And carburetors...

Other than the vintage vehicles he references at around 19:35 (vintage 427 engine)--why carburetors when fuel injection is around?

Your video, How Carburetors are Made, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

My mustang is a 73 convertible with a 351c.
I remember noticing its emission control ended with routing the PCV to the carburetor.

A big part of the Zero's reputation came from racking up kills in China against a lot of second-rate planes with poorly-trained pilots. After all, there was a reason that the Republic of China hired the American Volunteer Group to help out during the Second Sino-Japanese War – Chinese pilots had a hard time cutting it.

The Wildcat was deficient in many ways versus the Zero, but it still had superior firepower via ammo loadout. The Zero carried very few 20mm rounds, most of it's ammo was 7.7mm. There are records of Japanese pilots unloading all their 7.7mm ammo on a Wildcat and it was still flyable. On the flip side, the Wildcat had an ample supply of .50 cal.

Stanley "Swede" Vejtasa was able to score seven kills against Japanese planes in one day with a Wildcat.

Yes, the discovery of the Akutan Zero helped the United States beat this plane. But MilitaryFactory.com notes that the Hellcat's first flight was on June 26, 1942 – three weeks after the raid on Dutch Harbor that lead to the fateful crash-landing of the Mitsubishi A6M flown by Tadayoshi Koga.

Marine Captain Kenneth Walsh described how he knew to roll to the right at high speed to lose a Zero on his tail. Walsh would end World War II with 17 kills. The Zero also had trouble in dives, thanks to a bad carburetor.

We were behind in technology for many reasons, but once the Hellcat started replacing the Wildcat, the Japanese Air Superiority was over. Even if they had maintained a lead in technology, as Russia showed in WW2, quantity has a quality all of it's own. We were always going to be able to field more pilots and planes than Japan would be able to.

As far as Soviet rockets, once we were stunned by the launch of Sputnik, we kicked into high gear. You can say what you will of reliability, consistency, and dependability, but exactly how many manned Soviet missions landed on the moon and returned? Other than Buran, which was almost a copy of our Space Shuttle, how many shuttles did the USSR field?

The Soviets did build some things that were very sophisticated and were, for a while, better than what we could field. The Mig-31 is a great example. We briefly lagged behind but have a much superior air capability now. The only advantages the Mig and Sukhoi have is speed, they can fire all their missiles and flee. If they are engaged however, they will lose if pilots are equally skilled.

As @newtboy has said, I am sure that Russia and China are working on military advancements, but the technology simply doesn't exist to make a Hypersonic missile possible at this point.

China is fielding a man portable rifle that can inflict pain, not kill, and there is no hard evidence that it works.

There is no proof that the Chinese have figured out the technology for an operational rail gun on land, let alone the sea. We also have created successful railguns, the problem is POWERING them repeatedly, especially onboard a ship. If they figured out a power source that will pull it off, then it is possible, but there is no concrete proof other than a photo of a weapon attached to a ship. Our experts are guessing they might have it functional by 2025, might...

China has shown that long range QEEC is possible. It has been around but they created the first one capable of doing it from space. The problem is, they had to jury rig it. Photons, or light, can only go through about 100 kilometers of optic fiber before getting too dim to reliably carry data. As a result, the signal needs to be relayed by a node, which decrypts and re-encrypts the data before passing it on. This process makes the nodes susceptible to hacking. There are 32 of these nodes for the Beijing-Shanghai quantum link alone.

The main issue with warfare today is that it really doesn't matter unless the battle is between one of the big 3. Which means that ANY action could provoke Nuclear conflict. Is Russia going to hypersonic missile one of our carriers without Nukes become an option on the table as a retaliation? Is China going to railgun a ship and risk nuclear war?

Hell no, no more than we would expect to blow up some major Russian or Chinese piece of military hardware without severe escalation! Which means we can create all the technological terrors we like, because we WON'T use them unless they somehow provide us a defense against nuclear annihilation.

So just like China and Russia steal stuff from us to build military hardware to counter ours, if they create something that is significantly better, we will began trying to duplicate it. The only thing which would screw this system to hell is if one of us actually did begin developing a successful counter measure to nukes. If that happens, both of the other nations are quite likely to threaten IMMEDIATE thermonuclear war to prevent that country from developing enough of the counter measures to break the tie.

Me, I like my science-fiction when they don't cheat and make up silly stuff like a 'selectable' blower. Anyone who knows even a tiny bit about how a roots supercharger works sees those scenes from TRW and groans. The blades of the impellers need to spin because the carburetor is sitting on top of it. No impellers turning, means no air or fuel passing it, means the engine no worky .

That being said, I could see how a Paxton (basically a belt driven turbo) style supercharger could be set up to work, using an electric clutch from a air conditioning pump and some interesting intake plumbing. Instead of the best of both worlds, it's probably the worst of both.

You'd be better off with a variable boost NO2 system.

Now, don't think that I don't know about the 1920s Mercedes engageable roots superchargers, it's just that the one on the Interceptor in the movie isn't that style, and they merely shot the engine starting up when Max "pulled the switch".

"If there was a revolutionary power distribution technology, somebody would be building it and profiting by it."

Not necessarily-Yours is a naivete shared by scores of peeps dosed continuously by propaganda while a proper gander would serve much better-

They couldn't make any $$ off a conventional carburetor retrofit that netted100 miles to the gallon back in 76' either, the patents were bought and suppressed. Countless other similar stories lend credence to the notion that knowledge is power. Profit isn't everything, but the consolidation of power in the hands of a few IS.

Why do you imagine we still use copper hard lines for internet when fiber is cheaper and more efficient? Follow the power.

The Tesla motors example is weak as they have only now been able to compete with oil-Had the R&D been forward-thinking with a view to conservation and efficiency in 1950, we'd already see a transition in the industry making a difference.

We don't need to transmit power with overhead lines, but the infrastructure and the power concerns are controlled by those who own them-Combine that with governments available to the highest bidder and you have a technomonopolistic cabal of behind-the-scenes power-mongers.

>> ^Kreegath:
People drive cars/boats/planes without knowing all the technical jargon used by experts. They cook food without knowing all the cooking terminology, do their hair without knowing the technical phrases known to hair dressers and use the computer without being intimately aware of the phraseology.
Some of the very select group of interviewed people shown here did know the difference, they just didn't know the keywords "browser" and "search engine". And that doesn't make them stupid.


I have to disagree. People can drive their cars without knowing what a carburetor does, but if they don't know the difference between the gear shifter and the emergency brake then they are fucked. People don't need to know how to code a webpage, but they need to know the difference between a browser and a search engine.

That said, this video is obviously edited to remove the intelligent answers. It just shows that there are some people out there who are hopelessly clueless.

Knowing the difference between a carburetor and fuel injection doesn't affect life outcomes, but being a fan of computers and the internet and using them well can mean a vast competitive advantage.

This isn't surprising, but it isn't really a bad thing. Many of the people using the internet today didn't use it before search engines, so to them the ability to search seems like it is simply part of the program they're using (especially with things like the Google searchbar).

Lots of people drive cars, but not many could give you a good explanation of the difference between a carburetor and fuel injection. Still, they know enough to operate it, and that's fine for most.

Some of us may cringe when we hear people using terms like "hard drive" and "memory" interchangeably, but that isn't a difference I'd expect everyone to know.

(down vote for loaded, leading, leaning title)


MINK, that comparison is somewhat valid, there were a lot of folks, who depended upon their cheap labor-we in the U.S. have been groomed for the current dilemma of immigration, systematically, in premeditated genius strokes, by the shapers of this clusterfuck. How can we do without illegals, now that they are such a necessity for economy. Larger cities, L.A., Houston, whose city planning did not include an efficient model for expansion with relation to economy, are feeling the pain of continual retrofit and addition of roads to keep pace with influx-(illegals, being the biggest problem, with regard to congestion and crap cars)

We use cars, because the current paradigm of fossil fuel dependence, is forced upon us by those who would control the worlds economy-Free energy is like garlic to a vampire, to these assholes.....but they do want to control that as well.


Guess what??? It is already here, and has been here, for quite some time...one has but to see how hard they crush the most innovative and visionary of the planet. The fellows that tinkered with a carburetor long enough, to get 100 miles to the gallon in their Chrysler Imperial....they disappear, or join the ranks of the insane, because of a patent buy-out, or their untimely demises. They did it to Nikola Tesla, his backer Charles Westinghouse, and the public, they laugh at the very idea, because it is not part of their programming to believe anything other than what the group says, what the spin, disinformation, and propaganda says, and because humans follow each other to the mob pep-rally, cause they are fearful, predictable meatbots-

WE USE CARS, CAUSE THAT IS THE TOOL THAT HAS BEEN GIVEN US.

NOT EVERYONE, IS AS....Privileged TO LIVE WHERE THEY CAN WALK, BUS, or bop-along in their own, idyllic, fantasy bus, to work their politically-correct, Starbucks job, in their fucking "Made by indigenous people, with earth-friendly materials." These same idiots, hold in their own farts, to cut down on their, guilt-ridden contributions to "Wobal Glorming"

Shall we go on, with the CARS SUCK type folks, who, if they had to grow from seed, their own food, eating sprouts and purifying water to drink until the first harvest was available, would most likely, walk into a government rescue camp, before putting shovel to earth, then finding out they don't have the proper university credentials to operate such a complicated device?? Yeah why don't we.

You have inspired this sifter, to shove the pathetic idea, that humans have a goddamn thing to do with the earth's warming up...(CYCLICAL, YOU FUCKING MORON FOLLOWER FUCKS)

....right up the asses, of all who will venture to remove their
own, swollen, heads prior.


One of the best ways to understand the world one is in, is actually be a part of it.......

California could drop off the map tomorrow, and we could all eat grits and bacon, since the Frosted flakes were too soggy, and salty....

I love how a bunch of his "idea" is basically "do the proper maintenance on your car."

As for the acetone thing, I've seen some decent evidence that it is only useful on some older cars where the carburetor is not as efficient as it could be. Modern cars were already aerosolized the gas about as good as you could get...

(not to mention that acetone will eventually eat through the rubber fuel hoses/gaskets/etc...)

This was on Mythbusters, admittedly not the most scientific of guys.
Episode 53
Great Gas Conspiracy

Myth: Automakers and fuel suppliers are in collusion to keep us dependent on expensive gasoline and inefficient cars. There are many devices that one can use to cut your fuel consumption.

They got a carbureted car and a fuel-injected car to test several types of devices. The cars were placed on a dynamometer, which allows the car to drive without moving anywhere.

Test devices and additives:

* Fuel line magnets: working on the "principles of hydrodynamics," they are supposed to align the molecules for more efficient consumption.
* Acetone additive: supposed to make gasoline burn more efficiently
* 300mpg 'super' carburetor
* Hydrogen fuel cell generator: flammable hydrogen gas produced by electrolysis. Adam labeled it "Gasbuster: Stickin' it to the Man"

They tested each car on the dynamometer at 35mph and 55mph with each 'device.'

Carburetor car:

* Baseline: 17mpg at 35mph and 25mpg at 55mph
* Magnets: exactly the same as baseline busted
* Acetone: 16.7mpg at 35mph and 24mpg at 55mph busted
* Super carb: much worse than baseline, 12mpg at 35mph and 17.7mpg at 55mph busted

Fuel-injected car

* Baseline: 19mpg at 35mph and 27mpg at 55mph
* Magnets: 18mpg at 35mph and 26mpg at 55mph busted
* Acetone: 18mpg at 35mph and 26mpg at 55mph busted