Extreme Fuel Economy And The Classic Car 

Some guy has a RU-vid video how he made a V8 get 45 mpg using a lawn mower carb. I don't think he was being totally honest in the video. He was driving the car, but it didn't seem to have any power/acceleration. Like Tony said the carb is just the metering device. Although from the comments a lot of people believed it.

He knows how to make a 100mpg carb, he just cannot tell us because he knows that they'll disappear him. So he makes this video. Smart man.

To get maximum efficiency from any engine optimum fuel to air mixture with completely vaporized and burned fuel are necessary, I modified a 440 mopar in a motorhome that was getting 5mpg on gasoline to propane. I increased the compression to 12:1, stainless valves, special cam and maxed out the timing, not only did it increase the hp but now I do 8+ mpg, cleaner exhaust and less than half the price of gas here in Canada.

My great-uncle used a 1953 carburetor that was sitting in his office for ten years ( a customer wanted it rebuilt but never picked it back up), installed it in a 1980s Plymouth Reliant K-car, tested numerous times at FIFTY-FOUR MPG. (At 60 mph highway speeds) and almost 50 mpg on back roads. It was pretty gutless, but still!

So, I was enthralled with this idea back in the 70’s. I had a Chevy Malibu with a 194-6. I acquired a Rochester 1-bbl from a stationary engine. I had accumulated a stash of main jets and started leaning it out a bit at a time. The short story is that it couldn’t get out of its own way… and… I burned 4 exhaust valves. All with no improvement in mpg. To make power, you need to burn fuel!

I had a 100 mpg carburetor. It was on a 50cc four speed moped(like what they drive in India). Topped out at 43 mph. It was so much fun

The description of a carb as "a mechanical computer" makes the whole system's operation blindingly clear! I always appreciate your knowledge and ability to educate, but this video might just be the best one yet. Thanks, Uncle Tony.

I am 76 years old, and these tales have been around most of my life. People said tires should last 100,000 miles, and engines 1,000,000 miles. I simply asked how long would they last wrapped around a rim.

I have been in love with the automobile for 84 years, And I have learned so much more just from experiencing your programs, Thank You So Much! John from Toronto Canada!

Tony you've done it, taken a subject I couldn't care less about and made in interesting. This is a good one.

The story was the guy that invented the 100 mpg carburetor for his 70 Coupe DeVille was either bought off or rubbed out by the evil petroleum industry. Anyone remember cow magnets for your fuel line to increase mileage? Don't forget about the spacer you could mount under the carburetor with swirl inducing projections, or a simple piece of screen wire across the bore.

Thanks for the description of Smokey's engine, I remember reading about it years ago and wondered how he did it. If I recall right, he used a Buick V-6 and disabled three cylinders. He had two turbo's on it, and was getting something like 60mpg. The article didn't go into detail how the system worked or why the need for the turbos.

I read an article about a guy that designed a carb for a V8 that got 57 mpg. he was a retired GM engineer and I guess they had a court ase against him because he designed it while working for GM. Long story short, they won.

This was very informative.. just the notion that the engine wants what it wants is a good concept to get across..With my sunbeam i changed the gear ratios by installing a Toyota five speed trans to replace the 4 speed that had really high revs and i changed out the rear to a higher ratio as well..i went from factory (when new) of 27mpg to up to 35 and even 40 on highway. engine runs at 3k at 75mph now and much more comfortable highway speeds.

Good Lord, the Smokey vapor motor is stirring the memories. I have forgotten so many things, this was nice.

There was a carb produced decades ago called the Fish or Brownie carb . 1 barrel, 2 or 3 moving parts used on 4-8 cylinder engines. gutless sipper but did give 40-50 mpg if you were not a heavy footed or in a hurry.

One of my favorite channels. Always a depth of knowledge, never just infotainment, I always learn about how something works and why rather just than blind faith (I could probably crack a book open too, but what would be the fun in that). There is a young blood on another channel just trying to run a car on a lawnmower carburetor. It's working surprisingly well. He is just doing to see if it works and will be checking mileage soon. Much like going from a 4 barrel to a single barrel carburetor. I have to find the link. My point being he is like an Uncle Tony proteget. Brilliant work as always Tony.

Hey Uncle Tony! I've got a 70 Roadrunner 440 6pk, looks like brand new, I always park in the econo spot in parking lots! No one has ever said a word! But I drive it only 500 to 1000 mi a year, very economical at 7 mpg! Lol!! Peace🤙🤙

Actually in the beginning the "Otto Cycle " engine was intended to run on vapor, gasoline came along and gave them an ez way to supply fuel. But bottom line is you have to turn any liquid fuel into a vapor before it can burn, that's why your propane fed IC engines have a coolant heated vaporizer to flash the liquid LP to vapor or you would just have a hunk of ice shortly because LP boils at -44 deg. f. Not an issue with gasoline.

Great video! I had a 1976 chev 3/4ton with a 454. I changed the jets and metering rods. And with no loss of power went from 16mpg to 22mpg!

I love this series. I hope you keep doing more. I find that maximizing efficiency excites my ADHD.

More mpg is in your foot. Driving habits and knowing your engines power producing characteristics etc. My big block Chevy pickup gets the best mpg of any of my vehicles including my wife’s 4 cyl Hyundai. The reason is the raw torque it makes at a low rpm and barely any throttle. I can drive around all day at 1/8 throttle or less, never going over 2000rpm and it just sips the fuel. It seems like it will coast forever as well on flat open road.

On carbureted engines a good way to get real, better fuel economy is to make a vapor injection setup. This is technology that came from piston-engine aircraft in WW2. It uses water, or water/alcohol mix in winter. I made one for a '76 Elite with a 400M engine. Could actually get almost 24 MPG highway, without a heavy foot, and cruising at 70 - 75 MPH.

I'm loving this direction because I've been thinking about this. I love my Mopars but I also love my Chevys. I also think a lot of go-fast tricks can work in the fuel economy World too, especially with cars already have a lot of aftermarket support. I imagine doing the feather Duster treatment to a 67 Camaro with a 230 inline 6. Put a lightweight fiberglass front end on it, some 14x4 lightweight Centerline Convo Pro Wheels, spoiler that works, and some tuning tricks to see what you get.

I have a 68 383 4sp H/T Roadrunner with 10/11 mpg ! I now get 16 + mpg after headers-750 carb to 650 ,RV cam w/323 rear. single plane to duo plane intake manifold. Looking for 20+ mpg ? It still run's good.

Uncle Tony be careful man you know what they did to that guy.

In racing there was no one else that could bend, stretch, exploit, as well as occasionally break the rules like Smokey Yunick. He was the Leonardo Da Vinci of cheating, an absolute genius.(also one hell of an entertaining character) I remember reading about a test of a car with Smokey's adiabatic engine, the first thing they noticed was how many squeaks and rattles it had along with a noisy exhaust leak which seemed to be trying to cover a ton of knock, but the thing did run.

I had a 75 Buick Estate station wagon. 455. It had the Rochester quadrajet with an altitude compensator. I closed off the back barrels adjusted the compensator. I got 25 mpg, no door in the tail pipe.

So glad Tony covered this. I’m Same age as Tony and come from a very similar background as far as working on cars and racing. It drives me nuts when I hear somebody talking about these urban legends of the car. They got 70 miles miles per gallon back in 1971. I still hear somebody talk about it at least every other week.

I used to have a 1966 stock Mustang with a 289 4 barrel 4speed and 2.75 rear end. The stock carburator gave me 36 miles per gallon on the highway at 75 miles per hour. This was a 600 miles trip and I had to refuel only once and come home with a 1/2 tank.

Smokey was a genius. Really enjoyed reading about his hot vapor engine back in the day. Would make a good power generator for a hybrid vehicle nowadays.

I just bought an 85 Camaro Berlinetta V8 305. My dream car since I was a kid. Not really a car guy but I love my car so much I am eager to understand as much as I can about it. Thanks for explaining everything in a way that's easy to understand.

I've felt that a 2-stage injection system (One takes-over for the other as key operating temperatures are reached) on the hot-vapor engine was the way to go for some time. And with the current generation of onboard engine management computers, I'll bet they could easily handle the needs seamlessly.

In 1980 I added a very simple water injection system system to a 1973 Gran Torino wagon. With no other changes it went from 10 to 13 mpg and ran stronger. No dyno test, just feel.

Those Motorcraft 2 BBL's on the 351C gave great economy with good power. I put a 650 DP Holley on it and it emptied the tank in 50 miles.

Charles Nelson Pogue of Canada. 200 mpg vapor carburetor. Don Garlits has the test carburetor and it achieved 198 miles per gallon on a flathead V8 Ford 1936.

I love your shop Tony, thanks for all the great knowledge you share for us car enthuisiasts

As a teenager, I was kept with a constant flow of Popular Science magazines from my engineer uncle. I always read with keen interest the series “Say Smokey”. I remember the articles about the adiabatic engine that he was trying to accomplish. I believe he was teamed up with General Motors of the time, but I can’t say that for sure. Even as a teenager I saw challenges with the project. The biggest challenge that I saw was the manufacture and use of carbide pistons to handle the extreme heat. I knew the material was difficult to work with and also that it would change the reciprocating mass in the engine enormously. I never knew what became of the project. Nothing ever showed up in mainstream media, or as a product to buy.

In the early 70s my father had a really nice really Fast Hurst Olds. The car was undrivable in the winter, so he always bought a beater in the fall fixed it up and drove it the winter and flip it in spring. He had all the classic economy cars you could think of. He said it was not far fetched to get 20-25 MPG out of a small body, V8, two barrel carb, bare option car. The best winter beater he had was A Valiant 273 two barrel, automatic car. He said it averaged 20 MPG City Highway. And would get 28 on the highway.

This is a great video. I have have a 1964 Ford f250 and have gone with a Pertronix Igniter and replaced the points. I had to change the 410 ratio differential and replaced it with a 373 differential and have a 4 speed on the floor rather than a 3 on the tree. I replaced the 2 bbl with a 4 bbl Holley. These changes have increased the mpg.

In 1951 a mechanic from Burbank did some modifictions to a 4 barrel Holly carb and added a Water Injection system. Engine ran cooler, mileage doubled and Standard Oil bought him out.

If you watch the documentary gashole it talks indepth about the carb vaporizer. I believe the first successful run was a straight 8 Packard and it was in Texas I Wanna say. I believe shell bought the patent and it disappears from their library.

I wish my dad could have lived long enough to have seen this video as he would have been completely fascinated by it. He was always trying to squeeze more fuel economy out of his drive to work Mopars back in the 70's. I don't remember the exact details, but one exception to those cars was a Gremlin with a straight six and a manual transmission and he was always experimenting on it.

A choke is more fuel efficient than injection on a cold start because the choke doesn't add more fuel, it just restricts the air. With injection, the air flow stays the same, the coolant sensor tells the computer to open the injectors to give it more fuel. A bad sensor can lie to the computer, telling it that it's still cold when the engine has been running for hours. The computer has no eyes. It can only go by the info from the coolant sensor and deliver the fuel for a cold start all the time.

First time watching this channel, I like the down to earthiness of it and explanation from experience. I like how it was mentioned that with todays advancements in technology the Smokey engine is now possible. I will be looking out for more videos.

I think Smokey described the "turbo charger" as a one way valve that overcame the pressurized intake charge. Neat idea.

Forgive me for a double post but.... there was a story about a 70's Chrysler Imperial in White pine Tennessee that got stupid gas mileage. Chrysler supposedly contacted the owner and told him they let a 'defective' carburetor get put on his car and they needed to swap it out. He never did let them...or so the story goes.

My first car was a 74 Corvette with a mild cam, long tube Hookers, and a 750 CRM Holley. I've never really been a speed demon so I got decent mileage out of it. In town, I was averaging 17 to 18 and on the highway, I was averaging 20 to 21 MPG. I didn't mind that it wasn't the most high powered car, but I loved the reliability and the fact it was decent on fuel economy was a major plus.

Excellent descriptions of the carburation systems and the ins and outs. Covered some things I was unfamiliar with and refreshed some others. Thank you.

It's refreshing to see someone that knows what they're talking about. This is the first of your videos I've seen. The title caught my interest, I was like lets see what kind of bs this person has to say. To my surprise you're spot on about carburetion and carburetors. As to what you were describing about Smokey's idea, it's all about fuel atomization. The fuel molecules will only ignite when surrounded by air/oxygen at a ratio of approximately 14:1. Therefore if fuel molecules are clumped together(droplets), only the ones that has access to the air/oxygen molecules(outer layer of droplet) will ignite. So the inner molecules will not ignite till the outer ones are burned away. This slows the combustion process, and combustion pressure will be lowered as the combustion chamber volume increases because of the piston moving away and farther down it's bore. The key to efficient combustion is to burn as much of the fuel as quickly as possible so that combustion pressure is as high as possible while the piston is still close to TDC to take advantage of the combustion expansion pressure to exert the maximum amount of pressure on the piston therefore increasing force(torque) on the crankshaft.

The problem has always been the vaporization of the liquid fuel before the spark plug ignite the mixture in SI engines. The intake manifold has a lot to do in that process on carbureted engines. The carb is responsible for the atomization of the liquid fuel in fine droplets. The manifold plenum & runners do the vaporization job. Some intake manifold designs are better at doing this job then other design. This subject is rarely discussed imo. Natural gas running engines do not suffer from this issue and are more efficient at using the calorific energy available in the combustive agent.

I knew an old fellow that had two of those carbs. He had an R196 International. Pulled a low boy and a D 9 Caterpillar and got 15 mpg. That is phenomenal. He only used one, the other was still new in box.

I had the privilege to know a mechanic, Ed Lewandowsky, who modified carburetors such that he would double the gas mileage of most installations. His own vehicle, a Peugeot 404, started out at 25mpg, when he finished modifying the carburetor, got an average 60mpg. I had a customer who had a big Suburban that averaged 7-8mpg. I had Ed do his magic on the gas guslar 4 barrel, and he ended up averaging 14-16mpg. His theory was to get fuel from a liquid to a gases state well before the intake valve.

I tried something similar to this fuel vapor idea some years ago. I had a 327 Chevrolet engine in my car with a 3 speed standard transmission and a 4 barrel carburetor. I made sure the exhaust crossover under the carburetor wasn't blocked and I noticed the radiator had fittings for an automatic transmission cooler. So I connected the outlet of the fuel pump to the cooler and the outlet of the cooler up to the carburetor and that pre-heated the fuel, to the temperature of the thermostat around 180 degrees. I assume it was anyway. It ran pretty good in the winter but I never tried it in the summer. I need to try this again . Great videos.

Thank you 1 horsepower needs appropriately 1/2 pound per hour of gas. I always laugh when people with small fuel pumps and 5/16 line try to tell me they make 600 hp.

Over 10 years ago when I studied Engineering at university, a lecturer was always very interested in Economy, and getting the most out of a fuel source. He use to do aerodynamic tests with his car lol with cardboard, well he made something that he said has improves his engines economy, and has a meeting with a company who are interested in his concept. To cut a long story short they bought his concept and the rights to it. Must of been millions and he said they just shelved it? Never to be used on public roads again. He went travelling not much time after that, and I never saw him again the whole time I finished uni.

I tweaked a 75 datsun 620 to 31 mpg with a z24 engine. Extra air inlet in manifold under the carb. Would get to 30 mph, then open it up for the "mother of all vaccuum leaks" if you wish. Wouldn't idle, so closed it off below 30 mph. Pretty impressive mpg increase. And no, the valves didn't burn up any.

When I can get one of my hero’s experimental engines explained to me by another hero of mine, you know it’s going to be a great video. Thanks, Uncle Tony.

I believe the man's name was Tom Ogle. It is what's known as a vapor carburetor. Gasoline turns into vapor at a certain temperature. It was like a metal box with a hot plate under it. Keeping the Plate at a certain temperature the system would drip gasoline onto the hot plate where it would turn into vapor and be ran into the engine. He claimed 2500 MPG. Reportedly he was was found dead in the car on the side of the highway.

I had a 1969 318 in a dodge A100 van. It had a Stromberg 1 barrel that routinely got 30 mpg.

THE best explanation/refutation I've ever seen of "high mileage" claims!!!

I really found this interestingly educational

I read in a very well known mag, pop mech, about an famous engine builder who built an engine that used multiple valves per cylinder and the basic principle was the engine was 1/2 fuel, 1/2 steam engine. would run on fuel to a temperature point then the 2nd valves would take over and water was used to create steam in the cylinder and you get "free strokes" until the temp dropped to a point then goes back to fuel. It was years ago but I always remembered that article. This fellow actually had his invention in a car and would drive it daily. I don't believe it was McLaren but somebody equally famous. I imagine it would have to be a diesel type engine and some kind of lubricate added to the water but the "exhaust valves" would send the steam back to the water tank to be reused. Fascinating concept. Uncle Tony you rock!

Thanks for that video, Ive been a mechanic for 50 years. Now I can quit looking for that carburetor. Everything you said make complete sense. Think Ill get back to work.

Great explanation. The vapor carburetor is practical for an engine at a specific rpm and output as a generator for a serial hybrid EV. I would expect the same would apply for a hot vapor engine. Reclaiming lost energy from heat always improves efficiency.

GM's delving into Smokey's system was called "EFE, Early Fuel Evaporation". That's the best application they could adapt for production manufacture of it. Mostly just put a grid plate under the carb, and electrically heated it up. I remember those.

I had an IC engine class in college. We went thru the chemistry of gasoline combustion. Just one more death dagger to the ‘100 mpg’ engine. Nice explanation from the carb side though.

I read an article in 1999 about a team of engineers from a university that made a v8 Buick get over 100 mpg by adjusting the carb and timing, after 9-11 I couldnt find the article anymore.

85 y/o gear head. Easy to follow concepts. Success is always on the details.

Uncle Tony is highly intelligent. He talks about springs oscillation. Where did you learn that did you take a physics class? I worked on cars many years before I took a physics class and learned about sine cosine oscillation of springs. Molecular makeup, man Uncle Tony really gets it.

I find the best way to get the most fuel economy out of my Plymouth is to zip tie the float arm on the fuel sending unit to the highest point of travel and unscrew the speedometer cable, disabling the odometer. Can’t complain about a bad number if you cant do the math to get it.

You deserve a standing ovation man seriously your understanding and profound knowledge is impeccable

This is an interesting subject and a lot of fun as i have screwed with this off and on for years , thanks Tony for bringing it out here

God stuff Tony. Good to hear the 'Smokey Yunick' name. I'm thinking a good amount of the younger followers are scratching their heads.

This is the first time Tony has explained different systems without driving the train WAY off the tracks.. I made it all the way through!!!

Yesterday's technology. I have experience with two vehicles that got better than expected fuel economy. The first was a '65 Ford Country Squire, with a 390 CID V8, with a 4 bbl Holley carb. It got 24 mpg, when driven with a light foot. I don't remember what the carb number was. The second was a '68 IH 3/4 ton pickup, with a 345 CID V8, with a Holley 2-205 EconoMaster carb. This truck got a combined city/highway fuel economy of 17 mpg. The highway cruising speed was 70 MPH. The last time I saw that truck, it was being used as a service truck by a garage in Ridgecrest, CA.

I had some early mechanically fuel injected cars. They didn't have a choke, but did have an extra fuel injector near the top of the intake, hooked up to a thermal switch in the cylinder head. When the engine was stone cold it would make that extra fuel injector fire for a moment. The thermal switch has an electric heater in it, which cuts it off after a short time. If the coolant was warm, the switch wouldn't activate.

Good ole Smokey. I haven't heard his name in decades!!! I got a Holley Sniper for my 70 442 project and am curious about what MPG's will be like compared to the old Dominator it ran

Very good Tony , brilliant explanation. My personal was add paxton supercharger = plus 7 mpg... hiway cruise. Volumetric efficiancy is the key. Down fall of this is that peak (for any given engine) will only occur at a given rpm. Most interesting subject.

Tony, Great that you are covering these issues. No one else is, so eloquently. Smokey is one of my heros. I paid close attention to his theories when I was stock car racing. Race the rule book & the physics...smart man. Self educated. I too have few NASCAR no- no's in the short track book... A few direct observations: The Rochester Quadrajet (i know...) With it's tiny primaries & vacuum door secondaries does the best job of the vacuum controlled needle jet in any American carb. I have built and tuned all major brands. Most hot rodders don't understand them. Your explanation is superb. Try 18mpg/135 mph in a 7000lb Caddy 500 Q-jet powered '67 Ford F250 flatbed! Even better are the side draft British SU (Skinners Union) and Honda motorcycle constant velocity carbs. They are just not sized for American Muscle. (8 Individual 2.5in. SUs on a 340 anyone?) Think outside the box... Ignoring arguments over atomization advantages, all vapor designs (even Smokey's!) are an effort to deal with fuel drop out and intake runner wetting. Unavoidable in carburetor systems. I have ported intakes & heads to ski jump the liquid fuel back into the airstream with good results. But nothing solves the issue short of the complexities you speak of. Multi- point fuel injection largely makes it a mute argument. Direct injection is another dysfunctional animal altogether. Carbs have 4-5 circuits. EFI has upwards of 500. I rest my case For the record i agree with your take on the "black helicopter" conspiracies. However I have direct personal experience with a prototype 2bbl variable venturi design that made 50+ mpg in a 1971 Vega 2.3 (? go figure...). This design had squared off venturies not unlike later Predator designs. 1 end wall of each venturi was vacuum controlled. Atomization was amazing under all conditions. The inventor (I knew him) patented it. Patents are public. Shortly thereafter legal reps for GM approached him with an offer to sell the rights for $250,000 (1972$$$). They implied he would be unable to afford the lawsuits if he refused. He sold. Later GM sold the patent to Ford. Autolite division bungled it trying to make their own version. Committee engineering? It did go into production briefly in 1975-76 in 302 powered Granadas. It did improve milage but only by about 2mpg. Ford dropped it afterwards due to drivability issues from the changes they made. Electronic carbs and then EFI were the writing on the wall. Analog carbs were for the OEMs a dead end. Sorry about the length off this post...

And now i guys see this 5 stroke engine setup. Thanks again

The system was multi-stage A) Intake through fuel metering device, carb, whatever B) Heated by a heat exchanger with engine coolant before it hit radiator C) Drawn through turbocharger, which he called a "homogenizer" because it further broke up the fuel droplets to hopefully completely dissolve the gasoline in the fuel. D) Another heat exchanger that used heat from the exhaust system with the goal of making the intake mixture a SOLUTION of gasoline dissolved in air, not an atomized suspension, so every gasoline molecule was surrounded by oxygen molecules, ready to ignite it and burn it completely. When you applied throttle, the "boost" climbed instantaneously, as the turbo was not to add compression, per se, as it was a one-way valve merely to keep the natural expansion of the last stage, which was the exhaust heat exchanger, from expanding the fuel and air to the point where you had far less of it, mass-wise, entering the engine, which would cost power. If the turbo was being used to boost the system, there would have been lag, but the pressure in the intake manifold increased almost directly with the throttle position, as it was not designed to add power via boost, but to prevent power loss due to excessive expansion of the intake mixture, and to "stir" the fuel/air mixture after the first heat exchanger to help the fuel evaporate more readily. The functional concept was preservation of heat coupled with far more complete combustion, which would allow one to run a FAR leaner mixture, as complete combustion was assured by dissolution of the gasoline. The heat normally entirely discarded by the radiator (around 60 percent of heat energy from the fuel) was recycled into the intake charge, thermally compressing it, ready to push the piston down, from the moment the intake valve opened. The target temperature, said Smokey, was 400 degree fahrenheit, for complete gasoline vaporization. Smokey Yunick claimed that knock was a phenomenon that was more related to atomization than temperature, so his system, by dissolving the gasoline, solved that problem. Of course, the big automakers panned the system, as it would have returned us to cars WE could work on, minus a bank of "HAL 9000's" at the dealership or garage. Also, the efficiency and power production was quite high. Rest in Speed, Smokey. I still think this concept bears more exploring. Perhaps one could get away with lower compression, which would produce less heat upon the compression stroke, as the engine is already compressing the mixture via heat before it reaches the combustion chamber. As an example, 100 degree air compressed to 10:1 yields 5000 degrees in temperature, whereas 400 degree air at 6:1 yields 4800 degree temperature, actually cooler than conventional intake air temperature and compression. By eternally trapping heat in a loop in a closed loop in the engine, you end up with no greater peak temperatures, and increased efficiency, as that heat was formerly discarded to heat the atmosphere.

I read an interesting piece by Mike Brown who was remaking Fish carbs for a while (sort of a predecessor of a Predator). He apparently built an engine with 16 : 1 static compression and utilized a custom ground cam that held the intake valve open for half of the compression stroke resulting in an 8 : 1 pump gas pop with half the fuel. Legend has it that the cams were manufactured and sold for a while. I think it's an interesting idea that comes with a unique set of problems.

Thanks UT. Superb as always.

Thank you for clearing up some of the questions i have had . 🤔

I remember reading about Smokey's engine in Hot Rod. Article came out just before Hot Rod Magazine started to really suck. He had it on a Pontiac Fiero seems like it got 80 mpg. Never heard another word about it for years. Finally they had a little write up that said he'd sold the patent to a company that did nothing with it. That's how all these stories end. 😆

Good job Tony. It's funny how some people think a really smart person can defy the laws of physics. ...."carburetor sends what the engine asks for..." Brilliant!

I had a 68 pontiac grand prix 400sb, turbo 400, 4bbl rottenchester, dual factory cherry bombs and 61k miles on the barn find car, and it got 35 mpg all the time. This was back in 1998-1999 and I used mapquest to measure distances in addition to miles and fuel used. At the same time I drove a 67 pontiac executive 400sb, turbo 400, 4 bbl and the mpg was 10-15.

Thanx for the lesson on carbs and vapor engine. Enjoyed it immensely. I remember Smokey Yunick. 😮

You are a walking encyclopedia! Thanks Tony!

time to build a still in my backyard and make my own fuel.

I had a 302 before that got 28 mpg. Had a Motorcraft 2 barrel on it. I always wondered why that 78 Mercury Cougar always got such good gas mileage. Because every car I have owned with a 302 always got 18 to 22 mpg. I had the jets gauged and they were smaller then the other carbs. It really made a big difference in mileage. Just my knowledge from back in the day. Good video.

I visited Smokey in his shop back in the 1980s and we spent a few hours discussing the hot vapor engine

I´m a bit of a dreamer, and often ideas I come up with have already been tried in practice. Using the heat of the engine to atomize the fuel is a great example. Thanks for showing. Future cars have electric motors, and these concepts could make for efficient in-car generators at a constant RPM. I´m not convinced using coal plants and batteries is a cleaner sollution, let alone practical.

they didnt disappear the carb guy they killed the water fuel guy

Vapor carbs do work. I built one for a lawnmower that I cut my grass with for a year. It ran cleaner and had more power than a celebrated mower. I also got a Ford truck with a 300 Ci six go 55 mph before froze and stopped making vapor and that was with a cold vapor system made from a paint can and PVC pipe!

In the late 70s I read an article in probably Hot Rod Magazine about Smokey and all of the crazy things he did. It was a hoot.

My grandfather actually told me he knew the gentleman personally who created a system to get near 100mpg back in the 60's in yes, eastern Ohio.. He used GM and a few other machined parts to compile the set up. He told me soon after trying to find investors and marketing, the guy ended up dying in a freak accident on his way home from work. Not sure what happened exactly. BUT, rumor was EXXON and a couple other big oil companies tried to buy the prototype from him to keep it from being manufactured.. After he said no, well.. That's really the unkown.

Wow I got the notification for this within 3 minutes this time! Hello Tony hello everyone!

Best explained how a carb works , thank you so much. 😊