Gas Saver Thing
02-07-2007, 01:25 AM
#21
I talked to a Chemical Engineer last night about this. I first asked them what effect a magnet would have on hydrocarbons. They said very little but it could "excite" them. I then explained why they asked. They said that made no sense whatsoever because a molecule wants to be in its relaxed state so the moment it left the magnetic field it would return to its relaxed state. They also said that even if you had a magnet large enough to cover the entire engine in a magnetic field that it wouldn't matter because an excited hydrocarbon would burn the exact same as a un-excite hydrocarbon. Take that for what it is worth.
Medsker
Medsker
02-07-2007, 02:44 AM
#22
Eternal ***erator
I talked to a Chemical Engineer last night about this. I first asked them what effect a magnet would have on hydrocarbons. They said very little but it could "excite" them. I then explained why they asked. They said that made no sense whatsoever because a molecule wants to be in its relaxed state so the moment it left the magnetic field it would return to its relaxed state. They also said that even if you had a magnet large enough to cover the entire engine in a magnetic field that it wouldn't matter because an excited hydrocarbon would burn the exact same as a un-excite hydrocarbon. Take that for what it is worth.
Medsker
Medsker
Well, now my hydrocarbons are flacid? :sad:
02-07-2007, 04:19 AM
#23
JK Newbie
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Afghanistan by way of Maryland
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I talked to a Chemical Engineer last night about this. I first asked them what effect a magnet would have on hydrocarbons. They said very little but it could "excite" them. I then explained why they asked. They said that made no sense whatsoever because a molecule wants to be in its relaxed state so the moment it left the magnetic field it would return to its relaxed state. They also said that even if you had a magnet large enough to cover the entire engine in a magnetic field that it wouldn't matter because an excited hydrocarbon would burn the exact same as a un-excite hydrocarbon. Take that for what it is worth.
Medsker
Medsker
solid
Code:
whichmeansihavenoideawhathtehellthatmeansbutitsoundssmart
02-07-2007, 05:04 AM
#24
JK Freak
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 947
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well that makes more sense then doing something to the molecules but I still don't understand how ionizing or polarizing hydrocarbons gives them more energy or rather makes them burn with more efficiency giving the engine more power so that it propels it further giving it better fuel economy. I don't know the percentage of the fuel that gets burned in a cylinder but isn't over 98%? If this is the case you can only get 2% more efficient before you've created a perpetual motion machine (I thought I had once but a slinky on an escalator didn't count 
).
Like I said just curious.
Medsker
).Like I said just curious.
Medsker
02-07-2007, 05:51 AM
#25
The idea is that by lining up the molecules (de-clumping them) they are able to bond to oxygen better... we put CAI on to get more air into the engine, and we align the molecules to better bond with them for more efficent combustion. I've used them and they seem to make a difference, but more so on some cars, and less on others. I havn't tried this on my JK yet to run and tests or anything, but when i do i'll post up.
Still not seeing where the magnet could help but still keeping an open mind
Medsker