[DeTomaso] NPC good idea for mileage.

[Jeff Cobb]

Thank you for sending.
What you showed us is a fine system for air/fuel vapor induction on its crudest yet functional primal level.
Various systems of this type came out and were on working automotive and motorcycle functions in 1883 +-.
American George Brayton used a device like this in about 1880 to function as a carb and he used a screen 
to separate the wave reversal of combustion flame.
Karl Benz first Patent cycle used a vapor device like this in/about 1890.
The 1894 Hildebrand & Wolfmüller used this system and I photoed it at the 2013 Pebble.

Of course this system is crude and in the 120 design years since has become more usable for our daily drives.
What this u-tube shows and we all know is that a well designed steady state gasoline engine is many times more 
economical that an engine with varying rpm. 
Why can't GM, Ford, Chrysler, etc do it too? 
They cannot use this system because it does not provide enough horsepower and drivability.

This is why future cars will have steady state gasoline engine providing power for varying rpm electric motors,
trains have used this hybrid concept starting in 1903.

Gasoline consumed will equal specific horsepower and torque output and only will a very lightly loaded small h/p output gas engine ever achieve 50 +- mpg in daily use. Any higher number would be B/S, not properly drivable and unable to carry load.

Many English cars after WWII ran on coal dust and or wood fume vapors from their pulled trailers. 
Many fuel/air types are possible but most people desire functional use over economy.

Thanks,
Jeff Cobb


On Aug 23, 2014, at 6:16 PM, Jeff Detrich <jjdetrich at gmail.com> wrote:

>   What do you think of this!
>   Jeff
>   6559
>  
>   [1]https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10201677077718343&fref=nf
>   
>   Maybe people make fun of Rednecks and their ideas but here is one
>   Genius who will make you stop and think for a minute. He watched his
>   neighbor do this with a lawn mower and used the same technique on his
>   V-6 Dodge Dakota pick-up truck.  Why can't GM, Ford, Chrysler, etc do
>   it too?
> 
> References
> 
>   1. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10201677077718343&fref=nf
> _______________________________________________
> 
> Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
> 
> DeTomaso mailing list
> DeTomaso at poca.com
> http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com

-------------- next part --------------
   Thank you for sending.

   What you showed us is a fine system for air/fuel vapor induction on its
   crudest yet functional primal level.

   Various systems of this type came out and were on working automotive
   and motorcycle functions in 1883 +-.
   American George Brayton used a device like this in about 1880 to
   function as a carb and he used a screen
   to separate the wave reversal of combustion flame.
   Karl Benz first Patent cycle used a vapor device like this in/about
   1890.
   The 1894 Hildebrand & Wolfmueller used this system and I photoed it at
   the 2013 Pebble.
   Of course this system is crude and in the 120 design years since has
   become more usable for our daily drives.
   What this u-tube shows and we all know is that a well designed steady
   state gasoline engine is many times more
   economical that an engine with varying rpm.
   Why can't GM, Ford, Chrysler, etc do it too?
   They cannot use this system because it does not provide enough
   horsepower and drivability.
   This is why future cars will have steady state gasoline engine
   providing power for varying rpm electric motors,
   trains have used this hybrid concept starting in 1903.
   Gasoline consumed will equal specific horsepower and torque output and
   only will a very lightly loaded small h/p output gas engine ever
   achieve 50 +- mpg in daily use. Any higher number would be B/S, not
   properly drivable and unable to carry load.
   Many English cars after WWII ran on coal dust and or wood fume vapors
   from their pulled trailers.
   Many fuel/air types are possible but most people desire functional use
   over economy.
   Thanks,
   Jeff Cobb
   On Aug 23, 2014, at 6:16 PM, Jeff Detrich <[1]jjdetrich at gmail.com>
   wrote:

       What do you think of this!
       Jeff
       6559


     [1][2]https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10201677077718343&fref=nf

       Maybe people make fun of Rednecks and their ideas but here is one
       Genius who will make you stop and think for a minute. He watched
     his
       neighbor do this with a lawn mower and used the same technique on
     his
       V-6 Dodge Dakota pick-up truck.  Why can't GM, Ford, Chrysler, etc
     do
       it too?
     References
       1.
     [3]https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10201677077718343&fref=nf
     _______________________________________________
     Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
     DeTomaso mailing list
     [4]DeTomaso at poca.com
     http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com

References

   1. mailto:jjdetrich at gmail.com
   2. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10201677077718343&fref=nf
   3. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10201677077718343&fref=nf
   4. mailto:DeTomaso at poca.com