Sinister 87

iTrader: (2)

I found this info on another site and found it to be very interesting. You can form your own opinions but still intriguing.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread572015/pg1

I know this doesn't really fit into the media format, so I added a pic of my vette and camaro to to abide by the protocol and I thought others here my like the read.

MYSTIC-1SC

iTrader: (14)

very interesting to read.

enigmah

iTrader: (1)

Yeah i kind of figured... I dont run cats... never have.. never will.. sorry folks

Sinister 87

iTrader: (2)

"The better converter of which you speak is a plasma vortex reformer. A really cool name for a really simple device. It has the potential to make full size SUVs get 100 mpg, or better while giving better power, and performance. I.E. a 100 mpg hotrod. They work, they are easy to build, and they are VERY against the law on cars. You can disappear for making one, and trying to sell it. People already have. Shysters have ruined the reputation of the technology, most likely on purpose, but it works regardless of the court of opinion. I have a weed eater that has one on it, and it will run on old oil, soda pop, and wizz(yes urine). In fact it runs better on garbage than petrol, you just have to clean the container out often, and keep it watery to pass through the little orifaces. People in europe build, and use them alot, no problem. They even run helicopters on them.
A project engine I helped with, a chevy 350, ran on a mixture of petrol, and water for 8 hours on 1 quart of water, and 1/2 pint of petrol at 3500 RPM 30% load making about 175 bhp with a PVR. You could breathe the exhaust emissions without ill effect. Suicide by asfixiation in the garage would no longer be an option. You use model airplane carbs to get the mist small, and fine enough before going through the reformer. It was a bench engine, I'm not brave enough to push my luck, and actually put one on a street machine. I like breathing.
Even without non-conventional tech, the current configuration of our automobiles have the capacity already built in to perform to an order of magnitude better than they do. I was really excited when Ford launched its lean burn research, it was the way to go, but it got ahem... mysteriously derailed. NoX emissions come from a very hot burn. The most efficient expenditure of your fuel is total, and complete burn which is the hottest, but also creates more oxides of nitrogen (NoX). Nox can only be controlled by quenching combustion temperature, I.E. cooling it down a little. This can be accomplished in 2 ways: richer than stoichiometric, or leaner than stoichiometric. Guess which way the industry does it.
Quenching combustion temp. through air abundance works better, makes better power by extracting more power per unit of fuel, and is better for the longevity of the engine, Ford proved this in its research which is very hard to find the results of. The problem used to be that the AFR curve was very steep on the lean side of stoich., but more gradual on the rich side so rich was easier. Today our modern sensors, and computers make this problem a non issue. Wide band sensors are more than sensitive enough, and modern PCMs are more than fast enough to make the calculations, and changes. And before some jar head says that a lean mixture will burn your valves, get a clue, an over lean mixture will only burn valves at wide open throttle conditions for extended periods of time because the engine is pushed to it's max volumetric efficiency, and has no "breathing room" to put a simple term on it. Ultra lean burn at part throttle conditions is totally safe, and the answer to all our fuel, and emissions problems. It is a super simple, and very viable fix. We have been fed a pack of lies to the contrary. Every car on the road should get at minimum 30% better mileage than it does now, and produce 80% fewer emissions, and ZERO NoX, while giving better power output. It would require NO MODIFICATION other than throwing away the cat, and properly programming the computer. However even the mechanics today are taught that the way the PCM is programmed is devine inspiration from God, and cannot be changed. In fact changing your PCM programming is called tampering, and is a federal offence. Carefully designed to ensure that we all suck gas and spew filth no exceptions."

djsanchez2

iTrader: (14)

Wow no wonder our cars "appear" to run so rich w/o cats. WTF, looks like it's time for gutted cat replacements and a good tune. Maybe i can save some gas for once

LS1 Sounds

iTrader: (11)

Interesting read, thanks.

Joshiedoom

iTrader: (4)

Emissions are a joke anyway.

Who didnt know that?

oange ss

iTrader: (50)

whoever wrote that article is an idiot

Sinister 87

iTrader: (2)

Don't be so quick to judge, there may be some hidden truths in it.

maxgee

iTrader: (5)

good read.
i've heard of guys coming out with awesome ideas to save money and make more power while doing..... they all seem to go away.
there's a car show every friday in ft lauderdale and one of the guys built a truck that could run on almost anything and get almost 250 miles per gallon, after he proved this to many of the locals, haven't seen or heard from him in months ... makes you wonder

Latch

iTrader: (8)

I think if your car is a DD then it's worth it to run cats... showing up to your 9 to 5 everyday reeking of gasoline won't go down too well with your co-workers.

maxgee

iTrader: (5)

Nah, you only need to get a tune to back out the additional fuel.

Joshiedoom

iTrader: (4)

Then you apparently havent driven a car without cats

1989k1500

iTrader: (23)

I've had trucks without cats for years and never had it smell like gas at all.

Sinister 87

iTrader: (2)

If I recall, up until the mid 70's cars didn't have cats, I guess everyone smelled like gas, everywhere.

Mavmavv

If you believe that article you are an idiot.

and the part about the PCM is laughable.

vtirocz

This "conspiracy theory" is only interesting and intriguing without data to back up any of the statements. I can confidently say that there is no magical tune on modern cars with gas or diesel engines that is going to meet CO/NOx/PM federal emssions measured at 'engine out' (before any aftertreatment components such as cat converter).

After all, there's no mandate that auto manufacturers need to run catalytic converters, air pumps, or any other emissions related component. The federal mandate is on emission levels for CO,NOx,PM, & NMHC on the EPA's specified drive cycle. Why would manufacturers spend $$$ on expensive catalysts, air pumps, etc if they could simply optimize the tune to get engine out emissions low enough??

If you're interested in more information on the US emission standards and test cycles, this is a good source: http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/ld_t2.php

z28evans

iTrader: (4)

As an engineer, and someone who has worked on processes that involve catalytic reactions, etc - that article is so full of crap it is not even funny.

Latch

iTrader: (8)

Went for a ride in one, and while sitting stopped in traffic for a while with the windows down, yes I could smell gas... not a lot, but how about this... ever drive BEHIND a car without cats?

I just did a search for "gas smell" and found a number of threads with people saying that with an ORY they would smell gas when stopped at a red light. It's acceptable to smell gas at a race track, but not on the daily commute...

Every time I go to a classic car show, the gas smell is almost overwhelming. Maybe I'm more sensitive to smell than most people, but I can't stand next to an old car idling for more than a minute.

justin455

I, on the other hand, like to take a huff everytime I fill up.