Continued from page 1
We never want to fill our fuel tank to filler nozzle shut off, as that would give us a minimal surface area from which to vaporize our fuel and our mixture could then be too lean to run our engine. However, if one wanted to build a vapor chamber and install it above
top of
fuel tank and filler tube, there might not be much difference when
tank is overfilled. One thing we definitely want to avoid is liquid fuel in our vapor supply line. Though it is unlikely
liquid fuel would reach
carburetor,
more it wet
vapor supply line,
richer
mixture would be at
carburetor.
I envisioned a tri Y air bubbler on
fuel tank floor, to evenly distribute air in
tank. The line connecting to
old fuel supply line, inside
tank would split into two equal length lines of
same diameter from a Y or T connector. The two lines are then split into two more equal length tubes (fuel proof, of course) and porous air bubblers to make small bubbles moving through
fuel. This would give us a richer mixture at
fuel supply line, than a single tube with no air diffusers. I would terminate my air supply lines with those bronze fuel filters many carburetors used just ahead of
needle and seat assembly at
end of
supply line. Short term tests I did several years ago showed that
ceramic bubbler filter for fish aquariums gave very fine air bubbles and did not seriously deteriorate in gasoline. They were not very expensive.
I can only guess at supply line sizes. My guess is that
filtered air supply line need be no more than a quarter inch ID. The vapor supply line probably needs to be no greater than three eighths inch ID.
These are
basics of a cold vapor, fast burn fuel system. I would expect improvements to come rapidly following road testing. When we know
typical optimum spark timing and air/fuel mixtures, we can apply this knowledge to small engines with fixed spark timing, like lawn mowers, snow blowers and electrical power generators.
My expectations of fast burn performance is between two and three horsepower per cubic inch displacement, which would make fast burn conversion
best power bang for
dollar. No other modification can come close in dollar costs. Under most racing rules, fast burn would be legal for
allowed fuel and add more power than supercharging or nitrous oxide injection. Yet, these power boosters will add a lot more power to a fast burn engine than to a slow burn engine. Hence,
fast burn conversion will out perform slow burn by a wide margin, regardless of class allowed modifications. The fast burn conversion can also be camouflaged to look stock by plumbing
supply line through a non functional fuel pump.
As to economy, Charles Pogue exceeded 200 MPG with his hot vapor, ‘37 V-8 Ford, which would rarely yield 20 MPG in slow burn configuration. Uniform cold vapor might have allowed him to achieve
300 MPG economy he was shooting for, while more than doubling stock power output. When fast burn conversions become common, performance and economy contests will lead to rapid improvements in
very simple technology.
As to emissions, if we are consuming less than 10% of
fuel per mile driven, emissions will be less than 10% of
slow burn equivalent. Burning 100% of
fuel on a shortened power stroke, will further dramatically reduce emissions, probably to less than 5% of slow burn engines. In addition,
much higher power outputs of fast burn engines allows engine downsizing. A 300 cu. in. slow burn engine can be replaced with a 140 cu. in. fast burn engine and still provide a power increase. Economy is improved, along with emissions. Big cars and trucks Americans favor, in fast burn configuration will easily exceed hybrid electric cars in economy and reduced emissions, as well as power. On
other hand, a fast burn hybrid could top 400 MPG if we want to go that far.
I would love to hear from any individuals or groups already doing fast burn conversions and learn what they have learned. While
piston engine has had a bad rap for efficiency due to
liquid fuel systems,
Tesla Turbine, seldom used as a combustion engine, can be built as a very lightweight, compact, multi stage, supercharged, exhaust scavenged 30 horsepower per pound, fast burn engine. The Tesla Turbine with only one moving part is cheap and easy to manufacture in a small machine shop. The turbine requires no drive train except
connection to
drive wheels. No gear reductions, instant tire spinning torque and instant rotational reversal for engine braking. Stay tuned for more on
potential of this remarkable engine, developed early in
20th Century and virtually ignored by industry ever since, except for vastly superior pumps.

Freelance writer published on many websites and newspapers. justanotherview.com edhowes@hotmail.com