Gas mileage question.

[Kven]

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.

[buickmastermind]

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%.

[bjdm151]

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.

[CBFryman]

Originally Posted by Kven

if you ever got your car inspected thats what is listed(in percent) and that is what they look at to determine if youre going to pass or not.

i live in florida...no emmissions inspections here... but anyways thanks for the clarification... how many different oxides of nitrogen are there... are they all ions arent they? except for N2O which would cause -8 charge and would automaticly step down to the next energy level?

[buickmastermind]

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.

[CBFryman]

lead bassed additive? WTF? they dont use anything lead anymore...aside from radiation protection and fishing weight....lol...

[bjdm151]

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.

[buickmastermind]

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.

[calgary_redneck]

Originally Posted by buickmastermind

Damp/humid air has a greater density that dry air does. when it gets into the high heat of the motor, most of the water evaporates (liquid --> gas, big surface area expansion) either in the manifold or the cylinders, and you have more air in the motor than the computer knows about. Also, gasoline normally evaporates in the motor, but the amount is not significant enough for the car to run on the evaporated gasoline. When you have the wet air, the chances of a given amount of gasoline evaporating increase, and even though the computer sees a correct exhaust mixture throught the o2 sensor, you really used more air for the same amount of gas. It's advanced chemistry, and I don't expect you to understand it. You might be asking "why don't we heat the gas up enough so that we can run the motor entirely on gas vapors, then?" It is possible. When a gasoline changes to a gas from a liquid, it expands it's original surface area. That, and the gasoline molecule in its gaseous state is normally very reactive to hydrogen and oxygen, and when it reacts with hydrogen and oxygen (water-or-rain), it produces methanol and methane. The two chemicals combined produce a "percussion" explosion, rather than a heat explosion. A motor that correctly untilizes this method is the official definition of a supercarbureted system. It is like using gasoline to make propane (which is what the correct mixture smells similar to), and eliminating hazards to our environment. To visualize (not 100% to scale),
Start with this much gas vapor.
ggg
add this much water vapor.
wwwwwwwww
and you get this much methanol/methane
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

If you did notice the increase in gas mileage and power, you noticed that it wasn't very substantial, but it was there. The reason the current vehicles don't get the huge gas mileage as this system allows is because, even though they say the gas you are buying is unleaded, it really isn't. Lead is a type of preventative. It can be used to prevent methane and methanol from forming because it takes the reactivity out of the gasoline molecule, and every oil company intentionally puts a lead additive into their oil to prevent this reaction from happening. It still happens, but not to an extent that it can be utilized without filtering out the lead. Simply spraying a fine mist of water into the air breather can help this process along, but only slightly until the lead is gone.
Don't believe me? Type in "200 MPG supercarburetor" in at google. you might have to look on a few pages before you find the websites, and there are a few, but you would be surprised.

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

[curtis73]

Originally Posted by buickmastermind

Damp/humid air has a greater density that dry air does. when it gets into the high heat of the motor, most of the water evaporates (liquid --> gas, big surface area expansion)

Uh... the water in the air is ALREADY EVAPORATED

either in the manifold or the cylinders, and you have more air in the motor than the computer knows about.

The computer knows about all of the air going into the engine via either the MAP or MAF.

Also, gasoline normally evaporates in the motor, but the amount is not significant enough for the car to run on the evaporated gasoline.

HUH?

When you have the wet air, the chances of a given amount of gasoline evaporating increase,

Actually, they decrease. Air can only hold a certain amount of solutes, so damp air holds LESS gasoline than dry air.

It's advanced chemistry, and I don't expect you to understand it. You might be asking "why don't we heat the gas up enough so that we can run the motor entirely on gas vapors, then?"

First of all, I have two chemistry degrees and I DO understand. Second, we don't heat the gasoline since we can atomize it mechanically and avoid the extreme danger of heating gasoline.

When a gasoline changes to a gas from a liquid, it expands it's original surface area. That, and the gasoline molecule in its gaseous state is normally very reactive to hydrogen and oxygen, and when it reacts with hydrogen and oxygen (water-or-rain), it produces methanol and methane.

You are right on one thing. Vaporizing gasoline increases its surface area to oxygen. It NEVER gets its oxygen from WATER. I repeat... NEVER gets its oxygen from WATER. Nor, does it ever react with hydrogen. Gasoline is a HydroCarbon, meaning it has its own Hydrogen. Water (unless you apply huge amounts of energy) does not dissolve into Hydrogen and Oxygen. Therefore, the water you put into an engine comes out as... WATER. nothing else. The oxygen in H2O is NOT available for combustion. The Hydrogen in water is NOT available for combustion, nor is it used in combustion. If that were the case, we wouldn't need the gasoline. Just pump water in there, it would magically reduce itself to oxygen and hydrogen, and then combustion would bring them back together. Who need gasoline???

The two chemicals combined produce a "percussion" explosion, rather than a heat explosion. A motor that correctly untilizes this method is the official definition of a supercarbureted system. It is like using gasoline to make propane (which is what the correct mixture smells similar to), and eliminating hazards to our environment. To visualize (not 100% to scale),
Start with this much gas vapor.
ggg
add this much water vapor.
wwwwwwwww
and you get this much methanol/methane
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

If somone told you this, shoot him/her. There is no such thing as percussion vs. heat explosions.. they are all combustion. You don't use gasoline to make propane, you use chemical refining to make propane, and in my 30 years in the automotive world, I've never heard the term 'supercarburated". And MOST OF ALL... no form of HC combustion is harmless to the environment. Lastly. You can add as much water vapor as you want... it is not going to magically transform one complex HC into another complex HC. I challenge you to back up one tiny speck of your argument.

If you did notice the increase in gas mileage and power, you noticed that it wasn't very substantial, but it was there. The reason the current vehicles don't get the huge gas mileage as this system allows is because, even though they say the gas you are buying is unleaded, it really isn't. Lead is a type of preventative. It can be used to prevent methane and methanol from forming because it takes the reactivity out of the gasoline molecule, and every oil company intentionally puts a lead additive into their oil to prevent this reaction from happening. It still happens, but not to an extent that it can be utilized without filtering out the lead.

All I can say is.. What? I dont' understand it, but now you're saying that Lead with an atomic weight of 207.2 is randomly reactive with Oxygen with an atomic weight of 15.9994. Lead is in period 14 and oxygen is in period 16. Methane and Methanol are complex Hydrocarbons which have nothing to do with lead. Lead isn't even vaguely associated with the "-ane's" (propane, methane, hexane, butane, heptane...) Not to mention, your whole argument was based on 86 mpgs, but now you're saying, "...you noticed it wasn't very substantial, but it was there..." I would expect 15 mpgs from this magical 455, so 86 mpgs is not substantial???

Simply spraying a fine mist of water into the air breather can help this process along, but only slightly until the lead is gone.

That's like saying, "you can beat your children, but only until their bruises are gone." I used to work for the big oil companies and still have many friends who are engineers for big companies. I can't say the company names, but their initials are ExMbl. There is no lead in today's gasoline. If there were, my friends would be in jail.

Don't believe me? Type in "200 MPG supercarburetor" in at google. you might have to look on a few pages before you find the websites, and there are a few, but you would be surprised.

Well, I checked out that search. I came up with a guy who says (direct quote from the site), "The type of fuel used dictates the amount of propulsion (useful energy) and heat (wasted energy) generated. A fuel that explodes generates more propulsion and less heat than a fuel that burns..." ........ I can't believe this crap. The type of fuel has NOTHING to do with it. Its how the machine uses the energy. Paper burns slowly. That's why its not used as automotive fuel. Hydrogen burns hot and quick. That's why its not used as automotive fuel. All fuels in combustion generate HEAT. Its how the machine uses that heat that determines its efficiency. Who cares what fuel it is. This guy tries to separate propulsion and heat. They are ONE AND THE SAME. An engine that uses heat well is efficient. One that doesn't... isn't.

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.

[bjdm151]

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

[RandomTask]

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.

Also, gasoline normally evaporates in the motor, but the amount is not significant enough for the car to run on the evaporated gasoline.

Uhh, the gasoline is atomized as soon as it leaves the carburator/fuel injector. The goal is to have the gasoline in a fine mist/vaporized

That's like saying, "you can beat your children, but only until their bruises are gone."

hahaha

[buickmastermind]

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.

[Evil Result]

Originally Posted by buickmastermind

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.

I feel helplees to help this poor soul... anyways. Thermal expansion is a good subject to read up on oh and the heat created by the fuel through the combustion process is energy -->HEAT IS ENERGY<---. you can't loose heat to energy thats sort of like saying I lost MY car keys to MYSELF.

[curtis73]

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.