In the 1970's a man I knew developed

[LaurenG]

a device that allowed a car to go 200 miles on less than 2 gallons of gas. Why can't we do this today?

His invention: a device that would allow a car to go 200 miles on less than two gallons of gasoline. According to experts, witnesses, and even newspaper reporters, the 24 year-old Ogle showed the world how to do it

UTEP Engineering Professor Dr. Gary Hawkins said of Mr. Ogle, "Tom needed advice on what to do and how to do it ..." Mr. Ogle was not a UTEP student, just a young man with a vision. Dr. Hawkins adds, "He had an innate ability to know how to make it work better. He was right. It took a kid to show us."

Mr. Ogle's idea: a vehicle will run much longer if gasoline is introduced into the engine in a different form. Dr. Hawkins elaborates, "He found a way of inducing fuel into the internal combustion motor the way it was meant to be... in vapor form."

In layman's terms, the way a vehicle's fuel delivery system works now, is like a spray bottle. Gasoline, its liquid form, is sprayed into the carburetor. Ogle's system converted the gas from a liquid into a vapor form before reaching the ignition. Gas vapors are sucked into the engine and burned at a more efficient rate.



http://kvia.com/Global/story.asp?s=4137051

[benburch]

1. A vapor-phase carburator is a dangerous thing, though.

You have to heat the fuel to its vapor point, and this creates an explosion risk.

[berni_mccoy]

4. Depends on how it is done... if it is done in small amounts

in isolated containment and at lower pressures (or vaccum), the vaporization can happen in such a way that is no less dangerous than igniting the gas in each cylinder.

[ret5hd]

6. doesn't a coleman stove or lantern...

use what is essentially a vapor-phase carb?

[benburch]

8. Yes.

And sometimes they go bang when they are not in good order.

[INdemo]

2. Yes I remember

reading about several high mileage systems back then. But my guess is that the oil companies were quick to purchase the inventions and set the inventors on easy street for life.

[punpirate]

3. As I recall from reading about this...

... decades ago, it wasn't exactly "developed." There were noticeable problems with uniformity of fuel feed and regulation and the improvements in mileage were not as described. Of course, when one thinks about it, the issue is simply about the BTUs available and how they are used.

If it were simply a matter of vaporization, propane- and natural gas-powered vehicles would show similar dramatic (order of magnitude) improvements in fuel use, and yet, long practical experience with those engines, especially in commercial fleets, indicates otherwise. There are some other advantages to gaseous fuel use, but a ten-fold improvement in mileage is not one of them.

Cheers.

[Wickerman]

5. Lots of problems that needed further development

but Mr. Ogle wound up entagled in lawsuits and some personal issues. He wound up a "suicide".

http://www.rexresearch.com/ogle/1ogle.htm

[htuttle]

7. I can go 200 miles on less than 2 gallons of gas

The SECRET: Don't use any more wheels than you absolutely need to. If you can get somewhere on two, don't use four.

[benburch]

10. I get 100 miles on two gallons...

in my 2002 Prius. And the new ones are even better.

[jimshoes]

9. Could the specifics

of these inventions not be shared on the internet so other inventive minds could try to improve on them? It would be a real shock to the oil producing world if their product suddenly became too abundant. Prices would moderate because there would be a glut of oil.

[berni_mccoy]

11. "gas companies and government .. threw us off course."

Mr. Massey says, "We gave up. We thought we had something. The rigamarole....gas companies and government, and more patents, it threw us off course."

Tell me our wars in the middle east are not about oil. Just look at the graph in my sig.

[trotsky]

12. This is not science.

It does not belong in this forum.

[LaurenG]

13. Where would you suggest this go? nt

[benburch]

14. Energy/Environment forum comes to mind.

Grey area though. This is engineering, which is applied science.

[LaurenG]

17. My thoughts too

I know that more people in this forum are likely to have the ability to understand if this was a workable invention than those on the e/e forum, I could be wrong though.

[trotsky]

18. It doesn't take a scientist to know this "invention" is bunk.

Just a computer with access to the Internet.

http://www.snopes.com/autos/business/carburetor.asp

No one reputable was allowed to see the mechanical miracle in action, let alone have a chance to measure its results. After the initial excitement over Pogue's 1936 announcement had faded, more serious types began to openly doubt that the carburetor would work as described. In the December 1936 issue of Automotive Industries magazine, its engineering editor, P.M. Heldt, said of a sketch of the Pogue carburetor: "The sketch fails to show any features hitherto unknown in carburetor practice, and absolutely gives no warrant for crediting the remarkable results claimed." Other journalists were beginning to voice similar opinions.

In response to calls to put up or shut up, Pogue's miracle carburetor was heard of no more. Faced with the choice of believing someone had made claims his invention couldn't later live up to or that a monied bad guy had bought up a technology to forever keep it off the market, at least some chose to believe the suppression theory. That the carburetor never made it to the public, they said, was proof enough of its existence.

[LaurenG]

19. OK but I was there and saw it with my own eyes

I knew this guy, my brother and I went to school with him and I have no other proof than the article, so say what you will.

I guess your opinion and article must hold more weight than those who were there. :shrug:

[trotsky]

20. You saw it with your own eyes,

yet you say you have no proof other than the article. Say again?

You saw a car, right?

Did you actually see the magical carbeurator? Did you check for the existence of alternative fuel systems, or even something as simple as a hidden gas tank?

Did you personally verify that the car really traveled 200 miles on just a gallon of gas?

[LaurenG]

21. I can tell It would be foolish of me to argue further, thanks. nt

[trotsky]

22. I'm no expert, but this guy is.

http://www.fuelsaving.info/atomisation.htm

Modern fuel injectors are pretty much creating vapor-size particles already.

[trotsky]

15. Heh, oh I've got a really good idea where it should go.

But you probably mean in terms of DU forums.

Maybe here?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=279

[LaurenG]

16. I see

Thanks for your input.


spelling

[BiggJawn]

23. The Meeting Room...

But it's not there anymore, so maybe the Lounge?

A 200-MPG carb that never made it to market because the Oil Companies bought out the inventor, or, as in this case, had him "Whacked"...

ALL ABOARD!
Woooooo! Woooooooo!