How Gearing Effects HP from 1-3rd in 727's

-
yellow rose said:
Yup. I'm off the reservation.

Hit me back when you can spell out the details.
Click to expand...

You got it. It was granted special status, meaning it has some priority over other patent applications in line. Hopefully it won't be long before I hear "something". But I will definitely keep you guys in the loop.
 
So, if it only works on the pump-shot
does that mean it does nothing during cruising, and
once the pumpshot is burned up, again it does nothing?

If that is correct, I think it will be a hard sell.
 
AJ/FormS said:
So, if it only works on the pump-shot
does that mean it does nothing during cruising, and
once the pumpshot is burned up, again it does nothing?

If that is correct, I think it will be a hard sell.
Click to expand...

No, it is very effective at vaporizing a lot of fuel very quickly without causing restriction, but it also has the ability to reduce Hydrocarbons and Co2 considerably as well as increase mileage. I didn't want to really say all that because it is hard enough for people to believe I got a 35% increase in HP. But yeah, it vaporizes the fuel, however much is there.

At top end, the increase is less, but at lower RPM's the increase has only been tested starting at 2000 RPM maintaining speed, then flooring it. The same guy, the owner of the dyno was behind the wheel, so he could do it rather consistently, but this just proves that further testing needs to be done I'm afraid.

I am as curious to see what it does with TBFI as you guys are about how it works...

I will keep this forum posted...
 
Honestly, I could not have any less interest in it. I'm just trying to make you appear like more than a dreamer with a keyboard.
 
Not one of these is it?

s-l1600.jpg


Would certainly perform a similar function - atomising fuel more efficiently.

- boingk
 
Not trying to pick on you just for fun or anything, but the pump shot is a transition state only, that lasts a fraction of a second. That theory does not make sense on a chassis dyno run. There are several very experienced builders here and at least 2 professionally trained and experienced engineers, who are all expressing doubts. The testing you are doing is not well calibrated nor repeatable, with lots of variables thrown in on top, and no range of engine combos. It will all add up to bad test results. And the torque numbers increase that you report is well over 50% which does not hang with the HP increase unless it is at a lower RPM, which is not given.
 
Well, the results I'm getting at low to mid RPM is greater than that at top end. I'm speculating that it is the pump shot, but obviously I need to do more testing, and on at least one or two more engines. The dyno operator said that he may have put his foot into it quicker on the 35% increase, I don't believe I said 50%, if I did, I think I said I was "hoping" to get 50% on my next proto design...

Anyway, it doesn't make sense to me that it would spike the hp results other than if it were the pump shot that did it. I am not impressed with the dyno operator's job. He brought it up to 2000 RPM in 3rd, and "gradually" increased the throttle to 4,500. He doesn't want to run my low end test so I am going to take it to a more expensive, more professional dyno shop. I am going to have him get the tires spinning in 1st gear at 1000 RPM, floor it and take it up to 4000 RPM hit second, then slowly back out of it with and without it. Here is a link to the Chassis Dyno Shop I am taking it to in December:

Murillo Motorsports, San Antonio Performance Shop

This should give me much more reliable results...

Sorry for the confusion. This is all new, all R&D, and no it isn't that type of spacer. But there is definitely a huge jump in HP and Torque, exactly how much I am not sure at this time, but it is impressive. I will post the results, the data sheet, in December.

Thanks

BTW, if it weren't new technology, then everyone would understand it and believe the results. No one could fly for hundreds of years. The Wright Bros figured it out. I'm hoping I figured out how to vaporize fuel without restriction which defies logic as did flight until it was analyzed and studied for years.
 
boingk said:
Not one of these is it?

View attachment 1714979269

Would certainly perform a similar function - atomising fuel more efficiently.

- boingk
Click to expand...
It doesn't NOT atomize the fuel more efficiently. It reduces exit losses at the bottom of the carb. If your manifold is well prepped, and your carb is half assed tuned those things do very little to nothing.
 
yellow rose said:
It doesn't NOT atomize the fuel more efficiently. It reduces exit losses at the bottom of the carb. If your manifold is well prepped, and your carb is half assed tuned those things do very little to nothing.
Click to expand...

My abs and neck muscles beg to differ with you. I am feeling some serious horses and I am Dying to find out how many it is...

I wish I could have you drive my car before and after this thing.

If you can hang on a month, I will have some professional dyno tests done and post the data sheets in PDF.

But I am trying to figure out what is going on with this thing still. I am getting some pretty significant HP and Torque increases, but the Patent Office is backed up and it will be at least a year before I hear back from them. I have more testing to do. So hang on for the ride. I know this thing is increasing HP and Torque. I may not know just how yet, but trust me, something is going on and I'm going to figure it out. I just don't have deep pockets, otherwise I would have figured out already... If it is not vaporizing fuel better, then how am I getting even 40 more horses out of the same amount of fuel. What could possibly do that then?

Thanks for your patience...
 
70DusterBob said:
My abs and neck muscles beg to differ with you. I am feeling some serious horses and I am Dying to find out how many it is...

I wish I could have you drive my car before and after this thing.

If you can hang on a month, I will have some professional dyno tests done and post the data sheets in PDF.

But I am trying to figure out what is going on with this thing still. I am getting some pretty significant HP and Torque increases, but the Patent Office is backed up and it will be at least a year before I hear back from them. I have more testing to do. So hang on for the ride. I know this thing is increasing HP and Torque. I may not know just how yet, but trust me, something is going on and I'm going to figure it out. I just don't have deep pockets, otherwise I would have figured out already... If it is not vaporizing fuel better, then how am I getting even 40 more horses out of the same amount of fuel. What could possibly do that then?

Thanks for your patience...
Click to expand...


Wasn't talking about your deal. I was referencing that 4 hole spacer.

I'm patiently waiting for you to finish your R&D.
 
yellow rose said:
Wasn't talking about your deal. I was referencing that 4 hole spacer.

I'm patiently waiting for you to finish your R&D.
Click to expand...

Ohhh Okay. Cool. I will let you know what the results are from a more reliable dyno shop and a more targeted area, low end.
 
70DusterBob said:
Ohhh Okay. Cool. I will let you know what the results are from a more reliable dyno shop and a more targeted area, low end.
Click to expand...

To get a truly accurate dyno result your dyno test it should be done an engine dyno. Chassis dynos have too many variables that effect the end result especially if testing at low rpm with an automatic transmission due to how a torque converter works. An engine dyno operator can measure the torque at whatever RPM you want the test to start at. It will give you a truly accurate test result. The dyno will do the math that is required to determine horsepower since it's just a simple math equation. Torque and rpm are what is actually measured.

If you are trying to determine low rpm gains on a chassis dyno use a manual transmission in 4th gear or whatever gear has a 1 to 1 ratio. The parasitic loads the driveline produces will still skew your test results though. Besides that not everyone uses the same driveline as you do.

Btw since is your car an automatic the torque convertor multiplies torque at low rpm, how do you plan on determining how much gain is created by it. Are you planning on having the shop fine tune your carb to perfection before you add you device? If you are lean to start out with your device will add power that was lost due to it's poor initial state of tune otherwise.
 
Last edited:
No offence OP, this may come across as grouchy but you need to stay away from anything that requires mathematical calculations. Just stop.

Let's break this down.

You say you gained 170 lb/ft at 2600 rpm for a gain of 84hp by sticking a homemade device under the carburetor.

You claim that it was an increase of 35% over the same engine without your device.

84hp is 35% of 240hp

240hp @2600rpm = 485lb/ft

That's already impossible for ANY naturally aspirated 360, much less a mild one. and it's before your device SUPPOSEDLY added an additional 35%!

SO NOW WITH THE DEVICE.

485 + 35% is 654 lb/ft @ 2600 rpm.

654 lb/ft at 2600 rpm in a mild 360.

That's 324hp... At cruising speed. From a mild 360. Get real!

I can believe that an off it's chain race spec 408 could make 650lb/ft at 4500-5000rpm. But a mild 360 at 2600? what you're claiming is an actual miracle. Totally impossible. Wrong wrong wrong.

Check your maths.

Better yet, get someone else to check it for you. You obviously can't get it right. Coz it's definitely a loooooong way off.
 
frosty_the_punk said:
No offence OP, this may come across as grouchy but you need to stay away from anything that requires mathematical calculations. Just stop.

Let's break this down.

You say you gained 170 lb/ft at 2600 rpm for a gain of 84hp by sticking a homemade device under the carburetor.

You claim that it was an increase of 35% over the same engine without your device.

84hp is 35% of 240hp

240hp @2600rpm = 485lb/ft

That's already impossible for ANY naturally aspirated 360, much less a mild one. and it's before your device SUPPOSEDLY added an additional 35%!

SO NOW WITH THE DEVICE.

485 + 35% is 654 lb/ft @ 2600 rpm.

654 lb/ft at 2600 rpm in a mild 360.

That's 324hp... At cruising speed. From a mild 360. Get real!

I can believe that an off it's chain race spec 408 could make 650lb/ft at 4500-5000rpm. But a mild 360 at 2600? what you're claiming is an actual miracle. Totally impossible. Wrong wrong wrong.

Check your maths.

Better yet, get someone else to check it for you. You obviously can't get it right. Coz it's definitely a loooooong way off.
Click to expand...


I'm am NOT going to participate in any thread where facts and math are going to be required. I'm not smart enough for all the ciphering.
 
frosty_the_punk said:
No offence OP, this may come across as grouchy but you need to stay away from anything that requires mathematical calculations. Just stop.

Let's break this down.

You say you gained 170 lb/ft at 2600 rpm for a gain of 84hp by sticking a homemade device under the carburetor.

You claim that it was an increase of 35% over the same engine without your device.

84hp is 35% of 240hp

240hp @2600rpm = 485lb/ft

That's already impossible for ANY naturally aspirated 360, much less a mild one. and it's before your device SUPPOSEDLY added an additional 35%!

SO NOW WITH THE DEVICE.

485 + 35% is 654 lb/ft @ 2600 rpm.

654 lb/ft at 2600 rpm in a mild 360.

That's 324hp... At cruising speed. From a mild 360. Get real!

I can believe that an off it's chain race spec 408 could make 650lb/ft at 4500-5000rpm. But a mild 360 at 2600? what you're claiming is an actual miracle. Totally impossible. Wrong wrong wrong.

Check your maths.

Better yet, get someone else to check it for you. You obviously can't get it right. Coz it's definitely a loooooong way off.
Click to expand...

I can get 654ft/lbs of torque out of a mild 360 in first gear at the rear wheels at 2600rpm. It's all about gearing all it takes is about 75ft/lbs of torque at the crankshaft. It doesn't increase the actual horsepower though.

His tests need to be measured at the crankshaft on a properly tuned engine, that will determine if his claims are real or snake oil. The driveline needs to be eliminated to get actual believable results otherwise it's hocus pocus.
 
T-N-T said:
I can get 654ft/lbs of torque out of a mild 360 in first gear at the rear wheels at 2600rpm. It's all about gearing all it takes is about 75ft/lbs of torque at the crankshaft. It doesn't increase the actual horsepower though.

His tests need to be measured at the crankshaft on a properly tuned engine, that will determine if his claims are real or snake oil. The driveline needs to be eliminated to get actual believable results otherwise it's hocus pocus.
Click to expand...


Yup, which is what the OP needs an engine dyno. It also proves how important gears are. If they weren't, all cars would have an in and out box. Cheaper, weighs less and takes less power to drive.

Except it would be slower than a Schneider truck dragging a another Schneider truck going the other way.
 
T-N-T said:
I can get 654ft/lbs of torque out of a mild 360 in first gear at the rear wheels at 2600rpm. It's all about gearing all it takes is about 75ft/lbs of torque at the crankshaft. It doesn't increase the actual horsepower though.

His tests need to be measured at the crankshaft on a properly tuned engine, that will determine if his claims are real or snake oil. The driveline needs to be eliminated to get actual believable results otherwise it's hocus pocus.
Click to expand...

Yes you can multiply torque with lower ratio gears but you CAN'T multiply horsepower.

He claimed an 84hp increase was an improvement of 35%.

That's 324hp at 2600rpm with the gain.

That ain't happening on no mild 360. No way. no how.

Im calling it. It's officially a bullshit claim. (Probably unintentionally bullshit though)
 
frosty_the_punk said:
Yes you can multiply torque with lower ratio gears but you CAN'T multiply horsepower.

He claimed an 84hp increase was an improvement of 35%.

That's 324hp at 2600rpm with the gain.

That ain't happening on no mild 360. No way. no how.

Im calling it. It's officially a bullshit claim. (Probably unintentionally bullshit though)
Click to expand...


Not exactly. Horsepower is a function of TIME. If you make a gear change and the car accelerates quicker, it made more HP, or more exactly, it made better use of the HP available. It's using wasted HP. You can make 1000 ft pounds of torque, but it it takes all day to RPM (time) you have a glorified semi truck.
 
I'm interested for sure. Reading David Vizard's book on Holley carbs he devotes an entire chapter to fuel vaporization in the intake manifold and talks about how the ability to turn ALL of the liquid gas into vapor before it is ignited makes a significant difference in HP and overall efficiency. There is a test he does where he compares two identical carbs on the same engine; the carbs are slightly bigger than would normally be used on that size of test engine (I think it was an 850 cfm carb on a mild 400-something-HP 355 Chevy). The only difference was the booster types; one ran conventional dogleg boosters, the other ran annular discharge boosters. On the dyno the engine with the annular booster carb made WAYYY more torque and HP in the lower revs (<3500 or so) due strictly to better fuel atomization from the much higher booster signal and the design of the booster itself in how the fuel is drawn through.

I think a device like the OP is describing could have a huge benefit on engines with single-plane intakes with big carbs and plenum volumes. Like he said himself the major gains are at the low-end where fuel vaporization is harder to control and tapers off as RPM increases; in theory you could basically get back any "lost" low-end power and part-throttle driveability from using a single-plane/tunnel ram intake and big carb for max HP. But I agree, hard to believe without some real evidence and explanation of how it works so I'll be waiting patiently as well to hear back once your patent and legal stuff is squared away.
 
Now that the government-oil companies know what your doing expect helicopters over your house,with commandos sliding down ropes to take every thing you own and worked on. Then they'll barricade your neighborhood and air lift your whole house out and you'll never be heard of again. It happens all the time.
 
70DusterBob said:
I am not impressed with the dyno operator's job. He brought it up to 2000 RPM in 3rd, and "gradually" increased the throttle to 4,500.
Click to expand...

You guys really get lost in the weeds,,,,,the root cause of unrealistic Hp variation seems self evident.

Doesn't anyone else think the low rpm Hp results was wildly corrupted and simply a result of poorly controlled throttle between pulls??

Thinking that the EXACT same part throttle opening could be exactly duplicated between multiple WOT pulls completely invalidates this so called "test"
 
moper said:
Honestly, I could not have any less interest in it. I'm just trying to make you appear like more than a dreamer with a keyboard.
Click to expand...

They don't need you for that. LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top