I can understand the principle, at least, behind the tornado. Producing a “swirl” would tend to speed up vaporization of fuel, thereby ensuring more complete combustion of said fuel in the combustion chamber. Diesel engines are designed to produce a similar “swirl” to encourage complete combustion (and thereby reduce smoke).
Having said that, EFI basically makes such a device meaningless.
However, IF one still had a carb’ed car, and IF one found a way to increase turbulence DOWNSTREAM of the carb…I suppose it could marginally decrease the amount of time one needed to utilize the choke, saving a (most likely trivial) amount of fuel.
What interests the “fringe engineer” in me is this: design an engine of very high compression, say at least 13:1 or so. Such an engine would be subject to detonation, and detonation is most likely when operating at high power settings (as anyone who’s driven a car with mild-to-moderate knocking can attest). So, when one sets off the “knock sensor,” rather than retard timing, inject water. Vaporization of water would be endothermic, reducing heat, thereby reducing tendency towards knock. Thus one could enjoy the thermodynamic benefits of higher compression than gasoline generally allows. (This would be similar in principle to a turbo intercooler).
I’d appreciate feedback on this one…note that I’m NOT saying a stock engine would benefit…you’d probably confuse the bejeezus out of the ECU!
Actually the use of Nitrogen in jet tires is all about what happens in the rare event of an aborted takeoff.
Any transport aircraft has to be able to accelerate to the highest possible speed to abort a takeoff (meaning that beyond this, it’s shorter to takeoff, regardless) and brake to a stop on the remaining runway.
In the course of “worst-case-scenario” testing, multiple tires are usually popped, the friction generated tends to set them on fire, and the rims and axles are usually scrapped at the end of the test. Nitrogen is used so that, when the flaming tires explode, the anoxic gas helps to put out the fire.
I’ve never heard of similar things happening to car tires (though it would make a cool video if it ever DID happen!)
The concept of controlled turbulance to enhance vaporization is a long-known principle already built into the combustion chambers. I would suggest that creating a vortex would actually cause coalescing of the fuel into larger droplets at the ouside of the vortex, actually reducing the active surface area per volume of the fuel entering the chamber. And since only the HC molecules on the outside of the droplets, only those in contact with the oxygen, actually conbust (the HC droplet burns through like peeling the layers of an onion), efficiency would actually be reduced if anything.
Interesting proposal. I’d lean toward the knock sensor opening the EGR valve to displace some oxygen and reduce cylinder temps. That’s already done under acceleration load, but unless I’m wrong it’s not done in response to the knock sensor. I should add, though, that you’d still have to deal with the NOx problem.
To the best of my knowledge, injection of water to compensate for the higher temps generated by high compressions, and as a means to allow high compressions, hasn’t been experimented with. I thing it’d be fun to experiment with. There may be a compression point at which benefits could be gained. I like to play with ideas like this.
I have done two things to my 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee 4.0L engine, that actually DID immprove my gas millage. I installed a K&N air filter, and I started using synthetic oil. Previous to this, I averaged 18.5 miles per gallon overall before making changes.
Since the two changes, I am getting 20.1 miles overall in winter ( cold weather) and 21.5 average in warmer weather. As a curiosity, I changed back to a paper element filter and used regular oil and my milage dropped back to around 18.5. These two prodcuts, the K7N filter and synthetic oil seem to work. It’s been consistant for the last 4 years.
Cold air intakes do work on some vehicles, mostly on carbuerated engines, (on f.i. systems the computer will compensate for the better air by leaving the injectors open longer and adding more fuel) It depends on how restricted the air volume delivered through your original equipment was, and whether it delivered enough for any given rpm you were turning. If you gained nothing then the stock system was apparently delivering enough. I made a cold air delivery system for mine but it gives me fits if I don’t rejet the carb twice a year (because of the wide variation in ambient temperatures between winter and summer.
I think the swirl effect of the “tornado” would work if it was closer to the intake valve (carbuerated cars only) On EFI the results would be as you say. The top of my carb is an average of 1 1/2 feet from the intake valve & the air would have to have straighteded back out after covering that distance. As it appears on television it is nothing more than a $25.00 air restriction. On EFI engines the results would be as you say.
Suzuki motorcycles experimented with “twin swirl” combustion chambers in the mid 80’s on their 4 valve per cyl. engines. What they claimed was: “improvement to intake chargeing efficiency” and “charge burning efficiency” Being a 4 v head with 2 intakes, they actually had the air swirling in 2 different directions,(or so they said) who knows lol… This was as close to a hemispheric chamber as you can get, BUT it did have 2 small “squish areas” one in the front and one in the rear.
Re: Water injection to cure detonation aka pinging/knocking. Yes it works. I have the timeing advanced to the max on mine (for several reasons) and with the quality of the cat pee they sell now days my engine was pinging so I made a vacuum operated water injector. There are drawbacks (efficiency related) to a vacuum system (the list is lengthy but if you’re interested let me know I will post them) I run a 50-50 mix of alcohol(ethanol NOT methanol) and water, and I only need it in the summer. The moisture content in the air in winter takes care of the knocking.
Ethos: From what I read on the “ethos site” where the mutts are selling it:
Ethos IS in every gallon of gasoline now, BUT it is so expensive the oil companies only put the minimum amount in to get by. The theory behind how it works “sounds” good, but I am not a chemical engineer so what they post there may just be B.S. Their story is that the state of Cali being on the leading edge of environmental leadership, required the oil companies to provide them with better quality fuel that would burn better, burn more completely and efficiently to reduce emissions BUT without harming the atmosphere in some other way. Some oil co. chemist came up with “ethos” (possibly just a snake oil liquid) that when mixed with the gasoline promotes more efficient and complete burning. It supposedly does this by makeing the fuel droplets smaller (chemically) and surrounding each droplet with oxygen molecules (or some such magic molecule, I can’t remember for sure) which also promotes more complete and efficient combustion. My friend and I were going to try this one, but when I did the math it didn’t pencil out for my vehicle. Even useing their best percentages/promises, it was still a wash. There is a break even point for every car depending on the price of gas, and on the mileage you are getting now. For mine the price of gas would have to climb back up to nearly $4.00 a gallon before I would come out far enough ahead to make it worthwhile.
As far as why they say that you should add it in the oil too, makes NO SENSE to me. They do not say on their site WHY you should put it in the oil or what if any effect it has on the oil. If it does the same thing to the oil as it does to the gas, then I see no gain from adding it to the oil. If you read the chem lit completely and understand how and why it works with the fuel you will understand why it would do nothing if added to the oil except waste it, ha ha. Probably their intention all along… You waste it, you buy more…ca-ching ca-ching
…
20 hours later: After I posted this last night, I clicked on the link that rpstrong posted above. It is an excellent site and covers EVERY bogus fuel saveing device I have ever heard of. From what they had to say about “ethos” as well as all the other fuel s.d.'s should convince everyone that there is no benefit to ANY of them no matter what you’re driveing. Thanks to rpstrong and others who have posted links here.
Interesting article, but they got at least one fact wrong. As longtime listeners to the show might recall, the “sleek black beauty” was, in fact, a '65 AMC convertible. I believe the late, lamented '63 Dartre was medium metallic blue.
I also get emails claiming to enlarge various parts of my anatomy with “HEERBALLL VOYAGERAEA” as well as barely legal teenage queens who allegedly want to go all the way with me and chose to communicate via an unregistered corporation in the Cayman Islands for some reason.
PM’s test were mostly one-sided, and they provided little to no actual numbers in their results. Instead they use terms like “no significant increase”. And the only time they provided actual numbers, was when something decreased efficiency.
For a handful of items that have been thoroughly tested and proven, visit www.eagle-research.com.
I don’t mean to be a pain here but the 2nd law of thermodynamics has nothing to do with why this works or doesn’t. You obviously have never tried it or don’t have a suitable vehicle for it (typically pre-96). I have a 93 Subaru Legacy that I did install this on, it went from 24 to 32 MPG CITY. You can’t make me believe it doesn’t work, because it does for me.
You have to keep in mind that the typical gas engine in the US is inefficient, and I absolutely believe that’s by design. The addition of HHO in the air mix does not add any additional power by itself, this is true. However, hydrogen burns much faster than gasoline. The contribution HHO makes is the flash burn in the cylinder upon ignition causes more of the fuel to ignite while still under high compression, where it can do more good. You get a more complete burn and a more efficient power stroke.
Modern (read OBDII) computers have a target emissions value which in great part is read by the oxygen sensor, therefore it is a culprit in defeating the efficiency gain. There are ways around this, some not so legal, but in general, I advise not bothering to install one in a post 96 vehicle (when OBDII became the standard).
I don’t sell cans or kits or plans or anything like that. I have no profit interest in making a public post. Many of these plans are available for free if you know where to look, so I’d really encourage people not to buy them. I will make one further note on this though…
Stainless Steel DOES rust under electrolysis, and one of the byproducts is chromium, a hazardous material. Regardless of whatever plans you get tell you, always use titanium for the positive electrode.
“…thoroughly tested and proven,” meaning anecdotal evidence from people who either are ashamed to admit that they fell for the false claims, or changed their driving habits and experienced a nominal increase in mileage - not because of, but in spite of the modifications.
Here’s some Fuel Doctor fun - a teardown and analysis of a device that, as the maker claims, takes high-frequency noise from the car’s electrical system, “draws that interference, filters it, then sends back a more stable current.” This, in turn, is supposed to make the ECU and every other electronic device in your car perform better and improve mileage, “up to 25% more M.P.G.” All this, from the comfort and safety of your cigarette lighter socket!
For those without electrical engineering expertise: Although there’s no possible way the circuit can do what the maker -claims-, it does perform the only two things it’s actually -designed- to do. First, it turns some pretty LED’s on and off, depending on the voltage level at the lighter socket; and second, it magically transports cash from your bank account to the maker’s.
The only good news is that if you’ve already spent your hard-earned cash on this piece of scat, it won’t do your car any good, but it (probably) won’t do any harm, either.