Re: 3X Gas Engines Sniffing Vapors
 

Just remember that all those waste guey products are additives used to try and get better gas mileage, clean your engine, prevent knock and whatever else they dream of. Once an idea like yours catches on in cars, your system will force big-oil to change their gas add-ins and get rid of what's not needed!

Re: 3X Gas Engines Sniffing Vapors
 

What are the regular emission testing requirements in your state? This set up will likely mean increased NOx.

Re: 3X Gas Engines Sniffing Vapors
 

Not really. If you truly wanted to run your vehicle on vapor, you would not use gasoline at all. You would install a natural gas conversion kit. Formulations of gasoline would not change at all.

Re: 3X Gas Engines Sniffing Vapors
 

It varies depending on the location that you live in the state. In the area I live in right now, if you have a '96 or newer vehicle and the CEL is not on and you pass the safety inspection that you're good. However, if the vehicle is older than a '96 model then they put the car on a dyno and check emissions at 2 speeds.


Yes, it may increase NOx, but this is why I have incorporated EGR into my lawn mower setup, and the vehicle will have the same thing, and possibly water injection to prevent the formation of NOx.


For a bit of background info on me, I have taken a car in the past that had 3.1L V-6, turbocharged it, installed bigger injectors, installed an aftermarket more agressive camshaft, threw the stock computer in the trash and installed a Halltech computer. I then tuned it on the street and got it to pass the emmissions test on the dyno. If I can get that car to pass emmissions, then I KNOW I can get a vapor car to pass the sniffer test.

Re: 3X Gas Engines Sniffing Vapors
 

<sigh> This thread misses the mark. Let me count the ways.

1) Most gasoline engines are about 35% thermodynamically efficient. There is no way to get 3 x 35% = 105% energy out of a gallon of gas.

2) Even doubling is the efficincy is impossible due to the Carnot cycle theroretical limit of (T hot - T cold) / T cold.

3) Natural gas engines never have liquid in the cylinder, so there is no combustion "hold up" during the power stroke. And nat gas efficinecy, for a given cyclinder dimension, is quite similar to a gasoline engine.

4) Diesel engines are more efficicient, yet the diesel fuel doesn't evaporate more than gasoline as a prelude to combustion.

There's some flaws that I see........

1. You assume the motor is running at perfect tune and in perfect shape. VERY few internal combustion engines are in fact in perfect tune and in perfect shape. I base all of my research on real world facts, not on laboratory "perfect world", no variables facts.

2. See #1

3. Natural gas has a MUCH lower BTU than gas, but you say that Natural gas effeciency is quit similar to a gasoline engine of comparable size. This is more proof that burning a vapor is much more effecient than trying to burn liquid.

4. Diesel fuel has a MUCH higher BTU rating than gasoline, and requires a MUCH higher compression ratio in order to self ignite the fuel. Since the diesel burns at a slower rate than other fuels, diesel engines have a longer stroke compared to the bore to take advantage of the slower burn, and they have a smaller rev limit. Not to mention that modern day diesel engine fuel systems are VERY similar to gasoline direct injection systems in that VERY high fuel pressures are used, thus helping to vaporize the fuel.

Try Dyno-tab fuel stabilizer by Chemplex. I found this in 2008. I used it in my amazing mazda to get it up to 56 mpg. They also made an additive for the engine that i had one bottle left and added to my just bought 95 mazda. I could run the tank dry without any worry about water or other gunk because it is kept in suspention and burned. Its in a tablet form so no spilling, the stuff works. Hope this helps.