Feature on BBC South last night about a bloke that's developed some sort of valve that's claimed to reduce engine emissions:
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7953443.stm
I'm at work and haven't got headphones so I can't listen to it again now, but IIRC they measured the CO2 from a bike and it dropped from ~4% to <1%. I think the valve opens as the piston goes down, reducing the 'friction' (resistance?), allegedly.
Might be more snake oil, but it sounded interesting, and the program said they were going to test it out on at least one of their cars over the next week or two - I'll try to remember to find out how they get on.
Can't find anything on t'internet about this.
F
|
Sounds rather confused. The presenter said it reduced CO emissions, *not* C02. He also said "it takes 10 minutes to fit". If the latter is true, then I can't see how it can do what the inventor said, some sort of stuff about suction. It's also "been around for 15 years, only now being promoted". If it's been patented, and is worthwhile, people'd be crawling all over the inventor.
Edit: www.urbaneracing.co.uk/product/acat/?pid=5090
and others.
Edited by FotheringtonThomas on 20/03/2009 at 12:34
|
So much carbon goes in as fuel, it has to come out somewhere . . .
Presumably he is just letting some bypass the exhaust and hence the measure
or does it store the carbon in the engine somewhere??
Edited by IanJohnson on 20/03/2009 at 12:41
|
Presumably he is just letting some bypass the exhaust and hence the measure
Good point - if that's what it does, is it legal?
|
|
|
|
www.ducatisti.co.uk/forum/ducati-748/12420-harris-...l
Hmm. Oh well.
US patent:
tinyurl.com/cybr34
Edited by FotheringtonThomas on 20/03/2009 at 12:45
|
Thanks for finding those FT.
Reading the thread, it sounded like there didn't seem to be a power gain, but there were claims of improved economy (EDIT and ridability). Couldn't see any references to independent scientific tests.
Edited by Focus {P} on 20/03/2009 at 12:55
|
Couldn't see any references to independent scientific tests.
That's a big problem IMO. Wouldn't mind some light reading in terms of the "Superbike" (?) write-up, though.
Sniffs somewhat of greasy exudations of the viper at the moment....
|
These things have been around for years, sold either as an economy device, a power device, or both.
With modern control systems and fuel injection instead of dribbly carbs, I think the benefit received is in direct reflection to the amount of cash paid by the purchaser.
This was one of the FuelMasters earlier filings. patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect...8
|
|
A load of codswallop. Carbon Monoxide. Most cars give off <1%. We are talking about an up to 80% reduction of that 1% aren't we?
|
A load of codswallop. Carbon Monoxide. Most cars give off > an up to 80% reduction of that 1% aren't we?
I'm not saying it's not codswallop, but in the news item the CO figure on the measuring device's printout goes from 4.x% to 0.8%, or something like that.
|
|
|
|
"I think the benefit received is in direct reflection to the amount of cash paid by the purchaser."
Surely not? These are devices are mostly over-hyped rubbish which have never been properly tested and are based on very flimsy scientific "Principles". The more you spend the more you have wasted. With fuel the price it is and the mantra of everything having to be Green, if these things worked they would be fitted free at the point of manufacture.
|
|
if it works would you go to the news media, or ford?
|
BBC South Today test results (so far, ongoing):
tinyurl.com/d6so7g
Valve has improved carbon monoxide emissions by 50% (on a 200k+ Volvo mostly), but no big improvement to mpg or performance.
They are also testing a liquid which coats the insides of the engine - has improved performance a bit but not emissions (on a 160k+ Chrysler Voyager diesel I think).
So as suspected, not much to get excited about :-(
|
This looked like someting similar to an "ecotec" valve that did the rounds a few years ago. It lets a little air in. Was pushed around VW mags for a while, and was dropped like a hot potato when piston crowns started to burn and hole!!
Now if this valve reduced emissions by 50%. Lets say the nasties were (MOT test allowed??) someone I am sure will have better figures than me. 0.5%. Then reads 0.25%, so a 50% reduction.
Rather like (as a policeman said to me when I complained about being breathalised 3 times in one evening on a long journey, "it's all very well complaining sir, but 8% of all accidents are caused by drunk drivers". So on that logic 92% are caused by sober drivers. So on those figures we should all drive around drunk?
Edited by Webmaster on 01/04/2009 at 02:20
|
the bike was running rich so by adding the valve this allowed air into the manifold making it run weaker. The principle of the valve is that on the overun with the butterflies shut on the carbs vacum would be reduced by allowing air through the spring loaded valve reducing the amount of air dragged through the carbs pulling fuel with it.
On the modern injection engine fuel shuts off on the overun altogether reducing emissions even further!
Woodspeed was right, the same thing as ecotec years & years ago. If the vehicle was tuned right to start with they made no difference to emissions or economey. I tried quite a few on a fleet of vehicles for 5 years.
|
|
|
|
|
