McBurney Super Carb

April 21, 2010

Reprinted from: Exotic Research Report (Volume 3, Issue 2; Apr/May/Jun 1999)

Bruce McBurney’s own attempt to build and test a super carb.


In search of 100 mpg…
I read a book called The Secret of the 200 M.P.G. Carburetor by Allan Wallace. It explained a simple vaporizing carburetor system and discussed several of the systems from the past. I wanted to see for myself and set out to build my own system.

First I built a gasoline heater, then a hot water vaporizer, then an electrical system for heat control, with a dual disk butterfly mixing control with which I could vary the air/fuel ratio from 10-1 to 1000-1. Finally, in a text book while trying to find the boiling temperature of gasoline, I discovered the principles of Thermal Catalytic Cracking (TCC).

I learned that the oil refiners take the heavy oil leftovers and heat them above 747°F with water or hydrogen and break them down to smaller more usable molecules. The idea hit, the system had to lower the boiling point to make a difference with vapor because of the principles of refrigeration and compression-that is to turn vapor back to liquid. Natural gas will stay as a vapor under our engine compression. It struck me that this really could cause such a drastic mileage increase.

I took all I had learned and designed and built a system on my 1976 360ci. Dodge Maxi-van. It had a large catalytic chamber heated by the exhaust and electric elements powered by additional alternators capable of reaching this 747° and beyond. I air pressure tested it at 100 lb. at 900°. I also developed different systems to feed heated gasoline, air and steam. It was very difficult to get ratio pressures and temperatures stable. It was difficult to keep it balanced to run. The best I ever got was 72 mpg for about a 5 mile run as measured by my mileage computer.

Understanding Reactions
After researching and experimenting with the idea of using vaporizing carburetors (they boil the fuel by heating it) to obtain fantastic mileage improvements, I came to understand the secret of cracking the gasoline down into smaller hydrocarbons-and why it really could yield unbelievable gains.

Our engines burn fuel in a cylinder that generates heat that exerts pressure on a piston, which is connected to a crankshaft that rotates to produce motion power. The type of fuel used dictates the amount of propulsion (useful energy) and heat (wasted energy) generated. A fuel that explodes generates more propulsion and less heat than a fuel that burns. Describing the two basic types of fuels used in bombs, percussion and incendiary, will help explain this concept.

A percussion explosion will destroy a brick building but not generate much heat or fire. An example is nitroglycerin, used to extinguish oil fires. The dynamics of the explosion chase the flame front, or heat of the combustion, far enough away from the oil without generating more heat. This uses the oxygen completely and pushes the heat away so that the oil doesn’t re-ignite. Percussion explosives have a singular specific boiling point, and the molecular structure of each molecule is identical causing the fuel to react together and immediately.

Incendiary fuels burn and generate heat slowly causing a building to catch fire and burn. The flame front is slower, and doesn’t cause the dynamic explosion of a percussion fuel. Incendiary fuels are made up of molecules of many different sizes having a wide range of boiling points and a greater variance in molecular structure. These react slower in burning in progression as they reach different boiling points. Only vapor burns. Any liquid must become vapor before it burns.

This is the process used in today’s cars. It causes more heat to be generated and not as much pressure for dynamic motion. This requires more fuel to achieve the motion produced. Today’s gasoline has a boiling point ranging from 130° to 430° F or 54° to 221° C. When ignition occurs, the lowest boiling temperature fuel burns first and the heat from it is used to boil the next higher boiling temperature fuels. So that they can burn the up the levels of the fuel to push the piston down then when the exhaust valve opens and the fuel continues burning in the exhaust system.

When applying this understanding to any of the many supercarb systems over the years, there were two basic ways that achieved the percussion type reaction to power the engine more efficiently. Both basically vaporize the fuel.

The first and easiest is fractionalization which distills the fuel and burns each level of it simultaneously because each level will consist of similarly sized molecules. Vapor systems that recirculated fuel work on this principle. The problem here is that the fuel that boils over 350°F is left unused in the tank. If it is a water heated system then more fuel will be left depending on the vacuum and the highest temperature of their unit. Thermal Catalytic Cracking (TCC) is the other method and is the more efficient of the two.

Thermal Catalytic Cracking
TCC causes the molecular structure of the entire fuel to be changed by breaking the larger multiple carbon molecules into much smaller singular carbon molecules. The entire fuel is then made up of similar small molecules. You get methane and methanol and all the molecules now have comparable and much lower boiling points. When it ignites, it burns completely and instantaneously and the energy is transformed more efficiently with a smaller charge.

This cracking action uses all the fuel instead of leaving leftover high boiling point fuel that normally burns in the exhaust pipe or is reburnt in regular exhaust catalytic converters if enough oxygen is present. If not it just goes out unburned to pollute our air. The car companies’ converter does help for reducing pollution some, but the energy is wasted heat and isn’t moving you down the road.

Super Carb vs Natural Gas
What is basically happening with any successful supercarb system is that the fuel is being converted completely into vaporous natural gas and methanol before getting detonated in the engine. There is a distinct advantage to this, over the standard system used in today’s natural gas powered vehicles. That system pre-stores the natural gas in very high pressure tanks that could cause very large explosions when ruptured.

Also a natural gas system can not recover waste heat as much in that TCC is an endothermic reaction. This reaction can take waste heat energy and change it back to chemical energy, specifically, the molecular weight of the water into hydrogen and alcohol as fuel. Also a water injection system is used to quench the explosion and the pressure expansion characteristics of steam help to keep the engine running even cooler and more efficiently.

Some previous attempts to produce high efficiency carburetors used one or both of these processes, but usually did not run very long. It was not realized by the builders of these vaporizing systems that the metal of the vapor chamber itself was acting as a catalyst. These systems soon lost efficiency because additives in gasoline coat the metal of the vapor chamber and prevent the catalytic action from taking place. Since previous inventors didn’t realize what was actually taking place, they were continually mystified by their system’s apparent failure after a certain amount of running time.

Others have been aware of intricacies of the system for a good many years but for various reasons have kept quiet about what they know. It is interesting to note that lead was not added to gasoline until the time of the Pogue carburetor in the 1930′s. Also, understand that to eliminate the ping or knock in an engine you eliminate the larger, high boiling point hydrocarbon fuels, the diesel end.

Ping or knock is caused because under compression, the larger molecules are forced too close to oxygen causing spontaneous ignition, burning before the top dead center and spark plug firing timing. The smaller the molecule the greater the octane rating. The high test fuels just have more of the fuel that boils at a lower temperature and a lower top boiling point… 380° instead of 430° for regular fuel. Natural gas has an octane rating of about 120. This means you can run a higher compression.
In the Public Domain…
Now let me give you the short run of the years of frustration I went through with our patent office. The following patent is classed as public domain, because just at the time I was publishing my book and filing my patent, the laws were changed. The Patent Office put me on hold due to some regulation and by the time it was looked after, it was just too late.

I did know the laws and had done as I was supposed to, but the law was changed and that was that. I appealed twice and my only option was the Supreme Court and that costs mega bucks. I couldn’t afford to chase anymore and did not think they would ever patent it anyway.

What follows now is a more specific description of the process taken straight from my patent application, complete with diagrams. Included is an explanation of my original innovation of a replaceable catalyst container with increased catalyst surface area. This was filed November 3, 1989.

Patent Abstract
In the conventional carburetor process in the internal combustion engine, a mixture of air and fine gasoline droplets are produced for combustion. In this invention the gasoline is catalytically converted to small molecular, light hydrocarbons, methane and methanol which are then mixed with air for combustion. The new carburetion process improves internal combustion engine efficiency and greatly reduces atmospheric pollution.

This invention relates to a carburetion process for the internal combustion engine. In the internal combustion engine, a mixture of air and fine gasoline droplets are drawn into the cylinders where it is exploded to provide propulsion power. The gasoline droplets are converted to gasoline vapor by the explosion initiating sparks in the cylinders. This conversion is one source of internal combustion inefficiency. The gaseous products of the explosion and combustion of the gasoline vapor are major contributors to the pollution of our atmosphere.

I have found a process for, vaporizing the gasoline droplets before they enter the cylinders of the internal combustion engine, mixing the gasoline vapor with water vapor, and for converting the gasoline and water vapor mixture over a catalyst into a mixture of low molecular weight hydrocarbons, methane, and methanol. The methane and methanol then mix with air and this mixture of low molecular weight hydrocarbons, methane and methanol is then drawn into the cylinders where it is exploded to provide motive power more efficiently. The gaseous products of the explosions and combustion of the low molecular weight hydrocarbons, methane, and methanol, are minor contributors to the pollution of the atmosphere.

Claims
The embodiments of the invention for which an exclusive property or privilege is claimed, is defined as follows:
The vaporization of gasoline droplets by waste heat from the exhaust gasses of an engine to increase the efficiency with which chemical energy stored in gasoline is converted into propulsion power.

The catalytic conversion of a mixture of water and gasoline vapor to small molecular weight hydro carbons, methane and methanol.

The combustion in the internal combustion engine of a mixture of air, small molecular weight hydrocarbons, methane and methanol to produce less pollution of the atmosphere

A process for generating methane and methanol for use in an internal combustion engine generated from gasoline and water by passing them over a catalyst heated by exhaust gases.

A pre-carburetion system consisting of a series of tubing and catalyst bed heated by exhaust gases to regain this heat energy into further cracking of a liquid hydrocarbon and water into a lighter more aromatic hydro carbon and methanol.

How it Works
In a caveat filed, November 10, 1987, I described the theoretical background for this invention. (A caveat is a preliminary patent application designed to register an idea before perfecting and filing a completed patent application.)

This system will change the molecular structure of a hydrocarbon, and water into a finer compound state (ie. methane or natural gas and methanol). Using a iron particle catalyst cartridge, vaporous gasoline and steam will be regulated into the cartridge then flow into a further heated coil to allow time for the hydrocarbon to crack into a smaller molecules this finest state, natural gas and methanol.

This will align and lower the boiling point of the fuel for greater efficiency. Using heat from exhaust and electric energy from auxiliary generation, the iron will be maintained at a temperature of about 500°C. Thermistors will monitor the temperature to input to a computer to control electric elements on cartridge. A catalyst cartridge will require replacement as the iron surface is poisoned out.

Figures 1 and 2 illustrate embodiments of this invention. Figure 1 is an elevation partly in section of one embodiment of the process, Fgure 2 is a top view of this embodiment.

How it Works
1 Is a fuel injector that is fed by 12, which injects gasoline droplets into a mixer block 2, where the gasoline droplets are mixed with steam produced in the coil 3 that is heated by hot exhaust gases which enter the steel heater 4 at 5 and which leave heater 4 at 6. Water enters coil 3 at 3, is converted to steam in coil 3. The flow rate of the steam is controlled by the steam control valve 7 and the control flow of steam is heated further and injected into and mixed with gasoline droplets in the mixer block 2. The mixture of steam and gasoline droplets pass into coils 8 which are made from tubing. These coils are also mounted in heater 4. The heated mixture of steam and gasoline droplets become a mixture of steam and gasoline vapor which then enters the catalyst bed 9 which contains fine metal catalyst shavings and which is separated from heater 4 by a thermally conducting lubricant. The catalyst bed is easily removable, for catalyst regeneration or replacement at the connector blocks 11. The heated mixture of low molecular weight hydrocarbons, methane and methanol, which are produced in catalyst bed 9, exit at 10 to be mixed with air
for combustion.

The gasoline and water feed lines will be preheated by coiling them around the exhaust pipe and insulating with foil and fiberglass. The gasoline will be controlled by fuel injection into a vaporizing coil maintaining a temperature 350°C to maintain a complete vaporous state. The steam will be passed through a liquid trap to insure only vapor steam entering into iron catalyst cartridge.

The main structure is cylindrical with center area access for catalyst cartridge replacement. The cartridge cylinder is directly exposed to electric elements and heated surface of exhaust gases. It will be filled with a catalytic material-a metal such as steel or iron. Experimentation will produce a better catalyst. It will have two fittings, one for input and one for output, and will be baffled inside to allow greatest surface use and time exposure. The output of the system will be connected to a cooling coil then regulator for flow to engine. On the outside of the exhaust heat exchanger the coil for the gasoline vaporizer stage will be wrapped, also the liquid trap may be mounted on the end.

When the steam and gasoline vapor enter the iron chamber the water is broken down, the oxygen forms with the carbon, creating methanol the hydrogen forms with hydrocarbon, cracking it into the finer form, natural gas.

The entire unit, except for the cartridge, should be made of stainless steel, for safety and long life. This system could work also with a standard carburetor or fuel injection for the warm up cycle with an automatic temperature sensing thermistor to automatically switch the system to natural gas production when proper operating temperature is obtained.

This system will work and should be more efficient than the standard carburetor, as the reaction is endothermic. Regaining the wasted exhaust heat energy back into the fuel which now is natural gas and methanol that should give a more complete burn in the cylinder for more propulsion power. The compression ratio will be increased and the timing changed to enhance the burn of the new fuel for greater efficiency.

Suppression
Numerous times over the last sixty years, both mechanics and inventors have either stumbled upon, or through diligent experimentation on vapor carburetors, obtained fantastic mileage gains. These systems used either catalytic cracking or fractionalization. According to the many patents and books on these, most did not recognize that it was accomplished by more than just vaporizing or boiling the fuel. In most every instance sabotage or suppression has blocked the research and development needed to get it to our market.

There are records that show the oil companies now own many of the applicable patents. I have also found that if the oil companies do not own the patent then TCC was not understood by the inventor and could be easily sabotaged by gasoline additives. Therefore they did not have to buy the idea, they just would let the additive poison the system leaving the inventor wondering why it did not work any more.

For the complete history and details check out the Super Secret Mileage Report.

All Press Releases for November 17, 2003
McBurney Cracks Super-Carburetor Code
Inventor J. Bruce McBurney says the key to super carburetors is the catalytic cracking of the larger gasoline molecules into the dynamic combusting single-carbon molecules of methane and methanol, in the presence of heat, a catalyst, and water vapor.

ONTARIO, CANADA (PRWEB) November 17 2003–Everyone has heard of super efficient carburetors being invented and then suppressed. Few understand the underlying technology as well as J. Bruce McBurney does.

“Today’s engines should run 4-5 times more efficiently than they do — with virtually no pollution to the environment,” says McBurney.

He says the key to gasoline efficiency is found in ‘cracking’ the fuel from the large-molecule octane into small molecule methanol and natural gas. This yields far more ‘dynamic’ explosions than ‘heat’ energy in the piston.

“Most people who tinker with increasing the efficiency of carburetor systems think that it is the vaporizing of the fuel that is the primary cause of the increased efficiency.” Actually, following a basic law of physics, the vapor is quickly turned back to liquid by its compression in the piston. “The methanol and natural gas that are created while the fuel is vaporized are what result in the increased efficiency.”

According to McBurney, the process is really quite simple. You vaporize the fuel through any of a number of methods, then in the presence of heat generated from the exhaust, and added water vapor, run the fuel-water mixture across a catalyzing agent, and a vast portion of the fuel molecules will break down into methanol and natural gas. The heat and catalyst and water drive the reaction.

Gallon for gallon, natural gas and methanol burn approximately as efficiently as gasoline. The efficiency of McBurney’s system comes because by using this process of ‘cracking’ the fuel, one gallon of gas with two gallons of water will produce four to five Gallons of natural gas and methanol. These smaller molecules occupy a greater amount of space.

“The chemistry is straightforward, and proven,” says McBurney. He verified this process at Brock University in Ontario using UV spectrum analysis and gas chromatography.

The boiling point of gasoline is in the range of 130 to 430 degrees Fahrenheit. In any given gasoline solution some molecules will boil at a lower temperature, while others boil at a higher temperature. It is a function of the chemical chain, whether it is a C-6 or up to a C-12, and each of these has a 3-D pattern that effects its boiling point, so there is an infinite variety of temperatures involved within that range.
McBurney then points out that by converting all these larger molecules of an infinite number of boiling points into mostly single-carbon molecules — methanol and methane — the boiling points are greatly lowered, and they come within the same temperature range, so their ignition in the piston is virtually instantaneous, giving a much greater percussion. Both the lowering of the boiling point and the synchronizing of the boiling point are what give these systems their drastically increased efficiency. It’s like soldiers marching lock-step across a bridge and bringing it down.

He claims the oil industry has known of this phenomenon for decades, and has purposely thwarted this effect by its additives, especially lead, which have the effect of inhibiting this catalytic cracking process. Even “unleaded” gas includes a form of lead, according to the MSDA spec sheets that the fuel companies are required to produce.

“I don’t think it is mere coincidence that the oil companies began adding lead to their gas in the 1930′s after the emergence of the Pogue carburetor.” Lead inhibits the catalytic property of the Pogue, rendering it nearly useless after just a short while of running.

Another additive that inhibits the catalytic cracking is an “anti pyrosis agent” that is purported to “block the natural decomposition of organic matter, so the fuel stays fresh in fuel tanks.”

McBurney points out that gasoline is “organic matter,” and claims that the catalytic cracking process is what the oil companies are primarily aiming to inhibit.

“Many who experiment with fuel vaporizing methods are puzzled as to why their system works well at first, but then diminishes in performance. Whatever metal is serving as the catalyst to crack to fuel is becoming caked with the additives.”

McBurney proposes three different methods to overcome the additive obstacle. Gasoline obtained from the well head, straight from the refiners, before the additives are introduced, is an obvious but not readily available solution. Another alternative is to run the fuel through an activated coconut charcoal that removes the additives before vaporization. The third alternative is to increase the catalyst area a thousand times that of the Pogue, by using a bed of metal filings.

McBurney cites several substances that function as a catalyzing agent for cracking, including nickel, platinum, steel, aircraft aluminum. He used metal shavings because of the increased surface area.

After having a patent ready to file in Canada, McBurney was impeded by a change of filing protocol midstream, leading to a violation that would have been irrelevant under the previous rules. Lacking the funds to take the case to the Canadian Supreme Court, he chose instead to publish his design openly. His booklet, The Secret Super High Mileage Report, includes the patent, with drawings and explanation. He has money-back guarantee if the reader is not convinced, and has sold 1600 books with only two refunds thus far. The text is available for free on his website HIMACResearch.com

The problem with his design is that it is expensive and complex to build. It is not something someone could simply pull together in their back yard using off-the-shelf components and fit under the hood. Only mass production would render it cost effective. Better yet, the most obvious place for its integration would be into the overall design of the engine by the automobile manufacturers.
For Now . . .
Meanwhile, the most cost-effective and easy to install system McBurney recommends is the “Condensator,” which retails at around $100.00. “It increases gas mileage a little, but cuts down on pollution a lot.” “The older the car, the better the gas mileage improvement will be,” he says. “It just hooks up in series with the hose coming from the PVC valve under the carburetor.”

He recommends to be sure to empty out the canister when it reaches half full, and clean out the catalyst unit with every oil change.

For those who are only slightly mechanically inclined, he recommends the Hydrogen Boost system, and provides a manual for sale on his site that has full instructions on how to build one. It does not require welding or machine work, but just simple electrical and plumbing hook-up. It is an electrolysis unit that hooks up to the car battery. The package also includes basic plans for a home made version of the condensator.

For those who are much more mechanically inclined, he recommends the latest HIMAC publication on a CD: The APOD Fuel System, by Anthony P. O’ Donnel from Australia. It comes with interactive Auto CAD 2000 drawings and complete collection of notes, testimonials, pictures, and text to help you build your own system to triple your gas mileage. More CDs are also in the works.
Like the light bulb manufacturers who purposely design a limited lifetime for their product so they can get the return business of a replacement, “the automobile manufacturers have a vested interest in inefficient carburetors, both in terms of service calls from engine wear, and in replacements,” not to mention whatever collusion they have behind closed doors with the oil companies.

Efficiency means cooler running, and cooler running means longer life and less maintenance.

Until such technology is finally adopted by the automobile manufacturers, “the biggest factor that would open up this technology would be to make non-additive gasoline readily available,” says McBurney. Either of those eventualities are dependent on enough people putting pressure on the oil industry and automobile industry.

In 1987 McBurney converted a ’76 Dodge minivan to his design, and it got 70 mpg “when it was working well.” He said the carburetor system will have to be computer controlled to handle the intricate system. “It’s like an onboard oil refinery.”

In similar designs, the radiator never gets hotter than lukewarm, because the fuel was being burned so efficiently. McBurney’s design calls for a computer to be programmed to jettison a stream of normal fuel for initial warm up and for high acceleration so that the car will have adequate power, but that otherwise the fuel will run through the catalytic cracking unit.

Considering the wide range of boiling points of gasoline, McBurney explains why some high-efficiency carburetor claims can be misleading. “The acidic additives are catalyzing the release of a certain range of molecules in the gasoline mixture, giving an initial positive result, but then the remaining molecules are yet in solution, and the complete burn of the entire gasoline solution may not be that much more efficient.” A test to ferret out this effect would be use up the whole tank of gas (however full it is) and then check the mileage.

McBurney also states that one of the factors that most carburetor efficiency enthusiasts do not realize is the importance of water in the equation. “That is why these vaporizer systems run more efficiently in humid conditions,” he said. McBurney sets forth the chemical equation of the reaction, and shows that there are two water molecules called for every one molecule of gasoline, to yield C1H4 (methane/natural gas) and C1OH3 (methanol).

A contention that McBurney hears frequently when he states that methanol and natural gas are produced in the cracking of the gasoline, is that natural gas cars don’t have any power. His response is that the vehicles on the market lack an accelerator (pump)/circuit. The National Hot Rodder’s Association have race cars that use natural gas with an accelerator pump, and they get plenty of horse power.

One has to wonder why such a solution would not be implemented immediately into the mainstream market, if was so simple.

“It’s not chemistry, it’s politics,” is what E.A. Cherniak, late Head of the Chemistry Department at Brock University in Ontario of told McBurney after receiving a phone call that turned him pale and scared him away from helping McBurney in 1987. Two years later he agreed to at least pen some kind of statement of endorsement, “but it is nothing compared to what he knew” laments McBurney. Professor Cherniak only went so far as to say, “The concepts of Mr. McBurney are scientifically and technologically sound.”

Once at an automobile show, where McBurney was passing out business cards with a little blurb about the carburetor system, he ran into a fellow who said, “You only get 100 mpg? I get 140.” They spoke at length, and when McBurney asked him why he doesn’t try to do something with his technology, the man responded, looking down at his five-year-old son, that he does not want to go to jail.

McBurney tells a story of another man he met named Stanley Meyers, who said he could run a car on water, and finally got a grant for 50 million dollars to develop it, held a celebration with his colleagues at a restaurant, stood up and said, “I’ve been poisoned,” then went out to the parking lot and keeled over dead. Meanwhile, a van had pulled up to his shop, and men wearing black carted off with his stuff. Later, someone sent McBurney a copy of all of Meyers’ notes. “I didn’t understand them, but I made copies of them and gave them to a lot of people. They’re posted on Keeley.Net.”

Threats and opposition do not stop McBurney. He has lost his wife over this, and his family has been broken up. Yet he continues to hope that some day something will happen to finally allow this technology to break into the mainstream.

Stories like this sound like so much science fiction, yet in the many time he has presented this information to an audience of at least 50, McBurney has inevitably found another person who knows someone personally who has had a super-oppression experience of some kind or another when they had developed a super efficient technology.

McBurney has tried to get on Art Bell’s Coast to Coast program, but was declined by the manager who said, “Everyone knows that high efficiency carburetors are suppressed; that is not news.” Yet the show regularly airs other topics that are suppressed such as UFOs, alternative healing modalities, and supernatural phenomenon. Art Bell himself responded by saying that he was not convinced there was anything to the claim, and until he rode 200 miles he would not do a show on it. Yet he regularly airs claims about other subjects of which he has no direct experience. “Perhaps I just need to find the right connection,” McBurney says.

He is not lacking in his ability to express himself clearly and convincingly. “I can explain it so your mother-in-law and understand it.” His presence on the phone was amiable and patient.

He also has approached Green Peace and other environmentalist groups, because of the great boon this technology would be to the environment. He offered to turn all the rights to the technology over to them so that their bylaws would not have conflict in endorsing a particular company. They likewise turned him down, saying, “We get one call a week from someone claiming they have a super-efficient carburetor,” as if that was evidence that none exist.

“Not only are automobiles polluting the environment, but they are gobbling up all the oxygen on the planet,” says McBurney, citing the volume of oxygen consumed by an automobile while running. Scientists have documented a distinct drop in the amount of oxygen in the air we breath over the past decades. A lack of oxygen has also been shown to be directly responsible for the increase in the incidence of cancer. That motivates McBurney perhaps more than the pollution to the environment and the consumption of non-renewable fuels. Cancer is now killing nearly one of every two people.

“I’ll talk to anyone who will listen,” McBurney says, whether or not they’re a journalist, whether or not they’re going to go build something. “I just want this technology to get out there.”

He describes a metaphor. “It’s like you’re walking along the street and you see men raping a young girl. Do you walk on and not get involved, or do you try to do something about it? The young girl is the environment, and the men raping her are the oil interests.”

“I’m doing this for my children and for the future of this planet,” he says. “I don’t care if I don’t get a penny from it. I’ll give it away. I just want to see this technology put into use.”

His booklets and other information might not have the professional looking polish that is found in mainstream technologies, but it is a catalyst that can make all the difference — if we can get the lead out.

p.s. Pass it on!!

###

The above comes from www.himacresearch.com/books/secret3.html

CONTACT:
Bruce McBurney
phone (Quebec, Canada) 905-358-8541
fax aux 905 358-9439
HIMAC Research
6665 McLeod Road
Niagara Falls Ont. L2G 3G3

McBurney’s website: http://www.himacResearch.com/

See also:

http://www.pureenergysystems.com/

Open sourcing advanced energy solutions, including super efficient carburetors.

Inventor’s Affidavit of Denial Was Signed in Duress – 2004-07-22


 

Read about a guy today who has his car, motorcycle, riding lawmower, and generator running on fumes:

Car gets 400+ MPG

For detailed instructions on making your fuel injected vehicle extremely fuel efficient
( to run on vapors ) bypassing fuel injectors and carburetors, see our page

Run your car on vapors

 

 

3 Responses to McBurney Super Carb

  1. DJ on September 30, 2013 at 1:04 am

    Ed:

    In regards to your comment “The great disappointment is that I just had the thermostat, water pump, and radiator replaced in my Toyota and it cost me over $1500! Ouch! And, neither super carbs. nor hydrogen generators will stop that; only electric motors, with only 1 moving part, will put an end to so many engine expenses. The Tesla Roadster gets about 250 mi on a charge now and their goal is to get 500. The time is coming.”

    I can spend a smidge over 200 bucks and replace those parts myself EASY. The fact that you let someone take advantage of you in parts markup and labor charges means nothing. I want to see that Tesla Roadster haul as much as with as much a load as my 5.9 liter ram can… Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate your opinion, and I love the idea of alternative means of propulsion, but I am pretty sure there aren’t going to be enough improvements in my lifetime to make me trade up from a truck getting 100+ mpg with vapor gas, that with routine maintenance doesn’t break down on me, for something that, while it would make a great daily driver to help the planet, will never haul what I need it to haul. I would get one to take me where I was travelling but it would never replace or antiquate my truck.

  2. len on July 11, 2013 at 9:53 am

    Just a thought: How much more efficient would this system be, with a set of Robert Kurpa’s “FIRESTORM” spark plugs fitted? -which produce a plasma spark!

  3. Scott on November 24, 2010 at 12:06 am

    Turning vapor back into liquid during the compression cycle is not entirely true. Think of the compressor output on an air-conditioner. It is a high temp high pressure gas. It only becomes a liquid when the heat is removed in the condenser. There is no system to achieve this in an engine.
    If you’re interested in fuel cracking you should study the “Pantone reactor”.


    Whatever. He did get up to 72 mpg and Pogue, Ogle, Weston, and others have done more. Also, McBurney knows about Paul Pantone : http://www.himacresearch.com/docs/geet.html also see http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:GEET_Reactor_by_Paul_Pantone

    The great disappointment is that I just had the thermostat, water pump, and radiator replaced in my Toyota and it cost me over $1500! Ouch! And, neither super carbs. nor hydrogen generators will stop that; only electric motors, with only 1 moving part, will put an end to so many engine expenses. The Tesla Roadster gets about 250 mi on a charge now and their goal is to get 500. The time is coming.

Leave a Reply

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