Quantcast

Anyone ever heard of heating your gasoline before it hits your engine to increase MPG

  • Come enter the Ridemonkey Secret Santa!

    We're kicking off the 2024 Secret Santa! Exchange gifts with other monkeys - from beer and snacks, to bike gear, to custom machined holiday decorations and tools by our more talented members, there's something for everyone.

    Click here for details and to learn how to participate.

Tenchiro

Attention K Mart Shoppers
Jul 19, 2002
5,407
0
New England
There is a guy here who just dropped $70 on a device to heat your gasoline before it hits the engine. Supposedly it creates more vapor with increases MPG.

It sounds like a load of crap to me, but has anyone heard of this?
 

Spunger

Git yer dumb questions here
Feb 19, 2003
2,257
0
805
Well I know you want the air going into your intake as cold as possible, but I thought the same was with gas too. You didn't want it hot or it wouldn't atomize correctly. Seems funny that you would want "hot" gas. I dunno though never thought about it in that sense.

Personally I think if he got a tornado fuel saver or something he'd see the benifits more, or maybe some Prolong or something else :looney:
 

dhbuilder

jingoistic xenophobe
Aug 10, 2005
3,040
0
BOGUS !!!

you want your fuel to be as cool as possible.

hot fuel vapor locks.
just ask any race mechanic.
 

Toshi

butthole powerwashing evangelist
Oct 23, 2001
39,751
8,750
Spunger said:
Personally I think if he got a tornado fuel saver or something he'd see the benifits more, or maybe some Prolong or something else :looney:
are there any non-manufacturer-funded data that actually demonstrate a fuel economy benefit for either this tornado or prolong?

as far as i am concerned (until proven otherwise) all anecdotal increases in mpg from these devices come from the driver altering their driving habits after installing them. placebo effect plain and simple
 

Salami

Turbo Monkey
Jul 17, 2003
1,788
121
Waxhaw, NC
Tenchiro said:
There is a guy here who just dropped $70 on a device to heat your gasoline before it hits the engine. Supposedly it creates more vapor with increases MPG.

It sounds like a load of crap to me, but has anyone heard of this?

There was in article in a magazine (I think it was Hot Rod) about 20 years ago about Smokey Yunick (sp?) who had built a car that made pretty decent horsepower and got crazy gas mileage at the time.

He had found a way to heat the gas so it vaporized "perfectly" as to create a more complete burn. I don't remember the details but appparantly it was possible. The key was to find the correct temperature and place to heat the fuel so it would not cause vapor lock. Try a Google search to see if any info comes up. My bet is if the article was accurate some big oil company paid to make the technology "disappear".
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Salami said:
There was in article in a magazine (I think it was Hot Rod) about 20 years ago about Smokey Yunick (sp?) who had built a car that made pretty decent horsepower and got crazy gas mileage at the time.

He had found a way to heat the gas so it vaporized "perfectly" as to create a more complete burn. I don't remember the details but appparantly it was possible. The key was to find the correct temperature and place to heat the fuel so it would not cause vapor lock. Try a Google search to see if any info comes up. My bet is if the article was accurate some big oil company paid to make the technology "disappear".

tin foil hat alert?
 

Tenchiro

Attention K Mart Shoppers
Jul 19, 2002
5,407
0
New England
I suppose I will wait for him to report any big mileage changes, but I think if he sees anything it will be negligible.

Most of the articles I have seen on it are just "geek science".
 

dhbuilder

jingoistic xenophobe
Aug 10, 2005
3,040
0
smokey yunick was a frikkin genious.
it's a shame that he toiled in anonimity(except for his small circle of racer buddies) for all his life.

"best damn garage in town"

i could go on for pages about all he different and ingenious ways he slipped his tricks past the nascar officials back in the day.

a 7/8 scale malibu.that past inspection and raced.(only once before they busted him.)

fuel line that wrapped all throughout the car, giving quite a bit more fuel volume and therefore less pit stops.
etc... etc...
 

TN

Hey baby, want a hot dog?
Jul 9, 2002
14,301
1,353
Jimtown, CO
uh...rip-off.

When I get in my car from April-mid-November it is hot as hell inside. I am sure my gas is hot too, but my MPG stays the same.
 

beestiboy

Monkey
May 21, 2005
321
0
Merded, ca
Toshi said:
are there any non-manufacturer-funded data that actually demonstrate a fuel economy benefit for either this tornado or prolong?

as far as i am concerned (until proven otherwise) all anecdotal increases in mpg from these devices come from the driver altering their driving habits after installing them. placebo effect plain and simple

I can attest to the Tornado and K & N air filter. I installed them at different times the filter first improved milage about 1 mile per gallon and after 10000 miles installed the tornado and got an additional 1.5 mpg.

This was on my 03 VW GTI VR6, and if anything i drove the car harder. It got a little bit better sound and i flogged the hell out of that car. So for about $100 i went from 18 to 20.5 mpg and when you drive 20k miles a year it adds up. I just added a K & N to my Toyota Sequioa last night and will see what happens with this I have been getting about 16 town 17 highway we will see.

Of course this wasnt a scientific study but i believe enough in it
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
beestiboy said:
I can attest to the Tornado and K & N air filter. I installed them at different times the filter first improved milage about 1 mile per gallon and after 10000 miles installed the tornado and got an additional 1.5 mpg.

This was on my 03 VW GTI VR6, and if anything i drove the car harder. It got a little bit better sound and i flogged the hell out of that car. So for about $100 i went from 18 to 20.5 mpg and when you drive 20k miles a year it adds up. I just added a K & N to my Toyota Sequioa last night and will see what happens with this I have been getting about 16 town 17 highway we will see.

Of course this wasnt a scientific study but i believe enough in it

Too bad the K&N filter lets a lot of crap into the engine...
 

pixelninja

Turbo Monkey
Jun 14, 2003
2,131
0
Denver, CO
N8 said:
Too bad the K&N filter lets a lot of crap into the engine...
You made the same claim when I posted a thread about K&N filters a while back

http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129342

and yet no one was able to come up with any scientific proof to back it up. If my K&N filter is going to f-up my engine, I honestly want to know about it, but all I got from that thread was a bunch of anecdotal stories and hearsay.
 

Transcend

My Nuts Are Flat
Apr 18, 2002
18,040
3
Towing the party line.
pixelninja said:
You made the same claim when I posted a thread about K&N filters a while back

http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129342

and yet no one was able to come up with any scientific proof to back it up. If my K&N filter is going to f-up my engine, I honestly want to know about it, but all I got from that thread was a bunch of anecdotal stories and hearsay.
You should know by now that that is all n8 EVER has.
 

Transcend

My Nuts Are Flat
Apr 18, 2002
18,040
3
Towing the party line.
pixelninja said:
THANK YOU! I appreciate the link. Maybe I'll have time to review that this evening. That's the most scientific study I've seen so far on the subject.
Holy crap, if those tests are correct, a lot of fancy filters suck balls.
 

justsomeguy

Monkey
Oct 3, 2005
723
0
pixelninja said:
THANK YOU! I appreciate the link. Maybe I'll have time to review that this evening. That's the most scientific study I've seen so far on the subject.
"In the chart above it’s important to note the different test durations for each filter. The AC Delco filter test ran for 60 minutes before exceeding the restriction limit while the AMSOIL and K&N tests each ran for 20 and 24 minutes respectively before reaching max restriction. In 60 minutes the AC Filter accumulated 574gms of dirt and passed only 0.4gms. After only 24 minutes the K&N had accumulated 221gms of dirt but passed 7.0gms. Compared to the AC, the K&N “plugged up” nearly 3 times faster, passed 18 times more dirt and captured 37% less dirt. See the data tables for a complete summary of these comparisons."

The question that hasn't been answered is what effect the additional dirt will have on engine durability, in the real world.

I've been using a oil/cotton type filter in conjunction with a dyno proven aftermarket intake on my car for about a year.

They now offer a paper version of the same filter which I'll be switching to...
 

pixelninja

Turbo Monkey
Jun 14, 2003
2,131
0
Denver, CO
justsomeguy said:
I've been using a oil/cotton type filter in conjunction with a dyno proven aftermarket intake on my car for about a year.

They now offer a paper version of the same filter which I'll be switching to...
What brand?
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
pixelninja said:
THANK YOU! I appreciate the link. Maybe I'll have time to review that this evening. That's the most scientific study I've seen so far on the subject.
I ain't gonna do your research for you.

:rolleyes:
 

narlus

Eastcoast Softcore
Staff member
Nov 7, 2001
24,658
65
behind the viewfinder
justsomeguy said:
The question that hasn't been answered is what effect the additional dirt will have on engine durability, in the real world.
well from that link he's got an opinion on that:

but also let in a lot of dirt while doing it! Now how much is a lot? ANY MORE THAN NECESSARY is TOO MUCH!
i'm guessing that no dirt is necessary, but is balanced out by pore size and Vmax data for airflow; ie, zero dust allowed in should not be the obective at the expense of air intake, obviously

it would be hard to standardize...you'd need some sort of defined population of dust/dirt particle sizes and numbers, and then run an engine w/ an absolute (ie, determined pore size, not a depth filter) filter so you can figure on what gets let in and trapped by the filter.

once in the 'real world', all bets would be off i'd imagine.
 

spookydave

Monkey
Sep 6, 2001
518
0
Orange County, CA
justsomeguy said:
The question that hasn't been answered is what effect the additional dirt will have on engine durability, in the real world.

I'm in the high performance industry and am around a LOT of desert racing. I don't see engines failing due to dirt. K&N or K&N style filters are the norm. I'm not saying they are good or bad but that's what I see when the trucks roll in here.
 

spookydave

Monkey
Sep 6, 2001
518
0
Orange County, CA
If you really think about it you have to have the correct air / fuel ratio no matter what. So in the old days you went up the mountain to less dense air and ran rich. Now with EFI it can auto correct that. But when the air goes away and it takes fuel away for the correct ratio what happens? Less power no matter what.

Now if you take fuel away but you are still in nice dense air you run lean. Lean is mean right up until you melt it down.
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,729
2,712
Pōneke
Heating or cooling the fuel would slightly change it's viscosity and therefore slightly change the way it dispersed once injected into the cylinder. If the particular design of engine and injector was not performing optimally and required a more or less viscous fuel to disperse properly, then I could see an argument for heating or cooling said fuel.

However, this effect would depend entirely on the model of engine and injector in an individual model of car. Some might need colder fuel, some might need it warmer.

Personally I think it would make a tiny, tiny difference if any, either way.

Secondly I bet most modern engines are bloody good at getting the right volume and distribution of fuel into the cylinder anyway.

Thirdly, how much does this device cost? The same as a tank of Gas? It'd have to be quite effective to make it worth the purchase price, which I bet it isn't.

Fianlly, as someone pointed out, it's using more energy to 'supposedly' increase performance, so I bet it has a net negative anyway.
 

DirtyMike

Turbo Fluffer
Aug 8, 2005
14,437
1,017
My own world inside my head
Tenchiro said:
There is a guy here who just dropped $70 on a device to heat your gasoline before it hits the engine. Supposedly it creates more vapor with increases MPG.

It sounds like a load of crap to me, but has anyone heard of this?

I know teh device your speaking of, Ford tried to have one of them as a factory add on. We in teh industry replace them with a Plain spacer. What people dont realize is that once your Air and fuel are inside the manifold the tempurature no longer matters. The heat you get off your Injectors and Valve train is mroe than Adequate to Vaporize your fuel completly, As far as teh Air, once it passes teh Throttle body, Your air charge is Set, Its your Pre-throttle bodt temp you want to make sure to keep cooler. I love seeing these Cool air intakes on cars. They dont really do anything except make the car sound cool, that is untill you change your manifold and reprogram you Vehicle to work on teh new parameters. There are Lots of idea out there that give teh Perception of more power, and the percecption of More milage, but fact is that it is only perception. Example for you, a K+N air filter, supposed to be higher flow right??? Try again, While teh filter itself can allow more air to move, the rest or your intake system still has its limit, which teh factory Air filter was already more than adequate to Supply. 98% of vehicle have a restricter Built right into the throttle Bodies nowadays, limiting them to a max of 75 - 90% Max airflow. Dont change that, Then it doesnt matter how Trick your COld air system is, Or fuel heaters or anything like that.

Fact, a Hot Engine runs best, 200 Degrees running temp is the best target for the most performance and Reliability. Older engines this was a Problem do to Vapor lock. But with Fuel injection the problem of vaporlocking solved itself.

Anyways, My rant is done. If anyone wants more details on some of those So called" performance enhancers" PM me I will pass on what i know of them
 

DirtyMike

Turbo Fluffer
Aug 8, 2005
14,437
1,017
My own world inside my head
pixelninja said:
You made the same claim when I posted a thread about K&N filters a while back

http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129342

and yet no one was able to come up with any scientific proof to back it up. If my K&N filter is going to f-up my engine, I honestly want to know about it, but all I got from that thread was a bunch of anecdotal stories and hearsay.

I can, Call up Ford or Chrysler on that K+N and ask them why when you install one they will not touch your engine and completely Void your warranty on your engine. K+N's are sticky, they Catch light dust. They are a racing application the Filter itself is quite a higher Micron filter, without the Oil it can barely catch a Bee in it, A standard paper filter already doesnt performe its best untill about 50% of its life.

Dont forget that the Oil on the K+N comes of and sticks to Important Sensors, Like your Mass Air flow and Intake Air temp sensors. Giving the Vehicle a Falsew reading, and then Effectivly Dropping your Milage!!! You can belive me or not about the Milage, But I will tell you from first hand expirence, i have had to replace a ton of Maf's from Oil contamintation off of Oil type Air filters. Newer fords and chryslers have it Printed right on the Air filter box "DRY FILTER ONLY" for a reason.
 

justsomeguy

Monkey
Oct 3, 2005
723
0
DirtyMike said:
I love seeing these Cool air intakes on cars. They dont really do anything except make the car sound cool, that is untill you change your manifold and reprogram you Vehicle to work on teh new parameters.
Unless your car's ECU can adapt to the denser intake charge on its own...

I agree that most filter/intake combos sold are pure snake oil but there are certainly some out there that have proven beneficial (as shown by before and after dyno runs instead of butt dyno readings).
 

DirtyMike

Turbo Fluffer
Aug 8, 2005
14,437
1,017
My own world inside my head
justsomeguy said:
Unless your car's ECU can adapt to the denser intake charge on its own...

I agree that most filter/intake combos sold are pure snake oil but there are certainly some out there that have proven beneficial (as shown by before and after dyno runs instead of butt dyno readings).

Lab VS real world

In other words, Theory and reality. I have run the DYno test on a bunch of differnt stuff, And while you might see Slight changes, 95% Were not enough to be noticable when driving the car, other than the sound.

Dont get me wrong, lets say You built up a New motor, Used some nice hard Chrome rings, Large intake Port manifold, Match ported the Head/heads to your intake, Added a Valve job to Over size your valves. Now this is where i would start to Really Agree that Different air systems are going to benefit, I mean You add a Manifold and head that increases your Max possible movement of Air volume, And yeah Factory parts arent gonna work well enough anymore. Still after all that, You will have to add the Computer retune to make it really come alive. Proper Fuel stragety is Vital to making Add on after market stuff work like it is supposed to.


Before Anyone says anything, I mentioned Chrome rings for performance reasons, They hold up to the most abuse, say like Turbo's and Nitrous and goodies like that, Not to mention Added contamination in your air supply!!