Report: Condensator installed, works great, results and pics. [Archive]

View Full Version : Report: Condensator installed, works great, results and pics.

fastcar

10-07-2007, 12:19 PM

Hey Gang,

I wanted to report my experience using the Condensator supplemental carburetor. I have been using them for years on all my vehicles, and can't say enough about them. THEY ARE FOR REAL, and deliver instant results in terms of idle quality and throttle response. You won't believe how much smoother your car idles and crisper it is, esp. off idle.

My 1995 P-71 (RIP) which I had this device on before used to get 14.5 MPG. After installing the device, it went up one mile per gallon per tank full, until it hit 20.5 MPG! This was with more city than highway driving.

On a trip to Florida from MA, I got 28.5 MPG on one tank (I'm not kidding) and averaged 27 MPG.

Normally, your crankcase becomes filled with vapor that includes blow-by and other nasty contaminents, and caustic products from oil break-down. The motor is FORCE FED THIS EXCREMENT THROUGH THE PCV SYSTEM. Viola, instant disgusting inside of manifold, gummed up valves, and general refuse inside intake system. Combustion chambers become a MESS.

The Condensator works by separating the light, vaporized hydrocarbon component (which is harmless, vaporized oil) from the nasty sludge. Your A/F mixture is actually being supplemented by free combustible mixture! This is one reason gas mileage and HP go up!

The other reason is because of how much more efficient a motor is able to run when it's not gummed up by excrement:rolleyes:

Anyway, that's the long and short of it. It's INGENIUS and really works.

If you clean it every 3-5K miles, your results will be spectacular. I would let it go too long, and even not empty it when I should, and even abused, it still delivered consistent 17.5 MPG, which is a 3 MPG improvement!!!

I had similar results with my 1988 P-71.

I won't be documenting the results in my MM, because I find it much more fun to drive with a half tank of gas, and have been thrashing it so much, and not filling it up, I simply thought it didn't make sense to record mileage.:D

Notwithstanding, what a SMOOTH idle, crisp response, and I swear my cold start missing is getting better (is it the condensator, or the Shell V-POWER gas I'm now using, I can't be sure)

So, am I getting better gas mileage? YES! IT IS OBVIOUS TO ME THAT MY GAS GAUGE IS NOT MOVING AS FAST AS BEFORE. :P

Anyway, I just can't say enough about the device, and highly recommend it to all my friends at Mercurymarauder.net.

Because your motor will be ingesting so much less excrement from the PCV system, people are also finding their motors are actually LASTING A LOT LONGER, as well. Rings, bearings, seals - I believe everything benefits big time.

Try it, you'll love it, and it will pay you back, not just in $$$ saved at the pump, but in a smoother driving experience, longer lasting engine, etc. Oh, and did I mention it's even good for the environment?

http://www.condensatorsales.com/

$179 new. Does not include the totally awesome looking, lightweight aluminum bracket with stainless steel fasteners in photo. ;)

fastcar:burnout:

fastblackmerc

10-07-2007, 02:23 PM

Mike M

10-07-2007, 02:38 PM

Too funny!!!

fastcar

10-07-2007, 02:45 PM

Did you try one of these too?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Turbonator-Tornado-air-jet-Fuel-saver-SuperCharger-Fan_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategory Z38634QQihZ011QQitemZ320167036 035QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/MPG-Advantage-gas-fuel-saver-vortex-tornado-turbonator_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQc ategoryZ38634QQihZ010QQitemZ20 0159046414QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZW DVW

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Electric-Supercharger-Turbo-Nitrous-All-Makes-Models_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcateg oryZ33741QQihZ014QQitemZ330171 651126QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW

Man, are you serious :confused:

You could have gotten this for less money

http://jlttruecoldair.com/zencart/index.php?main_page=product_in fo&products_id=23

This is basically an element that attempts to LIMIT the amount of excrement the motor ingests, not eradicate it.

I would consider using it IN CONJUNCTION with the Condensator, BUT NOT AS A REPLACEMENT. Notice it is not touted as a BIG TIME FUEL SAVING DEVICE.

The Condenstator boasts a PATENTED CATALYTIC MEDIA that actually separates the nasty from the combustible in a way never before achieved.

It's a totally different concept, not just a filter, but a SUPPLEMENTAL CARBURETOR, supplying a constant flow of FREE FUEL for your motor, and eradicating the gunk, which the filter you show will still let through (though, perhaps in less quantities than stock)

fastcar:burnout:

O's Fan Rich

10-07-2007, 03:00 PM

The problem is your write up sounds more like a commercial endorsement rather than a hands on install and experience.
Makes it sound too good to be true.
Skepticism abounds.

KillJoy

10-07-2007, 03:05 PM

The problem is your write up sounds more like a commercial endorsement rather than a hands on install and experience.
Makes it sound too good to be true.
Skepticism abounds.

+1

:up:

KillJoy

fastblackmerc

10-07-2007, 05:13 PM

Makes it sound too good to be true.

Remember....

"If it sounds it good to be true then it's usually too good to be true"

J-MAN

10-07-2007, 05:21 PM

fastcar

10-07-2007, 05:55 PM

Remember... "If it sounds it good to be true then it's usually too good to be true"

I was skeptical when I bought my first unit back in 1991. I installed it on a gas hog 1988 P-71 with a 351-W. I meticulously documented the mileage before and after. It worked, and it worked in a big way. I would have been impressed with +1 MPG. I gained 2-3.

Then when I got my 1995 P-71 in 2000, I bought a brand new unit, and installed it after about 2 months of ownership, during which I meticulously documented gas mileage. I had BETTER results with the FUEL INJECTED car, then the old LTD.

My mileage went from 14.5 to 17.5, and stayed that way.

I've had YEARS of experience with these devices, and am always very enthusiastic to share my positive experience to anyone who is interested in gas mileage, performance or engine longevity.

I'm not the only one that has had a great experience with this device - there are lots of believers out there.

If I was selling them, I would understand your cynicism better. But, I have nothing to gain, accept a 'thank you' if you decide to try one out. :)

Skepticism can be smart, sometimes it keeps us from doing stupid things. But if an idea makes sense on paper, and there are folks with nothing to gain, who have documented results, continued skepticism becomes something other than smart...

I have issued other reports, with well documented detail on this website. No body impuned my 1/4 second result with Lidio's tune. I extolled the virtues of his tune exuberantly, but no one accused me of sounding like a saleman then. Ditto on the FMS gears, K&N, the UDs or the race gas tune.

There have been plenty of folks who have tried mods on their cars, and were excited to share their findings with their friends, here at MM.NET. You make it sound like this is some kind of first.

I publish my experience, based on numbers gathered from the gas pump, and my odometer. It's not rocket science, it's arithmetic. Even I can't screw that up ;)

I don't mind being the first, and for people to laugh or snicker. Someone's bound have an open mind, do a little research, and make an informed decision. If they post their similar results, will you give it more consideration?

I know it's hard to believe. I was there. But I've used it for 16 years, and can swear by it. This product will make you think outside the box.

fastcar:burnout:

Blackened300a

10-07-2007, 06:26 PM

This sounds like a pyramid scam.

I dont want some dorky looking yellow object under the hood of my gas guzzling muscle car.

fastcar

10-07-2007, 06:38 PM

This sounds like a pyramid scam.

I dont want some dorky looking yellow object under the hood of my gas guzzling muscle car.

It's direct sales. You purchase them at Condensator.com. No 'upline' or sponsorship involved.

I wasn't crazy about the looks, quite frankly either. But the bracket looks awesome!:)

But, seriously, after I got the results, I suddenly stopped caring about the looks.

However, now you got me thinking, I bet I could use a bit of aluminum sheet metal and make a cool looking cover.:)

Optionally, it could go in the fender well or some other hidden place - I don't think it matters too much the level, as long as the tubing isn't too long. They tested many different hose lengths and diameters.

fastcar:burnout:

Here is an interesting story about one man's experience with the device, and other similar ones. Dyno tests included! http://highstrangeness.tv/articles/empower/empower.php

RCSignals

10-07-2007, 07:26 PM

This sounds like a pyramid scam.

I dont want some dorky looking yellow object under the hood of my gas guzzling muscle car.

you could always paint it purple

MACFORD88

10-07-2007, 07:44 PM

I Like My Gas Mileage I Get From My Mm.thanks

fastcar

10-07-2007, 08:07 PM

I Like My Gas Mileage I Get From My Mm.thanks

If I'm getting the same results I did in my last two vehicles, I'm saving about $10 per fill up. I already notice half a tank is lasting longer...

I was filling up 1-2 times a week. I'll save those $40-$80 a month, thank you. I'm not rich, like you ;)

fastcar:burnout:

BTW a couple more interesting links on other people's results: http://www.fuelandairsaver.com/_fileCabinet/documents/pdf/ATDS_Test_Results.pdf (documented emission reduction)

http://www.preludeonline.com/showthread.php?t=174339 (half my gains, but with half the cylinders!)

I can't find anyone who has actually tested it, that claims it does not work. That is unusual, given it's amazing claim

wchain

10-08-2007, 06:45 AM

I was skeptical when I bought my first unit back in 1991. I installed it on a gas hog 1988 P-71 with a 351-W. I meticulously documented the mileage before and after. It worked, and it worked in a big way. I would have been impressed with +1 MPG. I gained 2-3.

Ford didn't make a P71 in 1988.

The Big Stu

10-08-2007, 07:24 AM

I can't see your vendor forum.

fastcar

10-08-2007, 07:51 AM

Ford didn't make a P71 in 1988.

'P71', 'police interceptor', whatever - it was town of Wellesley's car #1410, black & white, repainted Maaco dark blue. What made it better than average was the rug, split bench in dark blue velour, and the big motor :D

fastcar:burnout:

racorcey

10-08-2007, 08:12 AM

Having seen just about all the "fuel saving" devices that have been around since the Fifties (that's 1950's), I have found only one that ever had a beneficial effect. It was manufactured locally here in NJ, and, because it's carb'ed based, can't be used on modern day cars. It was basically a Ni-Cad series of mesh screens and had an electrolyte pressed into the carb base gasket connecting to the Ni_Cad screens that hung underneath the throttle plates. What it did was to make the gasoline charge more negative with respect to the block. It was basically a catalytic device.

The net effect of the Ni-Cad screens was to increase mileage by anywhere from 10 to 25%. I was more than pleased with the results, since my cars of the time (in the '70's and 80's) were real gas guzzlers.

Most of you know, I'm sure, that the ignition spark output is negative going with respect to the engine block. This was a phenomenon found in the early days of car-dom, and it affects gas mileage significantly. What this device did was to enhance the effect. Even as late as the 1970's, Mobil (now Exxon/Mobil) was studying these effects for the car manufacturers.

Can this same "effect" be used today? In theory - yes. In practice - no. It's very hard to impart a different voltage charge on the current systems of fuel injection. Besides, electronics has more than made up for this method.

As for the PCV gas separater discussed in this thread, notice it uses a "catalytic" separater to do the dirty work. From what I see, it's possible to impart a differential charge to the separated gas that is returned to be re-burned. Therefor, by dumb luck, there might be an increase in gas mileage - and not necessarily for the reasons given by the manufacturer.

On the other hand, if one uses Mobil 1 or another good synthetic oil in the crankcase, it has been shown that blow-by emissions are reduced significantly. Synthetic oil doesn't burn and produce vapors when left on cylinder walls. It is possible to pull in oil through leaky valve stem seals, but this generally exits primarily through the exhaust system.

I could see this device being basically useless when used with synthetic oils in the crankcase. The rest of you basically have called it for what it is. I wouldn't say that it absolutely didn't have some effect, but I would say it would be minimal.

fastcar

10-08-2007, 03:06 PM

Having seen just about all the "fuel saving" devices that have been around since the Fifties (that's 1950's), I have found only one that ever had a beneficial effect.

Hey Racer,

Did you ever test the Condensator?

fastcar:burnout:

ckadiddle

10-09-2007, 07:22 AM

Glad it works for you. There have been many changes in automotive technology from 1995 to 2003. Please do a real-world test with it installed on your MM and let us know what your gains are.

I also need to know if this would violate the federal laws regarding monkeying around with the pollution control system. Can our legal dept comment on that?

magindat

10-09-2007, 07:37 AM

Many of us use an air/oil separator in our PCV system to keep gunk out of the SC and IC. It looks like any other air/oil separator out there with the exception of a larger bowl and different kind of filter.

It's the 'hype' that's freaking everyone out. It's true that oil will reduce your octane through the PCV. This is another reason I chose to add and air/oil separator.

It's kinda pricey for 179, considering you can get a Moroso for 100, a Jeg's for 50 and make one yourself for about 30.

The idea is sound. The hype is too much but it seems it WOULD do it's job. Fuel savings? I dunno. Cleaner engine and less octane loss due to junk, I believe it.

Would I buy it? Nope. Made my own.

Thanx, though for bringing it to our attention. I too, am sick and tired of the 'dogpile' mentality when a member brings us another option!

O's Fan Rich

10-09-2007, 08:10 AM

magindat

10-09-2007, 08:17 AM

I made my own also, Rich. The desiccant beads make me re-think my design, though.
Perhaps I'll add this to my winter project list.... it's getting long.

I agree. After reading the site carefully, it seems the desiccant is the key. Otherwise, it appears it's just like any other separator.

GreekGod

10-09-2007, 05:34 PM

There is a device called a "Flux Capacitor" that will run your car on almost any organic compound, even banana peels!!

It can be installed in any automobile, but is still experimental!!! The Big Three car manufacturers and the Big Oil companies are trying to stop it!!!!

It was featured in a Hollywood movie, and will probably be available in the near future, just in time to save the planet, and save America from foreign oil dependance, too!!!!!

Flux Capacitor!!!!!:

http://www.mercurymarauder.net/showcase/files/2/1/9/0/Fluxcapacitor.jpg

fastblackmerc

10-09-2007, 05:54 PM

I agree. After reading the site carefully, it seems the desiccant is the key. Otherwise, it appears it's just like any other separator.

Since there is a desiccant involved is there a warning to not eat the desiccant? :dunno:

Seriously.... if this really worked ie. gave you better gas mileage don't you think all the auto manufacturer's would be all over this like stink on ***** or white on rice?? If it worked it could be massed produced for less than $5.00 and you'd see it on every car on the road with one.....

Marauderjack

10-10-2007, 04:04 AM

I made my own also, Rich. The desiccant beads make me re-think my design, though.
Perhaps I'll add this to my winter project list.... it's getting long.

Hey Rich,

I have a friend that has been making these for several years and he use bronze wool as the media and it works just fine!!!:beer: Clean it at normal oil changes and keep going!!!:burnout:

Marauderjack:burnout:

magindat

10-10-2007, 04:46 AM

any organic compound, even banana peels!!

http://www.mercurymarauder.net/showcase/files/2/1/9/0/Fluxcapacitor.jpg

That was 'Mr Fusion'. Good grief, if your gonna be a smart azz, at least get it right!!!!
http://www.tabletpcreviewspot.com/assets/839.jpg

magindat

10-10-2007, 04:52 AM

Since there is a desiccant involved is there a warning to not eat the desiccant? :dunno:

Seriously.... if this really worked ie. gave you better gas mileage don't you think all the auto manufacturer's would be all over this like stink on ***** or white on rice?? If it worked it could be massed produced for less than $5.00 and you'd see it on every car on the road with one.....

Re-read my post. Gas savings? Dunno. But I do believe it keeps gunk out of the motor. Why else would performance shops offer a separator? BTW, it's VERY common in piston-powered aviation to have an air/oil separator.

I agree they could me made for next to nothing on a massive scale. What if they were suddenly required on all cars? How many engines would be shot from people not emptying the can and sucking straight used oil into their intake plenum? I don't think it's a reluctance to save gas or prolong engine life. I think it's a reluctance to replace motors due to owner stupidity.

Hey Rich,

I have a friend that has been making these for several years and he use bronze wool as the media and it works just fine!!!:beer: Clean it at normal oil changes and keep going!!!:burnout:

Marauderjack:burnout:

Yep, aviation commonly uses stainless steel wool. All it does is give the vapors a place to 'condense' and then drip into a catch can rather than go into the motor.

fastcar

10-11-2007, 09:35 PM

I could see this device being basically useless when used with synthetic oils in the crankcase. The rest of you basically have called it for what it is. I wouldn't say that it absolutely didn't have some effect, but I would say it would be minimal.

Everyone has called it what it is? Man, that's too much. You and everyone else that has piled on haven't even TRIED one, and you have it all figured out? Nonsense.

I shouldn't be too hard on you, though. At least you admit that there is a device that could generate a 10-25% improvement in fuel economy.

But be warned: If you try one on your car, and it works, don't start a thread about it here, unless you want to be at the bottom of a pig pile!

I must say, though, about your device, to state that the ONLY devices likely to work must rely on the charge differential technique you mention seems a little bit narrow. The internal combustion engine has many systems, that employ countless principles, the possibility that there is ONLY ONE WAY to improve on it is patently absurd.

Glad it works for you. There have been many changes in automotive technology from 1995 to 2003. Please do a real-world test with it installed on your MM and let us know what your gains are.

I also need to know if this would violate the federal laws regarding monkeying around with the pollution control system. Can our legal dept comment on that?

Thanks, ckadiddle for the suggestion. For all the cynics, and smart asses here I've decided to do just that (present company excluded, of course. :D

I may start a new thread just on the test, to field suggestions on how to conduct it, so no turkeys can impune the results (when they find they don't match up to their pig-headed preconceptions);)

As for engine technology changing a lot from 1995 to 2003, I'm not sure. The mod motor in my 95 P-71 is almost identical to the one in a 2003 P-71. Very few improvements, really. The biggest one is better cylinder heads.

The Condensator is CARB certified for emissions in CALIFORNIA. It reduces emissions, and will not violate federal law. Trust me, with the kinds of mods being performed at this forum, the last one you have to worry about getting in trouble for is the Condensator. :)

I made my own also, Rich. The desiccant beads make me re-think my design, though.
Perhaps I'll add this to my winter project list.... it's getting long.

The Silica Gel adsorbant material is a reason this device was patentable, and why it works so much better than simple, mechanical air/oil separators. Here are more details from their website:

Technical Description

The heart of the system is the Silica Gel Catalyst, (adsorbant separator), the element which, by itself, causes a change of state without itself being changed. The operating principle is that of adsorption. From Ephraimk’s Inorganic Chemistry:

“Silica Gel adsorbs vapors other than water vapor and this property is utilized in the recovery of solvent vapors when diluted with large volumes of air or other gases.”

Such is the empirical nature of silica gel as an adsorptive compound long recognized in solvent recovery system, i.e., the separation of lighter molecular weight solvents from airborne masses. From Smith’s Chemistry:

“Incompletely dehydrated silicic acid, containing 5 to 7% of water (silica gel) is employed as an adsorbent material for recovering valuable vapors (such as sulfur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen and volatile organic solvents) from the issuing gasses in many large scale industrial processes. The adsorbed vapors are given up on heating and the gel is ready for renewed use. Silica Gel is also used in the deodorizing of petroleum oils, and as a catalyst. One cubic inch of the gel is said to present a surface area of about 50,000 square feet.”

It is evident that silica gel serves as a catalyst, adsorbant and separator, where the adsorbant qualities are described as a “condensing” property. The “condensing” mechanism is actually one of electrovalent attraction as opposed to simple condensation. It is empirically assumed that the lighter solvents extracted from the mass are passed back into the airflow separate from the mass. This accounts also for visual cleanliness of the catalyst (silica gel) after 30,000 miles of operation.

Silica Gel seems to be the ideal material to perform this function. Steel or bronze wool DO NOT have the same chemical, physical or electronic properties, much less the same surface area.

Since there is a desiccant involved is there a warning to not eat the desiccant? :dunno:

Seriously.... if this really worked ie. gave you better gas mileage don't you think all the auto manufacturer's would be all over this like stink on ***** or white on rice?? If it worked it could be massed produced for less than $5.00 and you'd see it on every car on the road with one.....

Ha Ha. Not necessarily and yes - in that order.

One early proponent actually found out that it was GM that tried to sabotage his marketing efforts. You can read his experience here: http://highstrangeness.tv/articles/empower/empower.php

I don't think giant corporations always to the right thing, the best thing or even the smart thing. They seem motivated by one thing, and, ironically, often chase it the wrong way. I'm also not ready to write off the idea that the oil and auto industries may have something to gain from one another:lol:

I have a friend who worked for NASA back in the 1960s, and specifically worked on the Apollo program. He said when he graduated from MIT, his class mate decided to work for Ford, and tried to convince him to, also.

'You have to come to work at Ford!' He went on: 'You won't believe all the ideas they are working on. The stuff is just amazing!' However, after careful consideration, my friend, decided to work at NASA.

The years went by, and after he had helped to put a man on the moon, he one day saw his friend, again. He was deflated. 'Not even one of the ideas we developed at Ford was ever implemented', he stated.

If we ran the companies, I bet cars would be A LOT different today.

fastcar:burnout:

GreekGod

10-12-2007, 09:25 AM

...
Technical Description

The heart of the system is the Silica Gel Catalyst, (adsorbant separator), the element which, by itself, causes a change of state without itself being changed. The operating principle is that of adsorption. From Ephraimk’s Inorganic Chemistry:...

Did you mean "Ephraim’s Inorganic Chemistry" (http://www.mercurymarauder.net/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=%22Ephraim%E2%80%99s+Inorgan ic+Chemistry%22&spell=1)?

GreekGod

10-12-2007, 09:57 AM

"The Technical Description
as described by Elmer W. Bush
The heart of the system is the Silica Gel Catalyst, (adsorbant separator),"

Did he mean "adsorbent"?

O's Fan Rich

10-12-2007, 09:59 AM

Hey Rich,

I have a friend that has been making these for several years and he use bronze wool as the media and it works just fine!!!:beer: Clean it at normal oil changes and keep going!!!:burnout:

Marauderjack:burnout:

Yep mines stuffed with stainless wool, but it feeds to the bottom then the stuff has to work it's way up.

Local Boy

10-12-2007, 10:25 PM

Having noticed a huge amount of oil in the upper intake...Doing the "cleaning"...really helped!!!

Just installed a JLT pre-filter and an oil /air separator to prevent this situation from happening again...

ALOHA

cyclopsram

10-13-2007, 12:59 AM

Nice catch...

rayjay

10-13-2007, 02:21 AM

Has anyone noticed any MPG gains with the other oil seperators?

fastcar

10-13-2007, 07:57 AM

Has anyone noticed any MPG gains with the other oil seperators?

That's a good question. Folks may not have been looking for it, when they installed them. If the steel wool approach works less efficiently than the Condensators Silica Gel media (which I suspect), any improvement may have been subtle enough not to be noticed.

Another good question is did anyone notice any IMMEDIATE improvement in throttle response and glass smooth idle quality, after installing the JLT or steel wool separators. The result from the Condensator in this area was far from subtle, but I found it rather dramatic.

fastcar:burnout: