History The elusive "POGUE CARBURETOR"

In 1955 The Fish Company was the sponsor for a 55 Buick stock car driven by Fireball Roberts. The Buick didn't run a Fish carb(after all, that was when there were real stock cars) but in the article I read it claimed a Fish carb equiped engine could get 3 t o4 times the miles per gallon as a stock oem carb. The government bought them out to get them out of business to save the economy. Sound like another urbsn legendto me but there really wa a Fish carb.

That would be great, I always wanted to know more about the Fish carb because of the 55 Buick stock car and Fireballs involvement, if any, in the project

 

"It is common knowledge that a lot of the raw gas going into the combustion chambers never gets burned."

Hmmm. I guess we need to define " a lot."
Even without afterburners like catalytic converter I believe the HC emissions can be quite low, like under 200 ppm.

 

There was an old mechanic here that was as close to a genius on carbs as I have ever saw. He could build and tweak carbs to levels of performance and efficiency most folks could only dream of. It was hard to get him to do one for you, but if he did, you could bet it would give the best performance you could get. His carbs were sought by local racers because they were usually the best and fastest, even on stock engines. He could get more mpg's out of a stock carb, too. Not 100 mpg's, but 5-10 mpg or so. I know several people had a carb that he had tweaked on a sbc that got mileage in the 30's, GM didn't see mileage like that until they started using EFI.

He built one of the vapor carbs, may have been a Progue. The problem with his though was the weight of the vaporizer and components canceled out any improvements in MPG's. Granted, if he had of used lightweight materials to build out of instead of steel, he might have had better results, but he used what he had available to him. Sadly, he got Alzheimer's in his later years, and all his knowledge was lost to time. He never was one to keep very good records on paper, everything was in his head. I loved to listen to him expound on his theory's on engines and fuel mileage, just wish I had of listened closer.

 

The Fish carburetor was the real thing but they never made crazy mileage claims. The only motor they claimed they could improve the mileage on, was certain models of Ford trucks around 1955 with the teapot carburetor that were known duds.

The advantage of the Fish was that it was infinitely tuneable for any engine and that it vaporized the gas better. I dare say it could be tuned for better mileage but not double, maybe 10% to 20%.

They were persecuted for years by the post office who claimed they were running a scam, even though they were producing and selling carbs by the thousands. If I recall right, the company folded when the founder died but the design was revived in the early 80s by a guy named Brown. He in turn stopped making them when fuel injection came in and people stopped buying carburetors.

From time to time they turn up on Ebay and other places. But don't expect miracle gas mileage.

 

As for how much gas goes through unburned, if it all burned up we wouldn't need catalytic converters. The newer the car the less unburned gas, some old cars wasted so much you could smell the gas in the exhaust as you drove behind them especially Chevrolets.

 

Here is a start

 

Catalytic converters are intended to convert the carbon monoxide to carbon dioxide to get the carbon monoxide levels down to the legal limits. Unburned hydrocarbons cause them to get much hotter and melt down.

 

Crawford Motors, best thing was Dairy Whip Burgers and fries next door, and cold Beer at the Marion next to the dairy whip.....

 

Yes, back to the original subject. It was my pleasure to meet Don and go through his museum again and pick his brain a little. I sometimes wish we could have gone to lunch or spend some time in the shop together. There is a lot more to him than what appears on the outside.

 

Speaking of crazy mileage claims... when I was in high school (late 60s) I drove a VW bug with a 1200cc 40HP engine that got 36MPG. It weighed about 1600lbs, had a top speed of 72MPH you timed the acceleration with a calendar and it had NO creature comforts or power accessories.

In 1980 my father bought a new Pontiac Parisienne Brougham sedan, a 4000 pound car with a 5700cc Diesel V8 engine, power steering, power brakes, auto trans, air conditioning, power windows, red plush upholstery etc etc etc and it got - 36MPG, the same as my old VW.

Since then they have brought out cars that will far outdo those ones. Including VW diesel sedans that are getting close to 80MPG on the hiway and conventional gas engine cars with smaller engines that are getting up around 70. Hell you could buy a Geo Metro 3 cylinder in the 80s that got 73 MPG.

The technology exists and it is on the street now. We forget how much has been done over the years. As soon as there was a demand, and the public was willing to pay for better mileage the car companies went to work to provide it. No doubt they have even better models under wraps ready to bring out if the price of oil goes back up.

There was a big jump in mileage, power and driveability when EFI came in. Could the same results have been achieved with a carburetor? EFI gives complete vaporization of the fuel and delivery of precisely measured amounts to each cylinder which was the goal of mileage engineers for years.

 

They started putting lead in gas in the mid '20s, so I would doubt that's the answer.

 

ROFL!
“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform (or pause and reflect).”
Samuel Clements

 

1964, Grandpa Munster invents the instant gasoline pill.

 

EFI although very efficient is not the end all be all of fuel delivery. The fuel mixture is adjusted many times a second by the ECU that is getting information from the sensors and mainly the O2 sensors. In adjusting the fuel mixture it is just adding or subtracting from the initial tune that is programed into it. It never has the perfect fuel mixture but an average of the rich/lean condition.

Fuel is not vaporized by the fuel injectors but instead it is atomized (tiny droplets of fuel) and that usually is aimed at the valve so that some of it does get vaporized on the way into the cylinder. The events happen so fast that the fuel doesn't get fully vaporized before it is lit on fire by a spark plug. Some people call this an explosion but in reality it is a fast traveling flame of combustion. The reason that ignition timing needs to be advanced is so that the fire can get lit and start traveling by the time the piston reaches TDC.

So with that information having the fuel in the air stream traveling through a hot intake manifold with exhaust crossover heat has a better chance of reaching the vaporized state. Some carburetors are better at metering and atomizing fuel than others. I would think that if you could get the fuel into a truly vaporized state before it even gets into the intake it would be more efficient than a standard carburetor or even possibly fuel injection.

 

This is exactly right! And thats why we want the fuel to be vaporized (NOT atomized) before it gets mixed with air in the intake track. I've heard it said that timing will be near TDC because combustion is more efficient and there is no extra pressure (from combustion) pushing the piston back down before TDC therefore freeing up some torque and HP.

 

This is true, you have to consider the time frame (30's) and people, heck, they believed Orson Wells on the radio. basically tell them what they want to hear, really no need to be able to prove it totally, just that the theory makes the average folk go hmmmm.

I know, right!

 

I know this is a bold statement; a bump in power, means a bump in economy. And better gears mean better milage!

SEMA proved it with the work of hot rodders, Edelbrock Jr., and a Hot Rod magazine editor.

And I would state that a Stovebolt six can become a true "thriftmaster" with a better ignition and two carbs!

If you give a car a better way of controlling fuel distribution and the burning of same, it can only get better.
If you are planning to go all in, the gears is also what wins the race and makes the goal.
In speed an economic. And an overdrive also helps.
But a better carb help and I have no doubt that the carb that started this thread can improve fuel economy.

I knew of a Model a with two stock carbs, and a better cam.snd bump in compression that made it a fuel saver fir daily driving. And a powerful toy for the weekend

 

When you look around today, it appears that the likes of Charles Pogue, Tom Ogle, Orson Welles, H.G. Wells and other visionaries might not have been too far off.
Shall I include Henry and Edsel Ford too?

But nonetheless, let me remind you, this thread is about our experiences with vintage vapor carburetor systems of the type that Charles Pogue and many others (including me, you, Don Garlits, etc.) have dealt with from the 30's thru the 60's.

It's not a public whipping post to insult the knowledge (or lack there of) of others. Like my mother used to say, If you don't have anything nice to say...
Thanks, now lets continue.

 

Here is a link to the website about the Shell/Opel.
http://www.376mpg.com/

 

Leaded gas was available from the late twenties but unleaded gas was still available too. By the fifties much more lead was used to get higher octane and even the cheapest regular had lead in it.

 

"THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX IN A TRADITIONAL SORT OF WAY" JIM FORD
There you go! That is exactly what I'm talking about!
Thanks Jim for sharing this.

If I'm not mistaken, I believe this is the car that was sold to a collector about 7-8 years ago for an outragous amount of $350,000 or so. WOW!!!
Anybody know the facts?

 

It was still on display at the LeMay facility when I volunteered there last summer for motorcycle week. You can't believe the auction BS many of the cars don't sell even though it looks like they do on TV. That guy on the phone with the bidder has just got a phone up against his ear with nobody on the other end. Many times there are plants in the audience bidding that work for the auction company or the person who owns the car. It is a way to get exposure for the shop and artificially drive up market value of the car.

 

Jim, here is a site I found in Hemmings to verify some of these claims:
http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/...piracy-376-mpg-opel-uncovered/comment-page-2/

 

Here is a patent drawing from Charles Pogue dated 1935...
My first attempt was modeled after this back in '77.

 

Here is another patent drawing by a young man named Tom Ogle who was greatly inspired by Charles Pogue's idea of a gasoline vapor fuel system...

There is a lot of info available on how he reached 100 mpg in the 70's with a 351 in a Ford LTD.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Tom_Ogle's_Vapor_Fuel_System

 

So the patents have been around for a long time, sneaking up on 100 years - not to mention a couple major World Wars where several of the belligerents were cut off from petroleum supplies, plus the 1970s oil shocks and Arab oil embargo. I'm finding it difficult to believe these 100 mpg carburetors have been suppressed.

 

Here's a picture of one that Holley made for the Model T in the late 20's. I don't know the claims of this unit, but this is what I found: http://www.overunity.com/9786/ford-model-t-holley-vapor-carb/#.VrGGuU8YGCk

The last few years of the Ford Model T ('26-'27)could have Holley Vapor carbs as alternatives , all the early cars had up draft carbs so the fuel had to be lifted and had a better chance of breaking down by vacuum as opposed to later cars that had down draft carbs on top ,where the fuel is poured into the motor like a drain pipe.

Fordson tractors also had vapor carbs ,when times were tough pretty much any fuel could be used in them as long as it would evaporate, alcohol and vege oil ,old engine oil. Holley doesn't acknowledge their old fuel saving devices. Occasionally they turn up on ebay.

 

Somebody picked up this ball and ran it, at least for a little while. I recall seeing something very similar in the mid-80s as a guy on a Nuclear Power Plant project I was working at was trying to sell these. He had a working system on a ex-patrol Dodge 440 and claimed to be getting 70+ MPG. He sold a few systems, but about six months in the exhaust valves burned up (which from reading a bit about these seemed to be the major issue) and that spooked any other buyers.

An internal combustion engine is fairly efficient at burning the fuel, it's the utilization of the heat energy produced that's the issue. Roughly 25% is converted into mechanical motion, another 25% is radiated away by the cooling system, and the rest goes out the tailpipe. A turbocharger can recover some of the lost exhaust energy, but not a huge amount. Ford experimented with ceramic engines in the 90s IIRC that didn't have any cooling system (reducing that loss) but the available materials weren't up to the challenge.

 

Here is an article that may make it not so difficult to believe. It talks about Pogue's efforts in the war, oil embargo and thermo or catalytic cracking. Feel free to do some research and find out for yourself. Very interesting read!
http://blog.h***lberger.com/2007/04/pogue_carburetor_gasoline_vapo.html

 

You didn't answer my questions, you cherry picked my conclusion and pasted a link.