Why didnt automakers focus on fuel efficient carburetors like Tom Ogles? Tom Ogles Carburetor

Why didn’t automakers focus on fuel efficient carburetors like Tom Ogle’s?

“ Tom Ogle’s Carburetor
Tom Ogle, an American inventor, developed a carburetor that allegedly allowed his car to achieve an astonishing 113 miles per gallon (mpg) on a V8 engine. The invention, known as the Ogle Carburetor, was a vapor carburetor that pressurized gasoline into a vapor and injected it into the firing chambers of the engine. This innovative design aimed to increase fuel efficiency and reduce emissions.

The Invention and Its Claims

In the 1970s, Tom Ogle, a 25-year-old auto mechanic from El Paso, Texas, created the Ogle Carburetor. He claimed that his invention could achieve incredible fuel efficiency, with some reports suggesting that his car could run for 100 miles on just 1 gallon of gasoline. This was a significant improvement over the average fuel efficiency of cars at the time.

The Mysterious Death of Tom Ogle

Tragically, Tom Ogle’s life was cut short when he was shot outside a bar in El Paso in 1981. He was just 26 years old at the time of his death. The circumstances surrounding his death remain unclear, and many speculate that his invention may have been a factor in his untimely demise”

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because Big Oil has had an iron grip on the industry for ages. Thankfully that's coming to an end.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      fpbp
      everyone knows the automakers have been co-oped by big oil. not to mention the planned obsolescence

      literally just Honda CVCC which was also poo-pooed by the auto industry and was later found to increase NOX emissions to unacceptable levels.
      efficiency comes with cost, even if this guy wasn't a bullshitter there's no way 113 mpg from a V8 is real. That's such an insanely lean burn I bet EGTs were insane and fricked up the primitive cats at the time.

      >midwit take
      just go back

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >nooo I want to believe this one guy figured out how to make insane mpg and nobody has ever once tried to figure out how he did it because muh fuel lobby

        conspiritards get the rope
        while it's totally true that big oil is in bed with the feds they had nothing to do with this, it would have made huge money because more gas powered cars could be sold.
        Dude got shot outside of a bar because he was in Texas during the leaded gas era. If the feds wanted to kill him they would have done it at his home like they did to MLK. I don't buy the mpg claims either, it's not physically possible for it to work as he claimed. Any "vapor" would be compressed back into a liquid during the compression stroke negating anything the Ogle carb would have done.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >midwit
        At this point I'm convinced "midwit" is exclusively used by morons in full Dunning-Kruger mode.

        Everyone knows this is bullshit. Automakers and big oil haven’t just killed fuel efficient carbs, they’ve killed batteries, and cars that run on water too. If what you said was true they wouldn’t spend all this money buying patents and stopping innovation.
        The massive leaps idiots like you make is incredible, especially since everyone can look up the auto industry history of killing innovation.

        You’re probably the same idiot who loves CVT transmissions and cost cutting measures that lead to more car purchases and more oil used.
        Naive cattle like you are the problem

        ?si=6wJYpfT97Imo0Mv6

        >cars that run on water
        Fricking engines, how do they work?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Quite simply an engine is an air pump that is driven by expanding hot gas, that gas could technically be anything including water, provided its volume can be expanded by heating.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            A car could run on water, its called a steam engine. And i belieb that steam engines could make a comeback, if all the processes to starting one was automated, imagine fuelling a car with any fuel source that can boil water, it wouldnt get rid of oil dependency but imagine not needing strictly gasoline anymore.

            Watching Jay Lenos videos on the last of the production steam cars such as the 1920s Dobles and seeing how close they were to completely automating the steam process with only thermomechanics was inspiring. They were so close to turn key like a petrol car which i think is achievable now more than ever. But of course its all about EV's and the questionable fate of Hydrogen powerplants, both requiring rare earths and refinement when we could just essentially go back to monke and bring back the old technology but modernised

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Steam engines run on coal, not water

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            And the coal does what, moron?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It provides the energy. Which is what gazoline does in an ICE.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It provides energy to what? Esl tard

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >when we could just essentially go back to monke and bring back the old technology but modernised
            Then why cling to automobiles?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >muh Dunning-Kruger
          Which is particularly funny because it has been known for nearly a decade that the dunning-kruger effect is in fact very much a midwit take, it was created out of thin air by a statistical error that was missed by dunning and kruger because they were themselves midwits, and keeps getting repeated because it confirms the narcissistic biases of other midwits. So thanks for outing yourself as a midwit, midwit.
          https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1188&context=numeracy
          https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1215&context=numeracy
          https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/2022/04/08/the-dunning-kruger-effect-is-autocorrelation/

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >haha you used the no-no word! Gotcha!
            How about answering to the main point, or to

            Another entire thread defeated by the law of conservation of energy (which they used to teach in 3rd grade, but now apparently do not teach at all or this thread would not exist). This stuff is excruciatingly simple - gasoline always contains nearly the same energy. In a combustion engine, that energy either propels the piston or is lost to heat. A carb, no matter what it does, cannot do much to change either. The best it could possibly do is reach the same uniformity of atomization that direct injection has and consistency of AFR as any modern EFI. That's the limit, which is a marginal improvement, and would not ever be reached by any carb design. If you think otherwise, you are braindead.

            's post, huh homosexual?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >t. midwit absolutely seething about being called out for egregious midwittery

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            replied here homosexual

            Just finished reading your articles. Good stuff.

            about the Dunning-Kruger stuff. Though that doesn't change the argument about "midwit" and, more importantly, the point about that dumb carburetor.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Just finished reading your articles. Good stuff.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >t. midwit

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >He claimed
    The only two words you need to read.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      yeah guys have played with heated vapor boxes and barely tickled 30mpg out of malaise era shitboxes with already tall gearing and puny v8's

      there's no conventional carburetor reaching that vapor efficiency, and no 700% gain associated with that vaporization efficiency

      https://i.imgur.com/RUUmgRp.jpeg

      Why didn’t automakers focus on fuel efficient carburetors like Tom Ogle’s?

      “ Tom Ogle’s Carburetor
      Tom Ogle, an American inventor, developed a carburetor that allegedly allowed his car to achieve an astonishing 113 miles per gallon (mpg) on a V8 engine. The invention, known as the Ogle Carburetor, was a vapor carburetor that pressurized gasoline into a vapor and injected it into the firing chambers of the engine. This innovative design aimed to increase fuel efficiency and reduce emissions.

      The Invention and Its Claims

      In the 1970s, Tom Ogle, a 25-year-old auto mechanic from El Paso, Texas, created the Ogle Carburetor. He claimed that his invention could achieve incredible fuel efficiency, with some reports suggesting that his car could run for 100 miles on just 1 gallon of gasoline. This was a significant improvement over the average fuel efficiency of cars at the time.

      The Mysterious Death of Tom Ogle

      Tragically, Tom Ogle’s life was cut short when he was shot outside a bar in El Paso in 1981. He was just 26 years old at the time of his death. The circumstances surrounding his death remain unclear, and many speculate that his invention may have been a factor in his untimely demise”

      >pressurized gasoline into a vapor
      the pictured holley 2100 would come apart at the pressure a ev6 injector fires at, and injectors still fire liquid fuel, you need a heated box to turn gasoline into a vapor at the rate an engine consumes it

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    All Tom's works were stored in Building 7.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    literally just Honda CVCC which was also poo-pooed by the auto industry and was later found to increase NOX emissions to unacceptable levels.
    efficiency comes with cost, even if this guy wasn't a bullshitter there's no way 113 mpg from a V8 is real. That's such an insanely lean burn I bet EGTs were insane and fricked up the primitive cats at the time.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >muh NOx
      the indicator of effectiness.
      you know what efficient?
      turbodiesel
      you know what releases NOx?
      turbodiesel

      NOx can be catalyzed.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        And how many diesels get 113 mpg? I think the aluminum aerodynamic a3 tdi got at best like 80 mpg and that was with a 1.2 liter engine or some shit. The theory is absolutely there but his claims were greatly exaggerated. Also people die outside of bars all the time.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          maybe he did not average enough but diesels can get 75 mpg. His vacuum made gasoline vapor could have doubled the mileage of the v8 guzzler.

          Dad used to say, 'we are running on vapor' as the tank was almost empty. Maybe it kinda was. and it still ran.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You probably mean the A2.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >25 year old inventors worth billions in future earnings die outside bars all the time
          that’s the point moron

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            As a 25 year old who hasnt done shit Ive already had 2 run ins with people wanting to take my life because its a bar after all and people drink and do drugs.

            Like I said, his theory was shit because to this day we don't have v8s that crack 30 mpg.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The amount of bullshit here reeks
            You’re a moron and you never created a product they could upset billions in profits. I can’t imagine how stupid you must be to even make this jump in logic.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            How is it bullshit? Im an average moron who works my day job and Ive already had to talk down drugged up armed people, a situation that happens very often and unfortunately for Mr. Ogle didn't work out in his favor. Have you ever been to a bar before? People die all the fricking time regardless of who they were. Now if you wanna talk about Michael Hastings maybe youd have an actual point unlike some moron who claimed to defeat the laws of physics.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >this guys argument is it’s common to die outside bars at 25
            It’s not common you dumbass
            >but I’ve had to talk druggies down
            Are you moronic?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Its not....le common!
            Yeah maybe if you go to dopey old people bars, but news flash, people do impulsive stupid shit and hurt others every second.
            >Are you moronic?
            No I'm reasonable. I'm a lanklet to the max and I don't stand a chance against some 6'5 dude with a knife whos easily 100 lbs of muscle more than me, but again, it sounds like you have no real world experience so

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >suspicious works for the best interest of billionaires again
            >it just happens that way anon
            Isn’t that lucky for them? Some people here are to naive to be on the internet

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >things are predictable
            >some people navigate the world in such a way to profit from that predictability
            >ISN'T THAT SUCH A COINCIDENCE???
            No.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Except his mystical engine does not fricking work headass.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It’s not an engine you glowie. It’s a carburetor. It’s not just him though. It’s happened countless times and been in newspapers and TV. Every time instead of understanding the inventions and where they fail, they ridicule and kill to silence. Time and time again. You’re not as smart as any of these inventors and everyone here knows that. But you’re so sure that you are smarter, your hubris is impressive

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Well considering how deep into the rabbit hole of tuning and fluid dynamics Ive gone I think Id have a better understanding than you but ad hominem is never an argument. If hundreds of thousands of people frick with cars every day Im sure one of them would've done what he did but since he didnt do shit why would they?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >im sure one of them
            thats why you’re moronic

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You're aware that scams exist, correct?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You sound like you watch those "mind of a CEO" bullshit videos.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Ls1 gets 30mpg on a stock tune, with lean burn 40mpg is possible with no cylinder deactivation, a true v8. Enojoy your euroshitbox epa israelite.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            As a 25 year old who hasnt done shit Ive already had 2 run ins with people wanting to take my life because its a bar after all and people drink and do drugs.

            Like I said, his theory was shit because to this day we don't have v8s that crack 30 mpg.

            Ls1, in a vette at least, will get nearly 40 stock with cruise on at 55, and this was in an automatic.

            My TBI 305 will crack 30 on the highway at 70mph, in my 92 bird. Also automatic, with the top down.

            Anon, we have had 30mpg v8s for 33 years minimum. That's a third of a century. You are moronic

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >we don't have v8s that crack 30 mpg
            We have tons of those anon

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >v8s that crack 30 mpg
            Engines don't get mpg anon. Cars get mpg. Engines get fuel flow rates at various power/rpm combinations.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    his carburettor design gets remade from time to time, it made a 350 chev produce 25hp and effectively drive like it had no accelerator pump in a conventional carb, on a flat road it could do 55mph but would literally stall if it had any sort of load like passengers an incline a trailer or if you didnt shit that morning and would lean out an engine to all hell.

    big oil didnt kill it, his design was an experiment that fell far short of drivability that had no impact on the industry. his vapour motif was already dickscovered back in the 1920s too during the depression and it didnt catch on back then either and you sacrifice all usability for that 113mpg. Stop jelqing to this man, you fuel efficiency """people""" are gay and moronic, if you want to hypermile get a CT90 or some other scooter that hits economy figures like that, you wont because you dont want to face da TROOF

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Everyone knows this is bullshit. Automakers and big oil haven’t just killed fuel efficient carbs, they’ve killed batteries, and cars that run on water too. If what you said was true they wouldn’t spend all this money buying patents and stopping innovation.
      The massive leaps idiots like you make is incredible, especially since everyone can look up the auto industry history of killing innovation.

      You’re probably the same idiot who loves CVT transmissions and cost cutting measures that lead to more car purchases and more oil used.
      Naive cattle like you are the problem

      ?si=6wJYpfT97Imo0Mv6

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        you speak like a schizo and your shits all moronic, there is no conspiracy and everything in that video is pseudoscience. You people all speak the same too "dude look it up" but you dont post anything? Just some pop science video, youd think if some 19th century homie can find out how to power a car on water we'd redickscover it. You've radicalised yourself through cherry picking and associating with boomers trying to find meaning in their lives.

        Oh and big oil didnt kill batteries, EV technology is a ponzi scheme and everyones betting on the wrong horse. You are gay and your echo chamber is gay too

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >nooo I want to believe this one guy figured out how to make insane mpg and nobody has ever once tried to figure out how he did it because muh fuel lobby

          conspiritards get the rope
          while it's totally true that big oil is in bed with the feds they had nothing to do with this, it would have made huge money because more gas powered cars could be sold.
          Dude got shot outside of a bar because he was in Texas during the leaded gas era. If the feds wanted to kill him they would have done it at his home like they did to MLK. I don't buy the mpg claims either, it's not physically possible for it to work as he claimed. Any "vapor" would be compressed back into a liquid during the compression stroke negating anything the Ogle carb would have done.

          https://i.imgur.com/1Jp1nb1.jpeg

          A car could run on water, its called a steam engine. And i belieb that steam engines could make a comeback, if all the processes to starting one was automated, imagine fuelling a car with any fuel source that can boil water, it wouldnt get rid of oil dependency but imagine not needing strictly gasoline anymore.

          Watching Jay Lenos videos on the last of the production steam cars such as the 1920s Dobles and seeing how close they were to completely automating the steam process with only thermomechanics was inspiring. They were so close to turn key like a petrol car which i think is achievable now more than ever. But of course its all about EV's and the questionable fate of Hydrogen powerplants, both requiring rare earths and refinement when we could just essentially go back to monke and bring back the old technology but modernised

          Just gonna point out that running vehicles on water, which might seem "free" to most of you basement dwellers, might be the single biggest economic/ecological disaster ever if it achieved widespread adoption. Hotter/dryer areas of civilization are beginning to have water problems already, and you want to CONSUME it for transportation?
          >But muh water vapor exhaust
          Yeah ok cool now it becomes rain halfway around the world, great job taking it away from your local supply and giving it to someone else.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            as if people didnt waste water already, in your sense we should abandon california for being water scarce. I would give any reason to abandon california but thats besides the point. Theres steam engine designs that allow recirculation of boiled water through a condenser, rather than being a total loss system, and we're not even talking about using drinking water in this hypothetical appliaction, it could be distilled or even gray water of varying quality, the type you couldnt use for drinking and hygiene.

            Another entire thread defeated by the law of conservation of energy (which they used to teach in 3rd grade, but now apparently do not teach at all or this thread would not exist). This stuff is excruciatingly simple - gasoline always contains nearly the same energy. In a combustion engine, that energy either propels the piston or is lost to heat. A carb, no matter what it does, cannot do much to change either. The best it could possibly do is reach the same uniformity of atomization that direct injection has and consistency of AFR as any modern EFI. That's the limit, which is a marginal improvement, and would not ever be reached by any carb design. If you think otherwise, you are braindead.

            pretty much this, ICE runs at 30-40 percent of efficiency even with injection factored in, it would take a fundamental engine design change to make it better

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            If commiefornia just allowed more nuclear power, we'd have more desalination plants, and the artifical water scarcity would be over.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >muh nuclear power
            it’s not even cost effective when considering storing waste material long term

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The total volume of waste material to be dealt with is laughably small, so the only "cost" in storing waste is theorizing containers that would survive hundreds of years after the destruction of the united states itself.

            https://whatisnuclear.com/calcs/how-much-waste.html

            The real cost in nuclear power is bureocracy, as safety standards are changing all the time and new/replacement components have to be constantly re-certified. And those safety standards are not necessarily better, as the vast majority of nuclear power plants are 40+ years old and clearly the safety standards back then made then last very long.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Keep repeating tired tropes but this has been proven false plenty of times. The number of examples are numerous and the deep state then kills these guys and you idiots spread the deep state propaganda

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        you're a dipshit
        big oil IS big battery
        they're energy companies that's what they fricking do
        not to mention you need oil to make batteries in the first place

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >just killed fuel efficient carbs
        just buy an avs2
        >annular flow primaries result in fuel injector-like spray pattern that noticeably improves throttle response and fuel economy

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >and cars that run on water too
        His patents are literally public and you can google them, they have also been public domain for decades. If it actually worked, someone would have reproduced it.
        >pro-tip: it doesn't because it violates the laws of physics

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Lmao I like that show, but I always had the feeling a lot of the fanbase (and maybe the host) were unironic tinfoil hats.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >zero proof it got 100mpg

    it just can, ok?

    in a car that weighs nothing compaired to todays cars

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I can't believe you dug this moronic story out of mothballs. You can tune ANY carb to get 100mpg - just keep leaning it out until you get there. Naturally, the motor will burn itself up, in about 25 seconds, running on such a lean condition.

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Greased Geese

    didnt dunderhead289 put a lawn mower carb on a sbf and only get like 29mpg

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Exactly all these glowtards running scared in this thread because this shit has been shown on TV tons of times
      They 70’s show even did a running skit on the car that runs on water
      I bet you sheep took the vax too

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because it doesn't exist and doesn't conform to laws of reality. I've spent a lot of time trying to figure out how the frick it worked and best I can tell is the only way it could work is similar to the equally mysterious Hot Vapor Engine built by Smokey Yunick in that it has to superheat the gasoline which means everything has to be built like a race car which means it's simply not viable on a street car.

    Now if you wanna talk real world, a progressive three or five barrel carburetor that has the first opening only under certain conditions and is the size of a lawnmower carb? That could work, with proven 40+ mpg and there are videos video backing this up:

    ?si=ydZ4mkqLAvBTHcHv
    Ideally the carb linkage would be something like 2-standard barrels under normal circumstances, the 1 small diameter only between 55-75mph highway speeds, and then pushing the throttle opens back up to 2 then 4 with the small diameter being shut. Likely easily done with computers these days, especially the geometry and flow testing of an intake manifold, but the real annoying part will be having a custom manifold made and choosing the right carbs.

    But the supposed Pogue or Ogle carbs if they existed at all wouldn't work without the engine being built up to the point it would be impossible to use under normal circumstances. As other anons pointed out "Claims". Yunick's was the only one with testing done on it by GM to supposedly verify, but Smokey himself isn't the most reliable for his word considering his cheating in NASCAR.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Another entire thread defeated by the law of conservation of energy (which they used to teach in 3rd grade, but now apparently do not teach at all or this thread would not exist). This stuff is excruciatingly simple - gasoline always contains nearly the same energy. In a combustion engine, that energy either propels the piston or is lost to heat. A carb, no matter what it does, cannot do much to change either. The best it could possibly do is reach the same uniformity of atomization that direct injection has and consistency of AFR as any modern EFI. That's the limit, which is a marginal improvement, and would not ever be reached by any carb design. If you think otherwise, you are braindead.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    > 113 miles per gallon (mpg) on a V8 engine.
    That’s almost impossible.
    This would be some genius-level discovery and I doubt a 25 year old mechanic could actually make that.
    This is something a 50+ year old engineer or chemist/physicist would create but it’s not really believable.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >That’s almost impossible.
      No, it's just plain impossible. The engine would be operating at 100% efficiency. It would generate zero heat/exhaust, because if it did, that would be sub 100% efficiency from the friction being generated in the exhaust stroke. See

      Another entire thread defeated by the law of conservation of energy (which they used to teach in 3rd grade, but now apparently do not teach at all or this thread would not exist). This stuff is excruciatingly simple - gasoline always contains nearly the same energy. In a combustion engine, that energy either propels the piston or is lost to heat. A carb, no matter what it does, cannot do much to change either. The best it could possibly do is reach the same uniformity of atomization that direct injection has and consistency of AFR as any modern EFI. That's the limit, which is a marginal improvement, and would not ever be reached by any carb design. If you think otherwise, you are braindead.

      the post OP and other people who think cars are powered by magic won't respond to.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Thanks.

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    everyone who has seen a Joe Rogan podcast knows this is big oil and the defense department. don’t be so naive

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If only i were an eccentric billionare, instead if a poorgay crackhead

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Not that guy, but Smokey Yunick was able to get 50 mpg and 250 HP out of an Iron Duke in a Fiero. https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/hrdp-1009-what-ever-happened-to-smokeys-hot-vapor-engine/

    It's interesting technology, and it's a shame it never made it to production. The article discusses using measurement of ionization gap in real time as part of the engine management system, and I just have to note that Saab actually did this with the Trionic system.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ogle was a scammer and a fraud, which is the most likely reason someone shot him.

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The last eco car to use a carburetor was probably the renault vesta 2, which achieved a 1,94 l/100 average (121 mpg US) going from town to town on a motorway thanks to a 473kg kerb weight, a 0,7 liter naturally aspirated 3 cylinder and a 0,19 Cd drag coefficient, which results in a Cda of 0,35 m2 - less than 2/3 of the drag area of tesla model s, at 0,56 m2 CdA.

    So the comparison only makes tom ogle's claims look more bullshit. Btw the reason they used a carburetor over fuel injection was that at the time they didn´t have a multipoint port injection system for a 3 cylinder, and they figured that a electronically controlled carb could mix air and fuel better for lean burn than a monopoint throttle body.

    That said electronically controlled carbs might have been horrible in the 70's/80's, but with today's technology they can actually be decent.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >the reason they used a fuel injector
      Is because it was more expensive and less efficient
      Same reason Nissan uses a CVT troony
      Don’t act dumb

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Now here is someone that has no idea of the horror that was dealing with smog approved carburetors in the 70's and 80's, fuel injection was always more expensive than carbs (the only reason big carbs are so expensive today is because they are mass produced as much), but at least it can maintain a target air fuel ratio consistently, carbs at best have a very narrow operating window where they are tuned properly.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Aren´t mass produced as much.

          This is the reference edelbrook uses for their carbs.

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    wrenchlet, ricer

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Tom Ogle
    That car had almost no power. Like 30 seconds to get to 60mph. Useless.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Still 4x faster than a fuel injected diesel golf 1.

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This scam has been going on since the dawn of the auto. This is from a 1925 newspaper. I wonder if this inventor died an untimely death too?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >this scam
      You mean planned obsolescence from automakers?
      You idiots are cattle. They could make a car that lasts 100 years but they would lose money idiots

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The car would probably also weigh triple what a town car does, drink gas like a fish does water, and be a dreadful driving experience

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Have you idiots never researched this before?
          There’s been tons of better cars designed. Big auto kills them so they can make more money off you. Wake up dummies

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Jews and regulations.
    Apparently it's more ecological to have 0.01% less (insert arbitrary unproven element) emitted from the exhaust per kilometre, than it is to have vehicles with 50 year service lives and straightforward repairs.

    Yep, 5 years of use then into the junk pile. But you used 20 litres less fuel in those years!

    This is why they've been kicked out of 109 countries and counting

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The first thing they teach you in mechanical design and engineering is that there is no original ideas, it's all been thought up at some point in one way, shape, or form. If cars that run on water or get 113 mpg where truly possible, then we'd have plenty of examples lying around. Random people/scammers making claims doesn't mean anything.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >if cars that run on water or get 113 mpg where truly possible, then we'd have plenty of examples lying around.
      This is obviously moronic tho and ignores human greed and drive for profits.
      You’re probably poor so it’s understandable why you struggle to understand reality here. Imagine being wealthy and wanting more money, imagine owning gas and auto stocks. This is the reality, I’m sorry you’re too stupid to get it

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >the first thing they teach you in mechanical design and engineering is that there is no original ideas
      Yeah. Except every invention known to man.
      Imagine if people listened to you, we would have no need to do anything better
      Your mindset is what’s wrong with this place
      Even if Ogle failed, we should be trying our best to understand his tech. It’s extremely sus that he’s not talked about more

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        His patent is public, hell you can even read it on the internet:

        https://patents.google.com/patent/US4177779A/en

        And of course there are plenty of people that used vapor boxes instead of carburetors to feed the engine, even if you don't count cars that are powered by fuel that's a gas at room temperature like lpg or natural gas. For your information vapor boxes is exactly how petrol engines were powered before carburetors were invented:

        ?t=935

        The reason why he got better fuel efficiency is simply because the engine would accept leaner fuel mixtures without misfiring once he fully vaporized the fuel before it entered the cylinder. The problem is that only raises efficiency up to a point, once you take away too much fuel it starts dropping again. The fuel gains he could make are significant (equivalent with replacing his petrol engine with a diesel engine of the same size, since diesel engines also run very lean fuel air mixtures), but not as much as he would like to make people believe.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *