G oog le BadWeB | Login/out | Topics | Search | Custodians | Register | Edit Profile

Buell Forum » Knowledge Vault (tech, parts, apparel, & accessories topics) » Engine » Fuel System: EFI/DDFI, Carb., Filter, Pump, Tank, Filler-Cap, Fuel » Archives » Archive through February 03, 2003 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Rick_A
Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2003 - 01:26 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Vaporization generally pertains to a complete and instantaneous evaporation.

Regardless of your ranting I stand by the statement that some vaporization occurs at all times, but not enough to have any real significance in a carb.

About the Republic of Kalifornia...please... CARB would probably put emissions devices on sphincters if they could. I guess the rest of the nation is clueless, huh?

Blake, why don't you answer your own questions above? Please enlighten us...or are you just going to continue saying that it's just how you say it is because it is?

You have been taking things personal here Blake...more than usual. IF YOU HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS JUST LET US KNOW INSTEAD OF CONTINUING TO STATE YOUR THEORIES THAT YOU PRESENT AS FACT. Is that so hard?

And still...about the carb heat...it's not going to make that much of a difference when the air is flowing constantly through it at a fairly high rate. The fuel in the float bowl first mixes with this air before it goes out the carb ports. The fuel in the bowl itself isn't there for long either. Again...there's a HUGE difference between a carb and your injector example.

Pressure, volume, and temperature are related for gases by the Ideal Gas Law. So, within a venturi pressure decreases, the volume remains the same though its velocity is increased, and so the temperature must also drop. Also, all carb surfaces will be cooled proportionately to the air velocity. That's why carb plates can ice when the temp is above freezing. So, by common sense it is highly unlikely that there is any appreciable vaporization in a carb, despite the pressure drop in the venturi.

About your heated intake and carb deal...sure aluminum is a conductor but they are INSULATED by RUBBER and PAPER seals and gaskets. As far as our bikes the radiant heat is a factor but not nearly as much when it's moving.

Like I've stated long ago...there are some carbs that attempt vaporization...but in any "normal" carb this is not the case!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Hootowl
Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2003 - 03:30 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Blake,
What do you mean? An African or European swallow?

Rick,
California recently tried to limit the number of cattle a rancher could have...due to their "tailpipe" emissions of methane.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Hans
Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2003 - 04:08 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Interesting article in the:
Groundschool – Aviation Meteorology
http://www.auf.asn.au/meteorology/section10.html

Adiabatic cooling - in the induction system the constrictions at the throttle valve and choke venturi cause a local increase in air velocity, with consequent increase in dynamic pressure and decrease in static pressure. Density remains constant so the temperature instantly decreases in line with the decrease in static pressure, refer 1.2 equation of state. This adiabatic cooling is more noticeable when the throttle is closed, or partly closed, for extended periods, but it is unlikely to be more than a 5°C drop at the coldest part, probably much less, say 2-3°C.

Refrigeration cooling - when fuel is injected into the airstream a certain amount evaporates. The latent heat for fuel evaporation is taken from the surrounding air and metal, which is already being cooled adiabatically. The temperature drop caused by refrigeration may be as much as 15°C, giving a total drop within the carburettor as high as 20°C. If the metal of the carburettor is thus reduced to a temperature at or below freezing cooled, or supercooled, water droplets will freeze on contact - as in airframe icing.


As far as I can follow the discussion in its relevancy it sustains the concept that vaporisation of the droplets of the "atomised" gas is the main cause for carburettor ice in light airplanes. Those air cooled engines are developed in the same time area as our twins and the same is true for their carburettors.
If the cooling effect is considerable, there must be considerable vaporisation.
When I bring back in memory how fast the cloud of droplets was vaporised at the old fashioned insecticide spray pumps (a very low volatile solution) it is clear that vaporisation takes place in the intake tract of an highly volatile fluid.
It has to be vaporised more or less, because even an ice cold engine can be started.
Hans.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Thunderbolt
Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2003 - 08:53 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

OK, Blake, let me get this straight, you were MAD because someone had the NERVE to say they didn't believe YOU (of all things! imagine!) You go on to blabber to and fro about how you had so impressively PROVED some scientific problem (HA!)...then a multitude of posts later, you say "I didn't work the actual number because I was feeling lazy; didn't feel like doing the math." Yes, that sounds like even you, deep beneath your many thick, thick layers of falsely placed arrogance even know that all you proved was...well, you've got more insults to give than proof of anything.

You were (and are) wrong, and I can see that when that happens you choose to act like a five year old brat and resort to name calling. I must say I enjoy the thought of you angrily pounding your keyboard in such a valiant effort to restore your over-inflated self esteem on a chat board...you're a complete joke!

over-and-out
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Buelliedan
Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2003 - 10:24 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Rick,
you said, "And still...about the carb heat...it's not going to make that much of a difference when the air is flowing constantly through it at a fairly high rate"

I guess you have never had to deal with vapor lock in a carb before? Key word being vapor!! As in vaporization. As in it can make quite a difference.

A good fighter knows when to jab and when to go for the knockout. I think you should jab a bit more. I have been in that ring with Blake before. He's not always 100% correct but he's usually pretty damn close so you need to soften him up with cold hard facts before you can even think about declaring yourself the victor.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Rick_A
Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2003 - 11:16 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Yeah...and is vapor lock a normal condition in a carb???!!! That's all I'm saying!

Where's Blake's cold hard facts? I Certainly don't see any there either. Gimme a break. That's all I've said from the start is I'd like some real proof of his theory that factors in only pressure and the assumption that the air/fuel flowing through the venturi is heated.

It's safe to assume that carb engineers knew what they were doing when they designed this device to function as a fuel atomizer under the conditions present in an internal combustion engine under any normal conditions.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Rick_A
Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2003 - 11:29 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

In Hans' post, I see the term evaporate used instead of vaporize. Hmmm...that's erroneous too Blake? It also states that the temp drop can be as much as 20 degrees celcius...would that not be "significant" in your book, Blake?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2003 - 03:20 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Rick,

"Vaporization generally pertains to a complete and instantaneous evaporation."
No it does not. Vaporization and evaporation are synonymous.

"Regardless of your ranting I stand by the statement that some vaporization occurs at all times, but not enough to have any real significance in a carb."
Careful Matt will call you names and stuff for using that terrible word. :rolleyes: Rick, though I am unsure of that statement's validity, I in fact never contended that the vaporized fuel had any "real significance"; I simply stated that it does indeed vaporize within the carburetor.

What would happen if all the fuel vaporized in the carburetor and intake tract?

Would there necessarily be any "significant" effect? What would that effect be?


Since the 80oF boiling point didn't convince you, here's another good question to get you thinking...

Can liquids exist in a vacuum?

"About the Republic of Kalifornia...please... CARB would probably put emissions devices on sphincters if they could. I guess the rest of the nation is clueless, huh?"
No, just a few years behind. We'll all have evaporative emissions canisters very soon. It is a valid concern. Why? Because gasoline vaporizes quite handily and those vapors are harmful to the atmosphere and us humans.

"Blake, why don't you answer your own questions above?"
Rick, I know the answers. I was hoping, since you seem to fancy yourself expert on the subject, that you might bother to learn a pertinent thing or two. You are after all intelligent and curious. Unlike the vague mental/conceptual grasp associated with simple memorization, actually learning a concept through self directed discovery/questioning leads one's mind to fully assimilate, digest and grasp non-intuitive concepts. If you learn on your own through investigative questioning you own the concept of study. It's why they made us do homework. ohwell

"Please enlighten us"
Not yet. You owe it to yourself to do some hard thinking and investigating into this subject. Don't be discouraged, it only entails no less than four disciplines/subjects within the field of mechanical engineering. That's a complete semester's worth of learnin'. If you really just want the answers I'll give them to you. I actually already typed them up. I'm just afraid that after I give you the answers, you will once again say "I don't believe you." Then I'd have to "prove" them to you. Unfortunately to actually really truly do that I'd have to first teach you calculus and chemistry, the prerequisites to learning/understanding fluid mechanics, thermodynamics, and heat transfer.

I'd be up for that, but you'd need to send me your tuition first. ;)

I think maybe you are starting to get the picture on this vaporization/evaporation thing. I started typing this yesterday evening. Now I see Hans' excellent post and your reply. I'm going to go ahead and hit the button on this one and respond to your new comments later. It's just too nice out (70oF and sunny) to be inside right now. I'd be riding if the bike weren't in track mode and waiting on race parts for next Sunday's track day/school. This is fun stuff ain't it?


Matt, I'm sorry you are so unhappy.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Rick_A
Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2003 - 09:28 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Hate to burst you bubble Blake, but an engine is technically not a vacuum. It's more an air pump. Atmospheric pressure gets pushed into the engine due to the volume displaced by the piston. This "pressure difference" is the principal that also pushes the fuel up the jets in the venturi. Also, the lower pressure area in a carb exists only in the venturi. The pressure returns to atmospheric after passing that area...as energy cannot be created or destroyed. The "vacuum" in regards to an engine is a term that applies to the pressure differences as there is always a positive absolute pressure present. Seems like you have some to learn yourself. Look too hard at the details and you miss the big picture. We're not in space, buddy.

If fuel became and/or remained a vapor you'd not need an enricher or choke for cold starts. As it is it's needed 'cause a liquid will not burn...and more fuel is needed 'cause not enough is vaporized in the cold combustion chamber to support proper combustion without it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Rick_A
Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2003 - 10:03 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

...and another thing nagging me...evaporate and vaporize are synonymous...they are nearly the same...but not exactly the same. Just think about the contexts in which they are used.
I guess sometimes common sense is an uncommon virtue
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 03:17 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Rick,

Please drop the smart ass attitude. I'm growing weary of it. I have no bubble; if I did you certainly would not be bursting it.

Where the hell did I say "an engine is a vacuum"????!!!! :?

Yes, an ideal (perfect) venturi returns compressible fluid flow back to its entry pressure as it exits.

That however is not the only place in a carburetor that is subject to a vacuum. There is another area that is subject to a vacuum. I'm talking about a slightly open (mostly closed) throttle, like when idling. When the throttle is closed and the engine is trying to SUCK air into the cylinders during each intake stroke, the closed throttle (part of the carburetor) almost entirely blocks the free flow of air/fuel into the engine; the idle circuit allows only a small amount of air/fuel to pass. A significant vacuum is thus developed within the intake tract between the engine and the throttle.

Besides, a vacuum, as in "vacuum cleaner" (I guess that is what you are referring to???) is damn sure an air pump.

You are correct "energy cannot be created nor destroyed", but it can be transmitted out of or into a discreet system. Do you know the difference?

Yes the term vacuum can refer to a "lower than ambient" pressure. When talking about the engine and intake that is precisely the meaning intended.

When I asked you if liquids can exist in a vacuum I was not talking about an engine. Just trying to open your mind to how liquids can behave in different scenarios. You are astutely correct, the environment within an engine is not like outer space. Here's another one for you...

Can liquid exist in equilibrium in an ambient gaseous environment whose pressure is below the liquid's vapor pressure? You have studied up on vapor pressure, right?

Rick,
Do you perceive fluid mechanics and thermodynamics as "common sense" topics? ohwell

Evaporate and vaporize are synonymous despite your ideas of their more popular usage. Like I said before, the popular technical name of the part of an air conditioning or heat pump system wherein the working fluid changes/converts from a hot liquid into a cold gas is called... an evaporator. You could call it a vaporizer but someone might think you were talking about one of those things your mom used to fill with water and plug in to put moisture into the air to help clear your stuffed up nose when you had a cold. Some of those vaporizers boil the water into steam, some atomize the water into an extremely fine mist and spray it into the air where it then turns quicly into a gas.

In a technical discussion involving thermodynamics, the terms vaporize and evaporate are 100% interchangeable.

It is becoming apparent to me that you may not be interested in learning this subject, rather you have made this a battle of ego driven rhetoric. I'm not interested in continuing such a pointless discussion.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 03:32 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Just to clarify. An engine is neither a vacuum nor an air pump. It is an internal combustion engine that takes in air and fuel and expels the products of combustion along with lots of heat. Shut off and drain the fuel, open the throttle and crank the starter, then you have an air pump. Similar machines lacking an ignition system are known as compressors. Hook a hose to the intake, attach it to a filter and tank, run another hose out of the tank and if you keep it all air tight, you can use it to suck stuff off the floor. Similar machines are known as vacuum cleaners. Ever see how you can use the exhaust of a vacuum cleaner to inflate an air mattress?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Mikej
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 10:06 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

That sounds like it might not be too good for cylinder walls. But I did look at a panhead engine once that now that I think of it could have been used as a vacuum cleaner by the looks of it's cylinder walls.

MikeJ (Just a diversion in a divergent conversation.)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lornce
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 10:14 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

My T-Stormed S1 with race pipe makes a great leaf blower....

jackassedly,
Lornce
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Deanna73
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 12:19 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Hi all!
I hope this is the right place to ask a motorcycle carburetor question. We're looking for jetting suggestions for my S2. Is the consensus that we should go with the 190 fast jet and 45 slow jet as listed above?

I tried the search function but couldn't find anything specific to an S2 Thunderbolt. Some of our friends say to modify the needles and slide too?

tia

d
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bomber
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 12:46 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Deanna . . .this is CLEARLY not a place to ask motorcycle-carb-related questions . . . . . just look at the above threads, and you'll easily see that it is the Great Buell Debating and Marching Society . . . . ..

(humor) . . . . there's all sorts of good data here, D, and this IS the right place to post looking for it . . .. . I'll allow my ignorance of S2s keep me quite (for a change), and will limit my remarks to saying you should look at all the systems in your carb (slow and main jets, pilot, needle, slide . .. . . . )

you may wish to post you question, in a slightly different form, under general discussion topic, alerting folks that there's a carb question over hear in the Debating and Marching page . . . . you may find someone who isn't a physics major who actually owns an S2 who can give you some theoretically wrong-headed advice that has been proven empirically (grin)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bluzm2
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 01:50 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Blake,
If Rick's not interested in a little Thermodynamics and fluid mechanics 101, I am.
Any recomendations on books and or web sites to give a good solid basic understanding?
Not looking for real hardcore stuff to start with but a good starting point.

Brad
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 02:11 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Deanna,

Bomber was lots of help there wasn't he? Please do not post tech questions on the GDB. This is the place. Thanks!

Check the suggestions at the top of the page. You may find that a 190 main jet is too rich. If so try a 185 or even a 180. Good luck.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 02:25 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Brad,
Unfortunately no, I'm not familiar with any non-textbook oriented material or web sites dealing with introductory fluid mechanics or thermodynamics. A high school physics text book might be your best bet. Check your locak library. There may be an applicable volume in the ubiquitous "... for Dummies" series of reference books. Some of those books are actually pretty darn good.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Rick_A
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 02:32 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Blake...there are different types of carbs...all the same principals apply...and there is no vacuum...the use of that word in and of itself in this context is considered improper.

You said vacuum...I was just making the point that it's more pump than vacuum...but you're right, it's obviously neither.

Even a throttle plate at idle does not create a vacuum Blake! Neither is a closed slide...

From Webster's
Vacuum
n.1.A space with nothing at all in it
2.A space from which most of the air and gas has been taken
3.Any void
adj.1.Of, or used to make a vacuum
2.having or working by vacuum
vt.to clean with a vacuum cleaner.


Look at that, none apply.

I'm sure you've done many inventive things with a vacuum cleaner...but what do I care?

The same amount of air passes a throttle plate at idle but with a higher velocity...NOT A VACUUM. For it to be a vacuum it would have to be a reduced volume of air, wouldn't it? Pressure is reduced but increases after passing that area of restriction. The throttle plate is giving the idle circuit/transfer ports the "signal" it needs to extract the needed amount of fuel. That's the only reason it's there. The slide acts like a variable venturi in our carbs. At this point it'd be at it's lowest position to ensure a sufficient velocity through it to ensure efficient operation. The slide operates in a manner that basically automatically varies the size of the carb to suit the engine demand/throttle input. The total velocity in the carb due to the variable venturi and throttle plate remains fairly constant...hence the name Constant Velocity. Regardless of the pressure through the carb and intake tract, the cylinder would ideally take in atmospheric pressure, but there are losses...which is why 100% volumetric efficiency and above in a normally aspirated engine is generally impossible...and due to the fact that the system operates under atmospheric pressure, the mixture going into the cylinder will not be vaporized; it is considered atomized...there's no way around that...at least in our application with a standard carb, under normal conditions. The absolute pressure through the system will always be very close to atmospheric. If there is any fuel vaporization it would be brief and short lived...making the point pretty moot.

I never said those two words...vaporize and evaporate...were not synonymous. However, who would say...the glass of water I left in the open vaporized last night...or...the mixture in a combustion chamber evaporates really, really quick during compression? Gimme a break, man.

Blake, when you talk all I hear is ego speaking. When you make your examples, you use extremes that don't pertain to the situation and wonder why I respond like I do. I feel I've said everything I've needed to say above. Have you done the math, Blake? You prove everything else you can through mathematics, so why don't you do it here?...with real numbers...and not something contrived. That's all you had to do from the start...but you're teaching me something, right? You don't need a degree to understand the basic operation of a carburetor.

You take unnecessary personal jabs at anyone who doesn't agree with you. If you live alone, I can see why.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sarodude
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 02:32 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Anyone have any input on QwikSilver carbs from Edelbrock?

Are they as easily tunable as they suggest? How do they compare with a flatslide Mikuni for tunability? How do they compare with a Keihin CV for rideability, part throttle happiness, and low RPM metering? Do they adjust for air density as well as the Keihin CVs?

-Saro
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Rick_A
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 02:35 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Deanna, the recommendations are a good starting point...but to get the best mileage/performance you should get a dyno tune with an EGA ("sniffer" )
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Court
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 03:16 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

>>>You take unnecessary personal jabs at anyone who doesn't agree with you. If you live alone, I can see why.


Is it just the "all I see is semantics" writer in me, or is that border on a self-contradicting phrase?

Seems to toy with logic like the old Wyoming Law..."when two trains approach on tracks that intersect; they must both stop and one can not proceed until the other is completely past".

At least THAT I understand.....

Down boys!

Court
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Josh
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 03:21 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Hey Court, wanna be an unbiased judge?

Who's winning?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bomber
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 04:18 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

While I'm not equipped to be an unbiased judge, and therefor can't figure who's winning (don't have enough of the proper education), I CAN recognize whining . . .. .

sorry blake, I'll not make suggestions about posting on the general page again . . . . .
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Hans
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 05:48 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Here we have an amount of cars riding on LPG: Liquid Petrol Gas. You have do the maths very well to see if it would be economical in your case. It is much cheaper than gas but road tax is higher. You need an expensive pressure tank which takes room in the trunk. The horsepower of the engine is 10 percent less and the consumption 10 % more: Roughly proportional with the lesser energy of the same volume of that liquid and of gas. But it is fed in the gaseous form in the intake tract. With other words: There is not a loss of power because partly unburnt gas in a normal combustion gas engine because the carburettor only "atomises" No Fish carburettor can do much better than the stock carb of our Buell, which is really an highly sophisticated contraption. Or.... What was the question ???

Hans.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Rick_A
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 07:23 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I'm curious...what kind of mileage are people getting?

I have to deal with a tremendous amount of stoplights here...and I like leaving them in a hurry. As a result my mileage is down to about 35mpg for city driving...on the highway I typically get around 50.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Socal
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 08:20 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Right around 45mpg city and highway riding combined on my 40 mile daily commute.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 09:24 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I looked at the Fish carb on the web ... pretty, but I doubt MUCH better than you could do with a really well massaged weber or carter 2 bbl. I had a mechanic roomie that played with my Carter bbd, knife edged the throttle plate, ported & polished (he was really bored) & handed it back to me (I had asked him to just rebuild it } with revised starting procedures & care & feeding info. picked up 2-4 mpg & better accel.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 09:35 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

That was in a 78 dodge Van by the by. Another pal went to a Pouge Carb seminar & built one for his VW, but had problems with small fires & had to manually switch from normal to vapor mode. The Pouge used a heat exchanger (coil of ss tubing for fuel, exhaust flowing thru tin can to vaporize fuel) and pumped vapor into carb after warm up. wee petcock acted as "jet" to control mixture (crude even by 50's tech)
« Previous Next »

Topics | Last Day | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Rules | Program Credits Administration