Amazing! Too Good to be True?

The Mangoletsi Modifier did work.

It was an additional venturi fitted between carburrettor an manifold, but there was a small ridge between the inlet side and the outlet . This had the effect of reatomising any liquid petrol running down towards the manifold.

The minute air bleed on the underside was supposed to keep any droplets from coalescing onto the manifold.

By improving the atomisisation, it improved the mixture distribution (Which, because of pulsations in the induction tract, was never equal between cylinders, unless one carburettor per cylinder could be fitted and individually adjusted.)

The improved atomisation and mixture distribution did produce an improvement in torque, particularly at low speeds, and probably in fuel consumption.

Howard..

My father in the early 1960s used Viscostatic car oil which claimed to clean the engine as well as engine oil. He had a mk 1 Vauxhall Victor, he was sure that this knocked out the top end of the engine. I remember going up and down the new M1 motorway with the new top end with running in sign on the back.

Bob

This thread is like going back to the 1980's when, among "petrolheads", discussions about devices to mitigate the effects of unleaded fuel were frequent as were discussions on fuel economy.

My employer had extensive engine and engine component testing facilities. We were asked to test a device that fitted in the inlet manifold that, so the guy who had "invented" it, would improve fuel economy.

An engine was run without for him to see its performance, then the device fitted and the engine run through exactly the same run. There was a very slight improvement in economy, this was enough for him to believe what he had been telling himself.

Examination of the the data from the test soon explained why. Atmospheric pressure had risen over the hour or so it had taken to fit the device. This explained the better(!) fuel economy. The guy dismissed that as irrelevant.

A few weeks later we noticed that as part of his advertising he claimed that ********** had tested it, true but the wording implied that *********** said it improved fuel consumption. A legal exchange ensued and the claims removed,

We tried to get sellers of the catalyst time devices to send us and examples of their products for testing, none were forthcoming.............

Mangoletsi is a name I haven't heard of in a long time, I see they are still in business selling a range of tuning parts.

I remember going to a talk given by the local Silkolene rep to the VMCC. By then almost all motor oils, mono and multi grades, contained detergents for cleaning the engine (just like Viscostatic). The warning was that if you used such oil for the first time in a well used engine the detergent was likely to lift all the gunge and deposits in the oil passages. That could lead to blockages. The message, such oils were OK with new and recently rebuilt engines only.

JA

Martin,

In the case of that engine the magic pixie dust was supplied by 20 miles in 2nd gear which unstuck the oil rings. Gotta love old fashioned mineral oil.

A pal talked me out of buying "Instant Rebore".

I drilled out the oil return holes in the bottom piston ring groove 1/32" bigger.

That worked.

The Gap in the HT lead is a known-to-work device. Honest. With some ignition systems, any conductive deposit (eg carbon) on the spark plug insulator can allow a current to flow in the secondary winding of the coil, and this slows down the collapse of the magnetism in the coil, and reduces the spark voltage. Result - misfires.

If you introduce a small gap in the HT line, this current cannot flow, and in consequence the misfiring stops.

But it only works if there is a direct connection with no gaps between the coil and the plug. Some early magnetos had a brush pick-up for the HT, and no gap anywhere else, so the shirt-button trick (or two wood screws point to point in a bit of rubber tube) would work with them. But, all cars since about 1920 have had a spark gap in the distributor (whether magneto or coil). In ordinary coil ignition it is the gap between the end of the rotor arm and the brass connections in the dizzy cap. A long time ago I was at an agricultural show where 'salesmen' were 'proving' their product worked by demonstrating with a pre-war Ford tractor engine. Which, of course, had an early magneto and no gap in the HT leads.

So, if you want to run a car with a WW1 ignition system, this gismo will reduce your misfiring. But so will a shirt button.

Funny old world - Regards, Tim

Has no-one spotted the flaw in the idea that these magic, apparently insoluble pellets rattling around the floor of the petrol tank were "catalysts" ?

Catalysis is the encouragement of a chemical reaction by an additive that does not itself react. In a catalytic exhaust the reaction being helped along is the decomposition of compounds by heat - I don't pretend to know the chemistry further than that.

Nothing is reacting, within the fuel tank. If those FTC Pellets were to work at all they would need dissolve slowly, adding to the fuel an active ingredient sufficiently volatile to accompany the petrol vapour into the cylinders. What would happen to the tablets' non-reactive ingredients - their binders, etc. - though?

.

The world was awash with supposed wonder inventions and strange myth - my favourite myth being that of course the oil-companies bought and crushed such things as running the engine on water.

I recall Motorcycle News in the 1970s, running advertisements for a so-called "Injector" - I forget the full name or the brand - which apparently replaced the conventional carburettor. The photograph showed a neat rectangular block with an inlet venturi, outlet flange and the throttle-cable connection. No other external features on what I suspect was just a fancy carburettor.

The same paper once publicised something called the Trigonic tyre. This was the trade-mark for a fancy new re-invention of the wheel by one of the leading tyre manufacturers, not some fly-by-night outfit. I think it was aimed at the racing business rather than Joe Public's street Norton or Triumph; but its peculiarity was its rounded-triangular profile. It looked as if handling would have been an art, to say the least. When riding straight and level, only about a third of the tread width would have been on the road; and it was difficult to see what effect the rapid change of outline would have on leaning into a tight bend. Perhaps it was meant to help the knee-pad-to-the-tarmac cornering style beloved of the racing-Press photographers, but I don't think it caught on.

.

Somewhere once many moons past I recall an intriguing advertisement for the information about some promising green-dream machine "engine" - long before the "greens" were sprouting. I sent off the requested s.a.e..

The drawing proved the machine was no more than a simple radial-vane, rotary-displacement motor; but I never discovered its wonderful working fluid and source thereof. Clearly that was what really mattered, but I forget if the inventor was not revealing it, or if, disillusioned despite already being very sceptical, I did not bother to pursue it further.

.

Does anyone remember though, the delightful April Fool spoof one of the railway enthusiasts' magazines produced when BR was scrapping steam locomotives faster than you could say "Dai Woodham" ?

.

Wal gets his own little page on Wikipedia: **LINK**

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wal_Phillips

MichaelG.

.

Edit: __ Just found this

.

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 20/07/2022 05:41:01

I was asked to try these in my VW Beetle 1500 engine (a daily driver) by the classic car business that looked after it. I was told it was tin, not lead that was in the pellets but who knows?

All I do know is that for several years afterwards it ran on unleaded quite happily and its emissions (which were not necessary for MOT but tested for the sake of the experiment) were drastically reduced.

Only one example but interesting anyway.

With regard to introducing a spark gap into HT leads, When trying to make the transition from one time telephone "engineer" to FE lecturer in Motor Vehicle technology I was once told by a colleague ( who was a real motor engineer as opposed to an enthusiastic amateur like myself) that carbon string HT leads performed better than solid copper ones because their resistance was too high to pass the initial current until the output voltage of the coil had risen sufficiently to close to its maximum. This had the effect of not wasting energy in the initial phase of the ignition sequence, only releasing it when it was really useful to contribute to making the arc.

Nowadays, coil on a plug is the norm (so far as I know) so the HT path is only about 150mm long on the DOHC engines which seem to be prevalent these days. At the time of our discussion, ignition systems with CB, Hall effect and inductive sensor triggering systems were still commonplace and most engines still had a mechanical distributor. There were a few with centralised coils with ignition leads sprouting from them and the coil on a plug type was becoming ever more the norm.

Within the next 15 years, or possibly sooner, I expect all of this discussion will be consigned into the darker corners of history, a bit like steam technology mostly is today!

Carbon string leads were the first in line to replace with copper when engine miss fires occurred. All the new gizmoes, coil packs and coil on leads are for one thing....... KERCHING.

Regards Ian.

An electronically fired coil pack(whether it's one per engine or plug) is a massive improvement over the 'it just about sort of works' distributor. Anyone who has fitted a mapped, distributorless ignition to an older engine will know the benefits of better starting/running/drivability/economy/emissions and reliability.

And anyone who has had one of the 'coil packs' fail on a Punto will be aware that it also takes the ECU with it. Old school coil, about £20, 'New age coil pack AND ECU, £600.

Regards Ian.

Energy Polariser

Ford and General Motors Holden were the main manufacturers of a locally designed cars in Australia. Both made cars with a 5 litre engine which were modified and used for racing.

In 1980 Peter Brock took over a company called the Holden Dealer Team (HDT), which started as Holden’s semi-official racing team, and was turned into a genuine Holden dealer-supported after he took over.

Peter was a race winner, then in his early 40s, lived like you’d expect with lots of booze and cigarettes and his health wasn’t great, so his girlfriend sent him to a doctor she knew and who taught her about the “New Age belief system with crystals and energy”. The doctor got him to eat healthier, quit smoking and drinking which he believed was because of the crystals and energy. Brock felt better and became a convert to the doctor’s philosophies.

Peter Brock was a truly gifted touring car driver and one of our best ever drivers but his downfall is truly fascinating, and involves a box of crystals and epoxy that tap into mythical orgone energy and align the molecules of whatever it’s attached to and called it an Energy Polarizer which sold for AU$890.

First unveiled in 1986 and then fitted as standard to every performance car sold by the HDT. The Energy Polarizer was, physically a plastic box filled with a pair of magnets separated by some crystals embedded in epoxy resin. It was held to the body of HDT cars with a single, self-tapping screw. At the time there was some kind of legal agreement that the Energy Polarizer could not be taken apart to see inside, in case the secret was used by their competitors.

Holden later officially ended all relationships with HDT and Brock.

When I see that fellow at the autojumbles peddling his spark gap thing, it always reminds me of:-

What you need is a monorail!

A monorail?

Yes, a monorail!

(Simpsons - lifted from The Music Man)

"That fellow at the autojumbles peddling his spark gap thing...."

I tried to have a word with him once. He was miles away and appeared to be on some serious substances.

JA

I fitted a Wal Phillips injector to a 2 stroke bike in the late 60s. No huge increase in performance, but if you forgot to turn off the petrol tap it filled the crankcase with fuel. Not one of its better features

I fitted a Wal Phillips injector to a 2 stroke bike in the late 60s. No huge increase in performance, but if you forgot to turn off the petrol tap it filled the crankcase with fuel. Not one of its better features

Still lives, for "Norton Spark Enhancer" read "Spitfire Multispark" here