Search | Car Forums | Gallery | Articles | Helper | AF 350Z | IgorSushko.com | Corporate |
| Latest | 0 Rplys |
|
Engineering/Technical Ask technical questions about cars. Do you know how a car engine works? |
Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread |
|
Thread Tools |
10-12-2004, 11:19 AM | #16 | |
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Raleigh, North Carolina
Posts: 641
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Gas mileage question.
but wouldnt the hydrogen molecules take up space that could be occupied by more oxygen? ive also thought that cold, dry air was the best for performance. this brings up this: what is better; more oxygen/fuel or the supercarburetor method? i never knew about the hydrogen concept; thx for the insight.
|
|
10-12-2004, 12:14 PM | #17 | |
AF Regular
Thread starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kalamazoo, Michigan
Posts: 453
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Gas mileage question.
What the process is doing is converting conventional gasoline into methane and methanol. To do this, you need the hydrogen. If you mix the fuel vapors with the oxygen only, It will increase the gas mileage my only about 120%. By changing the gasoline to Methanol and Methane, which are way, way less dense, you can effectively run the motor on vapors, and thus increasing your gas mileage by 400-900%.
|
|
10-12-2004, 03:44 PM | #18 | |
AF Regular
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: lexington, Kentucky
Posts: 141
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Thanx for not expecting me to understand Mr I'm in advanced chemistry. Damp/dense air might be more benificial in a supercarburetor, but in the world of normal function it doesn't. And yes cars do know when the air is more dense, baro, map, iat, maf, these are sensors that are used to calculate the density and volume of the air coming into the engine. Pump gas is no longer leaded, and it was used for its ability to increas octane numbers. It might prevent the formation of methanol/methane but that is not why it was used. I don't think you have this whole process down, things might work in your advanced chemistry theory, in the combustion process that we use today it ain't happening. I don't doubt that there is some process that can create 200mpg vehicles, but thats not what we are using right now. I wasn't trying to start a pissing contest, but its people like you that think you're the only ones that know that water is composed of Hydrogen and Oxygen that piss people off and start some shit. Thanks for the visual aid.
__________________
Anybody got ten grand? BJ |
|
10-12-2004, 03:59 PM | #19 | ||
Banned
|
Re: Re: Re: Gas mileage question.
Quote:
|
||
10-12-2004, 03:59 PM | #20 | |
AF Regular
Thread starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kalamazoo, Michigan
Posts: 453
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Gas mileage question.
I didn't mean to offend anybody, I was just stating I didn't expect a lot of people to completely understand what I was saying. And, they do put a lead based additive in your fuel. proof? Stick a subtance that only reacts to lead into a container that contains straight from the pump gasoline. It reacts. And, yes I have the process down. It will work on any motor, even a brand new one. I have seen it for myself. I don't expect a lot of people to believe me, but it's true. As a matter of fact, the newer the car, the easier. The computer will adjust for the change without doing anything to modify it. Filter the additives out, and evaporate the gasoline, and it will work. On any car. Try it, I challenge you.
|
|
10-12-2004, 04:04 PM | #21 | |
Banned
|
Re: Gas mileage question.
lead bassed additive? WTF? they dont use anything lead anymore...aside from radiation protection and fishing weight....lol...
|
|
10-12-2004, 04:51 PM | #22 | |
AF Regular
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: lexington, Kentucky
Posts: 141
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
No harm no foul, its just that your preaching this thing like its gods gift. There have been a lot of great ideas for high effieciency vehicles out there but most have had a lot of problems. The theories put in place by this Supercarb are not what is used in normal combustion.
__________________
Anybody got ten grand? BJ |
|
10-12-2004, 06:45 PM | #23 | |
AF Regular
Thread starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kalamazoo, Michigan
Posts: 453
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Gas mileage question.
It is not a theory. But, just send me a personnal message if you disagree with me, please. I want to keep the forum open to those who have questions. And, yes, they use lead for more than radiation protection and fishing wheights, and it is used without modifying the mechanical process of the motor. It's not how much you put in, but where and how you put it in. I guess it isn't a big deal to those who don't think it will work, so I won't make it one for them.
|
|
10-12-2004, 10:24 PM | #24 | ||
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: calgary
Posts: 180
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Gas mileage question.
Quote:
This is by far the dumbest post I have seen in a while and i do not intend to waist my time even responding to it as a 2 year old can see the inacuracies |
||
10-13-2004, 05:37 AM | #25 | |||||||||||
Professional Ninja Killer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Penn Hills, Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,561
Thanks: 0
Thanked 10 Times in 10 Posts
|
Re: Gas mileage question.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
My apologies for the rant, but if you don't know what you're talking about, don't post your conjecture on the AUTOMOTIVE TECHNICAL AND ENGINEERING FORUM.
__________________
Dragging people kicking and screaming into the enlightenment. |
|||||||||||
10-13-2004, 09:09 AM | #26 | |
AF Regular
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: lexington, Kentucky
Posts: 141
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
God am I glad somebody with a double chem majors stepped into this forum. I know enough to know that this stuff was wrong, i just couldn't construct the argument. Thank you Curtis
__________________
Anybody got ten grand? BJ |
|
10-13-2004, 09:51 AM | #27 | |||
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Norfolk, Virginia
Posts: 464
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Gas mileage question.
I wanted to break this one down too, but again, curtis... i love you... Being a ME major, I have a little bit of chemistry behind me. All of the sudden H20 is reactive? (Because we all know that you NEVER throw water on a fire, it will cause a huge reaction) I see your retort now, "Well thats H20 in its liquid form, not its gaseous form" H20 going from liquid to gaseous is a PHYSICAL change, thats 6th grade material right there. Whether in liquid or gaseous, its still H20. The reason you can get more power out of a slightly humid day is to the fact that H20 doesn't compress. Now the moist air is taken into the cylinder, The higher H20 content doesn't allow for the air to be compressed as much. This raises the combustion chamber pressures, causing for a higher cylinder pressures. No, this is not a huge secrete, there are several places where you can get water injection systems for heavily modified cars. But these are pretty limited to diesels which are built for these higher pressures. Just dumping non evaportated water into a motor is dumb. 1 teaspoon of H20 in liquid form can bring the combustion chamber to dangerous pressures even causing hydrolock.
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
10-13-2004, 11:58 AM | #28 | |
AF Regular
Thread starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kalamazoo, Michigan
Posts: 453
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Gas mileage question.
I know what I am talking about, believe it or not.
An engine that gets hot is more efficient? So, if I make a car run at 500 degees Celcius, it will be twice as efficient as cars are now? That is true for a heating device, such as a curling iron or a water heater, but not for a motor. Why use a fuel that loses energy to heat in the explosion process? If it doesn't generate heat, then all of the energy of the explosion is being used in the explosion, and not lost through the transfer of heat.. Oh, if you are a double chem major, which I don't doubt, go ahead and run gasoline through a filter to filter out the additive (lead-based), evaporate it, and blow it up. Redo the experiment along with evaporated water. Then, do the experiment without filtering the gasoline. See what it smells like, propane, or gas? You will find out just how wrong you are. Propane, used in internal cumbustion, doesn't produce toxins, and is therefore used in warehouses to power their trucks and so forth.
__________________
1986 LeSabre Limited L67 sleeper Fully ported & polished, shift kit, CAI, F41 polyurethane suspension, headers & 3" exhuast, |
|
10-13-2004, 01:33 PM | #29 | ||
AF Enthusiast
|
Re: Re: Gas mileage question.
Quote:
__________________
I disregard my perceived image in the persuit of knowledge. |
||
10-13-2004, 01:38 PM | #30 | |
Professional Ninja Killer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Penn Hills, Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,561
Thanks: 0
Thanked 10 Times in 10 Posts
|
First of all, allow me to apologize to buickmastermind. My last post was nothing short of caustic and I apologize. I was a little too spunky, but you took the high road and took my flaming in stride. My sincere apologies for the nature of the post.
I see what you're saying about heat, but heat is always one of the forms of energy given off in an explosion. I'm AM saying that a hotter engine runs more efficiently since it gets a greater amount of energy for combustion. With exothermic reactions, it takes energy to get energy. Hence, why the air/fuel is compressed to about a tenth its original volume. This is not to be confused with how much power a hot engine makes, NOR with its MPG since MPG has little to do with efficiency. There may be our difference. So many times those two terms are interchanged, but efficiency has to do with how much of the chemical energy gets to the ground, but MPG does not. Then we're talking about BSFC and driving style. Engines like to be hot; DRIVERS like them to be cool. The temperature of the engine is a net balance of heat in vs. heat out. Its possible for a 600 hp engine to run at 150 degrees water, and its possible for a 60 hp engine to run at 250 degrees water. It has nothing to do with how efficient they are, its just how much heat can be exhanged out. Also don't confuse heat with temperature. Totally different things. I guarantee the cooler 600 hp example above has more heat than the higher temperature 60-hp example. If you can swallow that, then we're on the same page. It mostly boils down to the type of engine we've settled for in the world and the types of fuel that work best in them. Fuel explodes, makes heat energy, light energy, sound energy, and kinetic energy, along with traces of other forms. The engine can use about 30% of those. But, as I pointed out later, even if we doubled that efficiency, we wouldn't double the MPGs. Whole different animal.
__________________
Dragging people kicking and screaming into the enlightenment. |
|
|
POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD |
|
|