Says his Grandfather developed this engine 60 years ago. Im calling BS...

http://video.wnbc.com/player/?id=271843

My ass. 0-60 in 3 seconds? 400 horsepower? He may be using that much gas if you consider that 85% of what he puts in there is corn oil. If he goes by that I can believe it, but that is not actual mileage per gallon of liquid in the tank. That is only the 15% of gas that is in every gallon of liquid shot into the engine. Did anybody else notice he really really liked Fords?


http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060227/FREE/302270007/1023/THISWEEKSISSUE

I really like the thinking of this guy though. I read about him in my Popular Science magazine about 6 months ago. Even if he never comes up with an efficient way to capture and reuse the water I would not mind having a separate tank that you pour water into every time you fill up the car.

He wouldn't even show them whats under the hood because of pending patents, I mean how the hell are you going to reverse engineer something you see in a video and have no way of knowing what the hell it is let alone what it does. This is total Bullshit!

0-60 in 3 seconds with 400 hp. Yeah right did you see the tires on that car, who the hell is he trying to fool. Even if the car was capable he would be busy spinning the tires if he had enough power to pull off a 3sec 0-60. So what's it do in the 1/4 mile, sub 10 seconds?

Anyone in a V afraid this guy will waste you in a race?

But the big thing is that this engine was supposedly developed by his grandfather during the WWII era, now if his grandfather is about the same age as mine he was probably in his 20's and if you ask me I don't think your worrying about getting 100+mpg while dodging German artillery shells on the beaches of Normandy or dogfight with the Luftwaffe at 15,000 feet above Stuttgart.

400 HP from a 1980s Ford? AHAHAHAHAHHA!! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH !!AHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Give me a break. :alchi: :thepan: :cookoo: :anibs:

I know plenty of Fox Boby Fords around here turning 400+. Problem is damn near nothing under the hood is stock and Ford + Naturally aspirated = 400HP just isnt gonna happen these days and I sure as hell didnt hear a S/C or Turbos in there.

Maybe he has a 100 dry shot and a 150 wet shot that he is including in his numbers.

98% of Fords are still on the road. The other 2% made it home.

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w52/jdinmaui/ford.jpg

I know plenty of Fox Boby Fords around here turning 400+. Problem is damn near nothing under the hood is stock and Ford + Naturally aspirated = 400HP just isnt gonna happen these days and I sure as hell didnt hear a S/C or Turbos in there.

Maybe he has a 100 dry shot and a 150 wet shot that he is including in his numbers.

98% of Fords are still on the road. The other 2% made it home.

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w52/jdinmaui/ford.jpg

I stand corrected, but I still smell BS in his so-called new fuel.

He's selling what cattle farmers are shoveling... that is all I will say.
:lol:

Notice that he won't open the hood! And if it was invented 60 years ago, why wasn't it first marketed in the `70s during the fuel crisis?

Oh, I forgot, it didn't exist.

well if it isnt a load of crap, then you can bet this guys going to have himself a v12 in the garage sometime within the next few years.

400 HP from a 1980s Ford? AHAHAHAHAHHA!! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH !!AHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Give me a break. :alchi: :thepan: :cookoo: :anibs:
I used to think you were clueless. All doubt has been eliminated. The 5.0 fox Mustangs are probably the most popular car for drag racing there has ever been. 400hp is on the low side for most these cars and there are several running 1000hp+ out there. 400Hp is an easily acheivable number for a 5.0 with no power adders, just bolt ons, exhaust, cam and other small things will do it.

I used to think you were clueless. All doubt has been eliminated. The 5.0 fox Mustangs are probably the most popular car for drag racing there has ever been. 400hp is on the low side for most these cars and there are several running 1000hp+ out there. 400Hp is an easily acheivable number for a 5.0 with no power adders, just bolt ons, exhaust, cam and other small things will do it.


I see more F-Bodies drag racing than Rustangs but they are all Redneck Rockets so its a moot point.

I used to think you were clueless. All doubt has been eliminated. The 5.0 fox Mustangs are probably the most popular car for drag racing there has ever been. 400hp is on the low side for most these cars and there are several running 1000hp+ out there. 400Hp is an easily acheivable number for a 5.0 with no power adders, just bolt ons, exhaust, cam and other small things will do it.

It is still a joke when we're talking about this guy's car, and I doubt that any biofuel is going to run 400 hp, especially out of a 20-plus-year-old block. And 1,000hp+? Yeah, riiiight. Sure. Show me a dyno sheet, or shut up. Don't you and that sheep have a date?

It is still a joke when we're talking about this guy's car, and I doubt that any biofuel is going to run 400 hp, especially out of a 20-plus-year-old block. And 1,000hp+? Yeah, riiiight. Sure. Show me a dyno sheet, or shut up. Don't you and that sheep have a date?

i saw this on TV about a year ago.

snaJHZEervc

25 seconds: "who said biofuels can't be fast"

answer: 93DevilleUSMC :histeric: :histeric::histeric::histeric::histeric:

less commentary in this one:
z4BrHzlOOQg

i saw this on TV about a year ago.

snaJHZEervc

25 seconds: "who said biofuels can't be fast"

answer: 93DevilleUSMC :histeric: :histeric::histeric::histeric::histeric:

Yeah, but that was a proven technology in that video. The guy making the claim in the original video is pushing some supposed new technology, which he won't even show us. Doesn't that sound suspicious to you?

i saw this on TV about a year ago.

snaJHZEervc

25 seconds: "who said biofuels can't be fast"

answer: 93DevilleUSMC :histeric: :histeric::histeric::histeric::histeric:

Also, the engine in that car was pretty much completely non-factory.

The one in the topic Mustang's compartment? Does not sound upgraded, and I'm not the only one so far who has said it. MauiV said something to that effect as well.

haha i was just commenting on the "not on biofuel" comment. ;)

haha i was just commenting on the "not on biofuel" comment. ;)

Okay, so it may be possible on biofuel. Still, the claims made about that F-body mustang in the first post just do not add up to me.

What do you think of his zero-to-sixty in three seconds comment?

It is still a joke when we're talking about this guy's car, and I doubt that any biofuel is going to run 400 hp, especially out of a 20-plus-year-old block. And 1,000hp+? Yeah, riiiight. Sure. Show me a dyno sheet, or shut up. Don't you and that sheep have a date?
Well youve gone past clueless and have entered the "oblivious" stage. Gee finding a 1000hp Mustang on the net was real hard. I dont see what the age of the block has to do with anything. Can you elaborate on that a little?. Cause I've used 20-40 year old blocks when doing projects and they worked like, well, a new block. I dont know if the guy in the original post makes 400hp on biofuel. I'm not saying he does or doesn't. What I am saying is that 400 hp from a 5.0 Mustang is very easy to do and 1000++++ isn't all that difficult with power adders either. Oh yeah, about the sheep thing. Tell mums I'm sorry but I have to cancel.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=PMu7tG4AJvU

http://youtube.com/watch?v=FBggNan78Ls&feature=related

http://youtube.com/watch?v=oI8kwxPx_Sw&feature=related

Mine (and I think his) point is that with no forced induction a Mustang has a hard time reaching 400 HP. That car didnt even have a cam and the exhaust even sounds stock.

Mine (and I think his) point is that with no forced induction a Mustang has a hard time reaching 400 HP. That car didnt even have a cam and the exhaust even sounds stock.

THANK YOU!!! Somebody can read a post without their Ford fanboy feminine sides getting all teary-eyed!

i dont believe the 3 seconds to 60 thing. i think he said that as a 'guess-timate' and went lower than it actually is to get more attention and interest towards the product. i'm sure there are other goodies under the hood of that car that not only help the MPG but also shave some time off the ET. those things arent as heavy as some of the cars today that are equipped with similar power, and add to the mix that they're very mod friendly. I dont think it'll run a 3 flat 0-60, but based on the info he gave, i'm sure its quicker than a :v: (0-60 in 4.6).

i dont believe the 3 seconds to 60 thing. i think he said that as a 'guess-timate' and went lower than it actually is to get more attention and interest towards the product. i'm sure there are other goodies under the hood of that car that not only help the MPG but also shave some time off the ET. those things arent as heavy as some of the cars today that are equipped with similar power, and add to the mix that they're very mod friendly. I dont think it'll run a 3 flat 0-60, but based on the info he gave, i'm sure its quicker than a :v: (0-60 in 4.6).

Hmm, I disbelieve it as well.

btw, claimed 500ft/lb tq

now, considering the weight of the car, and TQ in the neighborhood of 500, a sub 4 0-60 is plausible.

also, i didnt hear anything about it being the original engine...
All i heard was that his grandfather came up with a design about 60 years back. And that he & his team have been tweaking the engine for about 10 years.


its plausible.
as is the MPG claim.




** everything he says, its probably a little less than the claim. he sounded a little iffy when the reporter asked for specific numbers. his answers seemed like questions in a way; kind of a, "uh...500?" .. probably close to the numbers he was claimed, just not expecting an exact match.

btw, claimed 500ft/lb tq

now, considering the weight of the car, and TQ in the neighborhood of 500, a sub 4 0-60 is plausible.

also, i didnt hear anything about it being the original engine...
All i heard was that his grandfather came up with a design about 60 years back. And that he & his team have been tweaking the engine for about 10 years.


its plausible.
as is the MPG claim.




** everything he says, its probably a little less than the claim. he sounded a little iffy when the reporter asked for specific numbers. his answers seemed like questions in a way; kind of a, "uh...500?" .. probably close to the numbers he was claimed, just not expecting an exact match.

You have the question-like answers, plus the convenient timing of his claim, with gas having just jumped over $4.07/gallon nationally.

Mine (and I think his) point is that with no forced induction a Mustang has a hard time reaching 400 HP. That car didnt even have a cam and the exhaust even sounds stock.
I'm here to tell ya. They can. 1000hp......no, 400hp.......easy. Where are you getting your facts from or is it just common knowledge amongst Cadillac people that a 5.0 Mustang has cant get 400hp without forced induction?.

THANK YOU!!! Somebody can read a post without their Ford fanboy feminine sides getting all teary-eyed!Huh?. WTF are you talking about?. You said post up 1000hp Mustangs with dyno numbers and I did. But please, tell me how you cant get 400hp out of an engine block thats 20 years old. Its just priceless hearing you talk shop. :histeric:

Mine (and I think his) point is that with no forced induction a Mustang has a hard time reaching 400 HP. That car didnt even have a cam and the exhaust even sounds stock.Its a pointless point with no point cause its pointless. Its good that you found someone like '93 to share in your automotive unknowledge. Now, please tell me why (since you are a pro on the subject) a Mustang 5.0 would have a hard time reaching 400hp without forced induction. I know you are thinking more in the lines of the SOHC 4.6 but the 5.0 is a different animal. The 5.0 dates back to the 60's, its the 4.6 that would have a fairly difficult time getting 400hp out of without boost.

What do you think of his zero-to-sixty in three seconds comment?

I have done 0-120 in under 4 seconds on that coaster Top Thrill Dragster at Cedar Point. There is no way a Ford could stand up to that kind of force. :)

i'm no ford supporter, but uh, whose engines have won more Formula 1 races than anyone else?

:hide:

This guy's claim is no more believable than the shysters that claim they can run a car on Hydrogen using an onboard Brown's Gas generator.

The car in the video sounded completely stock, so the idea of 500hp without FI is out the window. No cam, no heads, no exhaust = no NA 500hp. The other ridiculous thing is the E85 stickers all over it- E85 returns absolutely horrible fuel economy compared to gasoline, so I'd have an easier time believing he did it on gasoline than Ethanol.

This guy is trying to make a buck by capitalizing on everyone's panic at the moment. Throw out a few buzzwords for people who don't know anything ("put some E85 stickers on it- now it looks legit!") and rake in the free publicity. The sad part is that people (including news stations) will buy it hook, line and sinker, just like the "Run your car on water" scams.

This guy's claim is no more believable than the shysters that claim they can run a car on Hydrogen using an onboard Brown's Gas generator.

The car in the video sounded completely stock, so the idea of 500hp without FI is out the window. No cam, no heads, no exhaust = no NA 500hp. The other ridiculous thing is the E85 stickers all over it- E85 returns absolutely horrible fuel economy compared to gasoline, so I'd have an easier time believing he did it on gasoline than Ethanol.

This guy is trying to make a buck by capitalizing on everyone's panic at the moment. Throw out a few buzzwords for people who don't know anything ("put some E85 stickers on it- now it looks legit!") and rake in the free publicity. The sad part is that people (including news stations) will buy it hook, line and sinker, just like the "Run your car on water" scams.


^^What I've been trying to say this whole time.

^^What I've been trying to say this whole time.No its not what youve been saying. You are latching on to Tony's coat tails trying to hide your embarrassing assesments. I agree with Tony's post, everything except the part about it not being able to make 500hp without FI. Carb'd cars often make more hp than fuel injected ones for starters. Not as efficient but effective nontheless. Secondly, if in fact that '87 5.0 Mustang was stock, it WOULD be fuel injected. Fuel injection was standard on the 5.0 since '86. I do agree with everyone about THAT car, I think its complete BS. I dont believe the mileage or performance figures at all.

who said it was a stock engine though?

ford chevy or dodge, 400hp w/o a blower is quite possible for a 302. 1000hp? Not a chance in hell. I would bet many times my worth w/o looking at the actual vids. The Mustangs in question are 500cu. and blown w/nos etc...

0-60 in 3 secs? With stock tires in a full size vehicle? There is a formula for figureing the calcs but it was a million years ago and I am not that interested in it to care. I can tell you this. 0-60 in 3 secs has been tried in some of the lightest and most expensive high performance cars in the world and to my knowledge nearly none have done it. For a full size vehicle on stock tires? I feel the most logical way to achieve this is too launch it off the deck of an aircraft carrier. With the trunk full of E85 stickers. Mega props for the first one who photoshops this into reality!

ford chevy or dodge, 400hp w/o a blower is quite possible for a 302. 1000hp? Not a chance in hell. I would bet many times my worth w/o looking at the actual vids. The Mustangs in question are 500cu. and blown w/nos etc...

You can get 1000+ hp out of a small block Ford or Chevy with turbos. Supras and Skylines do it all day with inline 6 motors........................

No its not what youve been saying. You are latching on to Tony's coat tails trying to hide your embarrassing assesments. I agree with Tony's post, everything except the part about it not being able to make 500hp without FI. Carb'd cars often make more hp than fuel injected ones for starters. Not as efficient but effective nontheless. Secondly, if in fact that '87 5.0 Mustang was stock, it WOULD be fuel injected. Fuel injection was standard on the 5.0 since '86. I do agree with everyone about THAT car, I think its complete BS. I dont believe the mileage or performance figures at all.

I know damn well what I was saying, thank you, ass hat.

turbo or blower...you wont be getting good gas mileage. I don't care what you pour into it. You can run it on maple syrup for all I care. It will be getting poor mileage.

All day? I doubt it very seriously. You can pump a small block to 1000hp but you will be doing it for a very finite period of time. VERY finite.

No its not what youve been saying. You are latching on to Tony's coat tails trying to hide your embarrassing assesments. I agree with Tony's post, everything except the part about it not being able to make 500hp without FI. Carb'd cars often make more hp than fuel injected ones for starters. Not as efficient but effective nontheless. Secondly, if in fact that '87 5.0 Mustang was stock, it WOULD be fuel injected. Fuel injection was standard on the 5.0 since '86. I do agree with everyone about THAT car, I think its complete BS. I dont believe the mileage or performance figures at all.

I know damn well what I was saying, thank you, ass hat. Go start whining with someone else, and while you're at it, kiss my ass. That said, I'm done listening to you.

I must have stumbled into an old rivalry?:hide:

I know damn well what I was saying, thank you, ass hat.
You dont have a clue. From now on, I refer to you as "Captain Oblivious". :histeric:

You dont have a clue. From now on, I refer to you as "Captain Oblivious". :histeric:

Wow, that's a great one! How many cereal boxes did you have to read to come up with that?

i'm no ford supporter, but uh, whose engines have won more Formula 1 races than anyone else?

:hide:

Formula 1 sucks. GM kicks Ford's ass in Nascar.

I'm not sure Chevy or mopar even built engines for F1 for a great many years...GM is too busy paying 3 times thier employees are worth to the union reps.

I agree with Tony's post, everything except the part about it not being able to make 500hp without FI.

All I said was there's no way that guy's car is making 500hp NA. I know it's possible on a Ford 5.0, but the hella big cam, intake manifold and exhaust needed would NOT sound like that guy's car (and by that I mean stock).

Tony said "hella"