better fuel economy.
1. Aerodynamics
2. Power transfer(auto vs. manual & gear ratios)
3. Overall weight
4. Friction(bearings, gears, tire traction, lots of stuff)

The list goes on and on, I once saw on Modern Marvels(I think) that an artist designed and built a semi truck that had very good aerodynamics. It looked a little funky, but he claims that due to the cut in wind resistance, the fuel economy increased 65%.

I believe it due to the fact that lots of semis are in the shape of a lunch box, this one looked like a mix between a jet and a SCUD missile, very aerodynamic

There are also companies that make full underbody pans so that the air can flow under the car with no obstructions from the axel or frame.

There are breakthroughs on every level(Drive-by-wire, weight reductions, etc.) I think that instead of reinventing the internal combustion engine, there should be strides made to improve it further.

BMW went this route and they have models that run on pure hydrogen, but use the same internal combustion engine(with a few tweeks of course)

 

[thegoat4]

The list goes on and on, I once saw on Modern Marvels(I think) that an artist designed and built a semi truck that had very good aerodynamics. It looked a little funky, but he claims that due to the cut in wind resistance, the fuel economy increased 65%.

Peterbilt made a truck model 372 that was nicknamed "Darth Vader." Back when everyone else was getting three and four mpg out of semis, it was getting ten mpg. But it was ugly, so nobody like it. Just now other trucks (including peterbilt's) are just creeping up on seven and eight mpg. All of the major truck makers have been adding aerodynamic elements to their trucks in the last couple of years, so it shouldn't be too much longer before all semis are butt-ugly.

 

[92MiniMonster]

Speaking of Peterbilt , did anyone catch that episode where they build a whole truck in 24 hours? (not trying to steal a thread here)

 

[oldbaldy454]

Iron Ranger,

Check out:

http://www.hafctechnology.com/index.htm
for the PICC system and HHO gas generator.
$1100 and $1700 including a retune is a bit high on the $$$


A dealer in Brainerd MN has been trying his hardest to sell me one of these,
yet he does not run it on his own cars...duh


and....

This one looks like the best installation video Iʼve seen...
Price is reasonable at $170 at
http://www.smacksboosters.110mb.com/

JB in warm muggy Southern MN