Has anyone ever heard of this thecnology that makes your car get 100%+ increase in milage?

Question

Is this technology safe? Is vaporizing fuel before it is placed in the intake dangerous, as it could explode? Has anyone used this type of technology. Does it work? Tell me what you know about it.... Follow the link and watch the 3 videos..


http://www.preignitioncc.com/default/viewVideo.htm

Some details... How it works. Liquid gasoline can not burn. This is a fact. It's the vapor that burns, and not the liquid, this is basic physics. So what this thing does is it vaporizes the fuel before it is injected into the motor, thus creating a 'burnable fuel". The O2 sensor will read that the car is running rich, and lean out the fuel it provides to the injectors. The way it works in all cars now, is that the injecters inject liquid fuel into the cylinder/intake, thus creating a very inefficient burn.
Proof of why the auto makers are on the side of the oil companies. And this is not from any web site, it's a case of logic. If your car's computer detects a lean fuel mixture, (creating better efficiency) it will default to a high rich mixture automatically after a couple days. why would they do this? Because they want to make sure your car is getting poor milage, and thus helping the oil companies. They are in cahoots. basically I was asking for testimonials I know how it works

Answer 1

This is an urban legend and a scam -- it's been circulating for over thirty years in various forms. There is only so much energy available in a single drop of petrol and no mechanical gizmo is going to double (or in the case of carburetored vehicles, triple) the energy output.

Answer 2

These companies will make up any story with a kernel of truth to them and blow it way out of proportion to sell their gizmo's----yes, the injectors inject fuel into the engine or intake but it's not drops of fuel--it's a very fine mist. As stated in other posts, there's only so much energy content in a gallon of gas and you'll never double the efficiency or fuel economy of gas engines, period. Most of the efficiency gains in the last twenty years have come from lighter vehicles, more effective transmissions and overdrives, better drag coefficients, better engineering at making engines that operate at the highest level of efficiency over a broader scope of operation. Look back at some of the cars of the 50's and 60's and some 4 and 6 cyl models were getting 30-plus MPG--just didn't have the emission requirements we do now.
Forget about all these vapor carbs, fuel line magnets, tornado air inlets and other wacky gizmo's--they just prey on people's desire to get some kind of miracle cure that's being kept a secret...that's why it works.
My two cents worth, Paul

Answer 3

Similar technology was developed and used in Russia almost 30 years ago. Instead of a common at that time carburetor, they used two merged layers of metal. The first one was heated, and the second - cooled beyond freezing point. Gas film flowing from one to the other would evaporate very effectively. It did provide significant savings but starting cold engine was a challenge. That's why this system was used in the southern parts of the country exclusively. Can't tell if there were any further developments.
As far as water goes, it was also tried but for a different reason - to keep the combustion temp down thus producing lower NOx emissions. In those tests, exteneded (30,000 mi or so) period caused cavitation to the cylinder walls BUT neither water nor gas was at the state this system does.
And finally, to address your legit safety concern, there already IS gas - unburnt - in the catalytic converter so what's the difference?
The only question I have is how this affects combustion temp - will it, for example, burn valves?

Answer 4

This is the typical "snake oil" scams that have been around since the advent of the car.

Additionally, you've supplied a source that is touting its own product - hardly an unbiased source. What about other parties or scientists? Have they tried the item? Have they been able to replicate the claims being made by the source?

There are many people out there (on these boards, in fact) that have an agenda to promote. No matter what you try to tell them, they just shut their eyes, grit their teeth, and shake their heads. This is not the way to promote a sound energy policy! Sound energy policy comes depends on truth as the impetous, and no one with an agenda has any clue what the truth really is.

ADDENDUM: The Olds being referenced by another poster is the Jetfire, which was made in '62-63 and somewhat like a Starfire version of the F85. I believe its engine was a turbo 215 Buick.

Answer 5

The "Fish" carburetor story in a new "skin"! This probably on snopes.com but I haven't bothered to check.

Water injection kits were available aftermarket from the likes of Edlebrock in the mid/late 70's after lead was removed from gasoline and GM cars were notorious for "after run" or valves clattering upon acceleration. It also was supposed to increase the gas mileage, a big thing due to the oil embargo and gas lines reaching around the block.

As to the conspiracy part, nothing would suprise me.

Answer 6

I recall that in the 60's Osmobile had a water injection system on a F-85 model called the Jetstar. My memory is pretty vague on this. It only lasted a year or two as I recall.

If there was something that doubled the mileage, don't you think that the car companies would have it on their cars. That would save a lot of money, instead of trying to invernt other ways to save gas and meet the CAFE ratings the government puts on the car manufacturers.

The water injection system was to reduce knock as I recall again, it was more for power than gas savings.

good luck.

Answer 7

I read something about this before, I think it said that there is no point in vaporizing the fuel before. It has no benefit, but then again I can't remember it was a while back. And since it was a while back that I first heard about this I would have a hard time believing that everyone is not using it, if it worked.

Answer 8

I dought it works realy