r u sure theyr wivestales.
i know that internal gasoline combustion engines r only 25% efficient
that means at most you would get 4 times the mileage without changing
anything other than the engine
come to think of it, it is kind of fishey form a chemical engineer's
standpoint. and there is no way to get all the energy out of gas through
an engine without losing heat to the surroundings...*ENERGY LOSS*. and
there is no such thing of a frictionless surface.. *ENERGY LOSS*. and on
top of that, they don't do anything to the engine itself, just the
induction system.
REALLY FISHY!
i have to see the literature that my friend has on this.
-Master Of Reality
'93 Dakota Sport
318 CID
auto (unfortunately)
4X2
short bed/cab
On Thu, 23 Jan 1997, Dave Clement-LDC009 wrote:
> I got to step in hear now. That's one of the oldest wives tales going. It
> started back in 73/74 during the first oil embargo. You better rethink your
> signature line if you actually believe those stories.
>
> Dave Clement
>
> _____________________________________________________________________________
> ___
> From: mrh2047@megahertz.njit.edu@INTERNET on Thu, Jan 23, 1997 05:59 PM
> Subject: Re: Intro & some experiences
>
> YES>>> YES>>> YES
>
>
> the tech is there
>
>
> did you ever hear od a vapor carb
>
>
>
>
> someone told me about it 2 years ago
>
> he said that he had a caddy in the 60's that he went 1000 miles and the
> gague never moved.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> turned out that the company bought the car back for $50,000 and his chouce
> of any new caddy
>
> i didn't believe it too much
> until
>
> i told a friend on mine and he (JUST TODAY) found somthing on the internet
>
>
>
> a long time ago vapor carbs were invented but it is hush hush
>
> oil companies will go out of business if they get released
>
> i was thinking of doing a research paper on them for school but it will be
> too hard to find info
>
> the idea is that the fuel gets heated to the point where it turns to a
> vapor before it enters the combustion chamber
>
> THE TECH IS THERE BUT people r worried about losing their businesses so
> they bribe the inventors to sell
>
>
> if anyone is interested, let me know and i will find the website where
> they talk about them
>
> another thing you have to think about.
> those caddys had bigblocks in them and what do you think a 1.0 liter geo
> metro 3 cyl would get of the caddy got 200 mpg
>
>
>
>
> -Master Of Reality
>
>
> '93 Dakota Sport
> 318 CID
> auto (unfortunately)
> 4X2
> short bed/cab
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 23 Jan 1997 mahoneyr@syr.lmco.com wrote:
>
> > Folks
> > consider all the Gas milage variances from the Ground thumping muscle cars
>
> > to the family junker winter rats, to the 50mpg commuter cars!
> > Doesn't anyone ever wonder why, with all of the modern technology that
> > Detroit (;^} or wherever has, that these places don't make engines
> > that get 100 Mpg or better? IMHO, the technology is there. (maybe not for
> > 100mpg but certainly higher that 14!).
> > The reason this doesn't happen is that EXXON among others owns Controlling
> > interest in companies like GM. They'd only be cutting thier own throats
> > Their opinion is (in my opinion),The Environment be damned. Its the
> > almighty dollar that is most important! Let our kids worry about the
> > planet!
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:07:30 EDT