Over 100 miles on a Gallon of Gas

"JR1" (type35bugatti) 05/04/2014 at 12:14 • Filed to: Tom Ogle, 100mpg, conspiracy, hoax, oppositelock

3

44

Some of you may have heard of the "hoax" of the 160mpg car. You would be forgiven if you haven't heard the story as it originated in the late 1970s. Tom Ogle, a high school drop out from El Paso, California was able to create a fuel system that gave his 1970 Ford Galaxie over 100mpg.

After the story was made public and articles were supposedly written by the New York Times and other major news organizations, things started to go south for Ogle. There is a rumor that GM had made a similar device years earlier and Ogle had to pay patent royalties to the company. He is also believed to have been audited by the IRS causing his life to fall further into disarray. The final straw was when Ogle's partner and friend died by a freak accident when a jack fell and killed him. Ogle's friend is believed to be the only other person who know how the design worked. Afterwords Ogle left his auto shop and turned to alcoholism.

Afterwords the story goes big oil got the best of him. Ogle refused 25 million dollars from Shell Oil company to hand over the blueprints for the invention. Then in 1981 he was killed by big oil. The common held belief is he overdosed on drugs after becoming an alcoholic and committed suicide. The conspiracy theorist say that big oil was afraid Ogle's invention would become a reality and destroy their profitable business. So they killed Tom Ogle burying his invention with him.

If the conspiracy theorist are correct it wouldn't be the first time big business has intervened to promote their own personal interest. In the presidential election of 1896 William Mckinley received over three billion dollars in todays money to win the presidential election. Big business wanted their man Mckinley in office to stop the onslaught of the radical democrats vying to dismantle the monopolies. At the time Mark Hanna a wealthy business man raised capital from the big organizations run by Rockefeller (Standard Oil), Carnegie (U.S Steel), and Morgan (General Electric). So it doesn't seem totally out of the question for big oil to kill of Ogle does it?

Tom Ogle's invention is based on a vapor fuel system. Now I will not pretend I have any idea what I am talking about but the invention goes something like this; the ingenious of Ogle's invention is he removed the carburetor on the car. This allowed him to use a series of hoses to feed gas vapors and air directly into the engine. The gas from the tank travels through several filters which stretches the energy available in each gallon. The gas tank withstands 360,000 pounds of pressure allowing for maximum fuel efficiency.

I have seen this story several different times on the internet and every time the conspiracy draws me in and make me wonder if this actually did happen? I am a little skeptical because it is after all it is the internet and the golden rule is you can't believe everything you hear on the internet. Everyone loves a good conspiracy theory too so their is a slight chance this is all just fiction. That being said it could be true and maybe the oil companies did kill off one of our greatest chances at burning died dinosaurs for another 1,000 years. Tell me what you guys think about this story and here is a link to the patent:

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Here is an argumentative by Micheal Ballaban about why these conspiracy theories may be false:

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

PardonMyFlemish16 > JR1 05/04/2014 at 12:19

4

Conspiracy holds no weight. The mere existence of CAFE, as well as the continued improvement of auto fuel economy fly in the face of theories that "big business" kills off anyone who finds more efficient ways for cars to operate.

ja9ae > PardonMyFlemish16 05/04/2014 at 12:29

5

You could even consider that as exploration costs increase oil companies have an active interest in improving economy to prevent a mass-market switch away from internal combustion.

*Adjusts tin-foil hat*

Dunnik > JR1 05/04/2014 at 12:30

4

Big Oil certainly had a motive to off poor Tom Ogle, and no doubt had the opportunity, but motive and opportunity are not enough - for good reason - to prove there was a murder. You need evidence, and there is none. I wish conspiracy theorists would remember Occam's Razor - that the simplest explanation (he killed himself after his demons got the better of him) is usually the correct one.

In regards to your McKinley example, it's worth noting subsequent history: that the monopolies were busted in the end, and gov't oversight and regulation was increased to prevent monopolistic practices (the Federal Trade Commission was created in 1914). Corporate political donations are corrosive, but no amount of money can stop the tide of history.

Also, don't forget that Big Oil doesn't make cars. If a manufacturer could steal enormous market share by producing a 100mpg car (which would obviously sell like hotcakes with today's gas prices), don't you think they'd do it, or would have already done it by now? Corporations don't care if their profits come at the expense of other corporations (or at the expense of workers, the environment, public safety, etc.). I'm not in a position to judge whether Mr. Ogle's device works or not, but this makes me suspect it doesn't.

Michael Ballaban > JR1 05/04/2014 at 12:37

1

Oh not this bullcrap again. Here you go .

JR1 > Dunnik 05/04/2014 at 12:39

1

That has always been one of the key points that makes me think this whole story is just one big lie. That being said couldn't oil companies maybe pay car companies royalties to not innovate?

PardonMyFlemish16 > ja9ae 05/04/2014 at 12:43

1

Not necessarily- any widespread improvement in economy = dropping demand which doubly hurts their bottom line. But I am pretty sure the guys who made the Prius are still alive. Conspiracy theories are a waste of time.

JR1 > Michael Ballaban 05/04/2014 at 12:50

0

Hell I didn't see I can't believe I missed this on the FP thanks!

Dunnik > JR1 05/04/2014 at 12:54

1

Whatever Big Oil could pay in bribes pales in comparison to what an auto manufacturer could make if they were first into the market with a 100mpg car.

The amount of bribery required would be so huge, in fact, that it would be visible on Big Oil's balance sheets. Don't forget that they're all public companies. Hiding a six figures worth of bribes might be easy enough, but beyond that, somebody is gonna notice.

tzx4 > JR1 05/04/2014 at 12:56

5

I have only a cursory acquaintance with physics, that said, I am certain that the quantity of potential energy in a gallon of gas is a fixed amount, and there are unalterable fixed energy demands made by a mechanical device such as an automobile that will use up that quantified amount of potential chemical energy in each gallon of gas. One example would be the fact that a moving car has to push aside many tons of air as it moves along, and that factor alone uses quantifiable amounts of energy.

There will always be magical thinking in the human mind, and ignorance creates lots of space for magical thinking to fill in.

PS9 > JR1 05/04/2014 at 13:51

1

Conspiracy theorists have no objective evidence to offer; just more conspiracies. poke holes in the conspiracy, and the theorist will reveal to you a Matryoshka doll of nested conspiracies, a convenient red herring included at every shell. Let's go over the largest problems of this story.

Inventions are not magical. They are not soulbound World of Warcraft-style to a given inventor, and the principals that make them work would not magically go away if the inventor were killed. This poses significant problems with the 'kill the inventor' trope of conspiracy theories. If you want to suppress an invention - especially a supposedly well known one like the 100 MPG Galaxie - you have to do much, much more. You have to destroy any examples. You have to try to pay off people who would attempt to replicate the invention. You have to keep information about the invention 'out of the wrong hands' (almost impossible today, completely impossible in no-internet 1970), and you have to keep doing that forever, because it's only a matter of time before it gets discovered again by someone else.

We live in a world full of people attempting to invent and discover. It's been true since the enlightenment (~1700s) and maybe has been since the renaissance (~1400s). This posses another problem with 'kill the inventor'; an uncountable number of others are working to discover the thing you wish to suppress, and it will only be a matter of time before they discover it again. You can't kill the principals that cause the invention to work, and you also can't just kill everyone so it never gets discovered again.

So you could get 100+ MPG from a 70s era Ford Galaxie - 3800 lb, carbureted, 1970s era V8 - if you had this magic device. But we can only match that in 2013 using every technological innovation at our disposal? If a car could get 100 mpg with the magic box and nothing else in the 70s, why does BMW need a hybrid powertrain, a special 3 cylinder engine, exotic and expensive materials and a decade or more of development time today? 'Because they're part of the conspiracy, too!'? So I guess we can include the entire auto industry as well as F1 in this invention-suppressing conspiracy then, since this is the technological direction they all seem to be going in? Right. 'Because they don't know how it works!'? Yeah, about that...

Lots of problems with the way this thing works as you have explained it, chief among them being the assumption that gas has more energy as a vapor than as a liquid. No. Liquids are more dense than gasses. A gallon of liquid gasoline will have more energy per kilogram than a similar gallon of gasoline vapor, no matter what you've pressurized it at (Unless the pressure is so high that it liquefies, and at that point...you have a gallon of gasoline + an expensive and unnecessary pressurization mechanism to keep it that way.) Running gasoline vapors mixed with air the length of the car is extraordinarly dangerous, especially if they've reached stoichometry. Unless you got them from Hogwarts, no filter anywhere will impart more energy to gasoline than it already has. Finally a pressurized gas tank will not fundamentally change the behavior of the engine, nor the principals of stoichometry that allow it to extract energy from gasoline. Because of this, you can pressurize it all you want, you're fuel efficiency will not go up because of that.

JR1 > PS9 05/04/2014 at 13:56

0

Great points and this is why I am glad I brought this hoax to Oppo. I wanted to see what your guys opinion was on it and generally everyone agrees it cannot happen. I can't say I ever really believed. I simply wanted to see if there was any truth to the story or if the entire idea and patent behind the hoax was even possible. The laws of supply and demand would have to have allowed for this invention to have surfaced by now if it was real.

Joseph Shaul > PardonMyFlemish16 05/04/2014 at 13:58

0

That assumes a simple supply-demand curve. In reality, as soon as gas > unsubsidized ethanol * 1.5, nobody will ever use gas ever again.

SmoothieKing > JR1 05/04/2014 at 14:38

5

I think this is fake for the following reasons. First if GM really held the patent to this technology, they wouldn't have sued for royalties, since there were none. They would have shut him down for patent infringement and we would have never heard from him again.

Second, if GM had this technology during the 1980s oil embargo, they would have made Billions and broken OPEC once and for all. Ending their influence and the worlds dependance on oil. While simultaneously catapulting GM to Apple like status throughout the world. The military ramifications alone would set GM up for life. Imagine a tank or truck that could run 2x or 3x on the same amount of fuel. This would eliminate supply line concerns on the battle field and provide and unparalleled advantage.

Third, if GM had this technology and it worked, they would never have been in the awful financial straights that plagued them over the last 30 years. They have long said that fuel economy was too cost prohibitive to achieve. The cost of a hybrid vehicle is roughly 20-30% higher than its conventional counterpart, with only a 10-20% fuel efficiency advantage. If what Ogle said was true about this tech, than we are talking about a 10X improvement in fuel efficiency. By today's hybrid cost standards, this technology would be a bargain.

Names have been changed to protect the innocent > JR1 05/04/2014 at 14:57

3

A guy named Pogue did develope a 100mpg fuel system in the 20s in Winnipeg MB, which did work. However, it required Naptha (white gas) to run. It worked by catalytically cracking the Naptha into lighter combustibles such as Nat gas, propane etc. it was a somewhat complex unit to build and operate. It only worked once the vehicle had warmed up somewhat. The same type of system has been re-invented several times but doesn't work on modern fuels, as they're so full of additives, that the catalysts get quickly clogged up.

Names have been changed to protect the innocent > PardonMyFlemish16 05/04/2014 at 15:01

1

I'm sure some conspiracy theories are a time waste.

On the other hand some have real teeth, such as the AE911 truth theory. It completely destroys the the 'official' govt theory every which way from Sunday, not to mention it's now supported by thousands of credible professionals.

PardonMyFlemish16 > Names have been changed to protect the innocent 05/04/2014 at 15:22

0

Architects and engineers can be idiots too. I would put the "professionals" behind AE911 in that category. I am an engineer and I have worked with root cause engineers. No engineer I know has ever determined the failure of a building with some shoddy video footage.... they go on site, they analyze the materials, the methods of failure, etc. They don't come in with a bias or a point to prove, like a typical conspiracy theorist. Conspiracy theorists are the worst.... prove things with facts and science, not confirmation bias and conjecture.

Kev Cudby > JR1 05/04/2014 at 16:11

0

Ogle's invention sounds like homeopathy. :) But why is everyone so obsessed with fuel economy? The IPCC reckons we must totally stop adding carbon to the atmosphere (by about 2080, if you do the math), which means crude oil in future will need to be made from carbon dioxide sucked out of the atmosphere or ocean, the conversion process powered by solar or nuclear energy. These resources are so huge there will be no constraint on gasoline supplies. Carbon neutral gasoline will be more expensive than what we use right now, but per-capita economic growth will take care of that. Fifty years in the future, car-buyers won't give a damn about fuel economy ratings.

JR1 > Kev Cudby 05/04/2014 at 16:58

0

I hope you're right, but at the same time for mainly selfish reasons I still hope gasoline will be used. I will miss not having a dinosaur burning engine to destroy the rubber on my car.

P chap > JR1 05/04/2014 at 17:03

1

Funny he ended up in El Paso Texas, One of my engineering profs at UTEP got caught up in this. He was a bit of showman as well.

JR1 > P chap 05/04/2014 at 17:05

0

So your professor actually knew this guy? At least that proves that he was real, I thought with a conspriacy theory he might not even be a real person!

Gearhead's Garage > PardonMyFlemish16 05/04/2014 at 17:36

1

Actually, no: http://www.calcars.org/calcars-news/5…

Cognative Dissonance > ja9ae 05/04/2014 at 17:39

0

As the price of gasoline continues to rise, the incentive to switch to more efficient or alternatives is now a reality.

Cognative Dissonance > tzx4 05/04/2014 at 17:44

0

The internal combustion engine can be made approximately 300% more efficient, except the public is unaware of this fact and therefore is not demanding more efficient engines from the automobile manufacturers. http://www.fuelvaporcar.com/

P chap > JR1 05/04/2014 at 17:48

1

Knew and promoted it. Lot's of local publicity..no real results. Damned if I can remember what course he taught. Might have been heat transfer..go figure.

NotUnlessRoundIsFunny > Dunnik 05/04/2014 at 18:24

0

I wish conspiracy theorists would remember Occam's Razor - that the simplest explanation (he killed himself after his demons got the better of him) is usually the correct one.

Amen to that. Not that there are no conspiracies, but it seems like many of the theorists are allergic to Occam.

PardonMyFlemish16 > Gearhead's Garage 05/04/2014 at 19:00

0

OK, let me requalify my statements for the neurotic pedants... nobody involved in making the Prius was killed by big oil.

Jim Drivas > JR1 05/04/2014 at 22:52

1

I don't know about this fuel system but I live by the Turbonator to add at least 50 hp and 70 mpg to my car...

Turbonator

JR1 > Jim Drivas 05/04/2014 at 23:01

0

I also heard pigs fly over St. Louis on February 30th

Names have been changed to protect the innocent > PardonMyFlemish16 05/04/2014 at 23:11

1

You're not much of an engineer if you can't, or refuse to see the obvious. It's not just a couple of crackpots. It's several thousand experts now that have examined the issue and came out with the obvious conclusion - 911 was a scam.

It doesn't take a genius to see what's right in front of your eyes- 2 buildings fully collapsed impossibly - in their own footprints, defying all known laws of physics, based on a couple of measly plane strikes - neither of which could create the collapses. However, it was the 3rd building that seals the deal(building 7). Fully collapses in its own footprint after a small fire, something it was designed to absolutely NOT do.

When you see the laws of physics being broken by the official govt position, you don't need to go on site to say "I call bullshit". Even a 10 year old can see it.

But don't take my word for it. That koolaid you're drinking probably tastes too good. When your eyes open - it will be a shocker for you.

Like I said, some conspiracy theories are just that, but some have real teeth.

BTW, follow the money on 911. It doesn't lead to a gaggle of 'terrorists'.

straightsix > JR1 05/05/2014 at 07:16

0

Pat Goodman of Winchester VA is the inventor of the water injection system. He's taken cars to 100mph+ and he's done it repeatedly in monitored test environments. There were a few TIME and Popular Mechanics pieces about his work and I've seen them. My (limited) understanding is that CAFE standards make "production" models all but impossible.

PardonMyFlemish16 > Names have been changed to protect the innocent 05/05/2014 at 07:48

0

Ah another classic conspiracy theorist strategy. Guilting the "non believers". "OPEN YOUR EYES DUDE". Spinning the old Republican mind trick ("if you dont agree with me, you hate freedom" ———> "if you dont agree with me, youre drinking the Kool Aid"). No. I was in downtown NYC on 9/11... I have friends who lost people when those towers fell. The shit you crackpot theorists are doing is the height of disrespect. You don't care about anything but being contrarian and attention whoring.

Fuck you and your crackpot theories, and your desire to mimic intellectual superiority through what essentially amounts to fanfics.

JR1 > straightsix 05/05/2014 at 08:20

0

Water injection? Sounds impossible to me.

tallestdwarf > Cognative Dissonance 05/05/2014 at 10:03

0

That article speaks futuristically about 2008. A Google search of "Fuel Vapor Technologies" doesn't turn up much since 2011.

Names have been changed to protect the innocent > PardonMyFlemish16 05/05/2014 at 15:52

0

Look - I see this is a struggle for you, but it doesn't make the obvious go away. Whenever someone gets backed into a corner and digs their feet in, they respond exactly as you have; call the other person a crackpot and try to discredit them. It really means you've lost the argument. The alternative theories also don't disrespect those who died that day. If anything, they honour them, as they are point the finger at the real culprits, not some pathetic scapegoats. This is also neither republican or democrat - I don't care about party politics.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the 'official' story is impossible. I didn't used to believe the alternative theories either, but the 'official' one never sat well with me. One day I took an honest look at things and realized there is no way those towers could have fallen the way they did, without help, and building 7 is an insult to anyones intelligence.

Follow the money, dude, follow the money....Ask why several hundred million in put options were taken out on airline stocks days before 911(a number waaaay higher than average), just for example.

Who benefitted from all the ensuing war actions, law changes etc?

PardonMyFlemish16 > Names have been changed to protect the innocent 05/05/2014 at 17:41

0

If insulting people means you lost the argument, then calling everyone who disagrees with you stupid (essentially what you do when you say things like 'it doesnt take a rocket scientist') damns your argument from the get go, doesn't it?

Names have been changed to protect the innocent > PardonMyFlemish16 05/05/2014 at 20:15

0

Umm, nope.

DasWauto > JR1 05/06/2014 at 20:00

0

Was this shared on Jalopnik somewhere? Wondering for the Best of Oppo because of the number of views.

JR1 > DasWauto 05/06/2014 at 20:27

0

I looked and I did not see it on Jalopnik Sunday when it was posted. But I know the views are surprisingly high. Maybe someone else shared it on a website I don't view?

DasWauto > JR1 05/06/2014 at 20:31

0

I looked too and didn't see it, I also checked for keywords for when they 'reframe' a post instead of just sharing it directly, no dice there either. You normally get a notification if it's shared somewhere so if you didn't get one it must have been shared outside of Gawker and I'll include it as normal.

JR1 > DasWauto 05/06/2014 at 20:35

0

Alright thank you. And you really don't get enough recognition for this and I just wanted to say thanks for taking the time to do the best of posts. I always look forward to them!

bobrayner > PardonMyFlemish16 05/07/2014 at 06:40

0

That's not actually true, because the cost of fuel is one of the factors constraining total usage of internal combustion engines. Just look at Jevons' Paradox . Making more efficient steam engines actually increased coal consumption, because it opened up a lot of new demand.

Anyway, back to a different economic problem in this conspiracy theory; there are hundreds of different economic actors who would stand to earn billions from this technology if they could make it work; including vehicle manufacturers, fleet operators, several different countries' armed forces, utility companies, &c. Many of them already have extensive R&D and most would try something new if it could give them an edge. None of them have got been any more successful with this tech than the anecdotal backyard amateur.

PardonMyFlemish16 > bobrayner 05/07/2014 at 07:24

0

Jevons' paradox doesn't apply here- when gas was 3-4x cheaper than it is today, people were not driving 3-4x as many miles. Cars weren't more efficient, but the net effect was the same. I.e. if the average car's fuel economy doubled, but the price of fuel doubled, driving habits wouldn't change at all.

Like you said though the important point here is that yes, while big oil wants people to consume consume consume, the number of people and industries who would benefit from more efficient cars far outweighs them, and the continued progress in fuel efficiency flies in the face of the implications of this "conspiracy".

Neat-O > JR1 05/07/2014 at 09:50

1

its simple, water goes in with the gas/air and when the mixture is lit the heat from the gas and air turn the liquid water into a gas helping to further pressurize the cylinder. Boom! Moe powwa!!!

TwoScoopsOfPig > JR1 05/07/2014 at 12:02

1

I'll call shenanigans - it's a question of density. Folks get "volume" and "mass" confused too easily. Gallons, being volumetric measurements, allow for different energy densities depending on temperature and pressure simply by condensing more gas into a given volume. This doesn't affect the actual energy content of a given mass of fuel.

Dude just reinvented direct injection and some sort of hokey BS about "filtering" gasoline. No. Doesn't work like that because of simple conservation of energy. You can't "stretch" the energy content of anything.

If he's got some sort of supercooled tank or a high-pressure pump to fill a reinforced tank, then maybe he can get 100 MPG - but it has nothing to do with efficiency in burning the fuel. In addition to needing the reinforced fuel tank (which I think was mentioned) he'd need a specialized pump and he'd still to purchase the same mass of gasoline as before, which winds up being even more expensive.

If anything, he'd have gotten a grant from Big Oil and Big Car.