Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Post by Ron Berts » Tue, 07 May 1996 04:00:00


As a wholesale supplier of after market parts and accessories, I am a
skeptic of aftermarket performance claims. I no longer trust anyone. I
have been abused by broken promises of performance claims. I have paid
the high price of engine modifications in mega dollars spent and
ending up with engines that would not live for a 100 mile trail ride
after modifications were completed.

So, I reallly wasn't e***d to add Boswell Energy Systems to our
product line up when I first read about Boswell's early claims to
Differential Vapor Injection. However, after reading a letter written
by Joe Portale, Sr. of RPG (Research Performance Group) and sent to
Jim Czekala of Dynotech, I started to investigate the possibilities of
this new technology in carburetors.

I put my skepticism aside and bacame a believer after reviewing the
numerous races won and records set utioizing Boswell Energy Systems.
My belief was further reinforced by a recent conversation with Kent
Anderson of Tri-K Sports, Maple Plain, MN

I would like to share with you excerpts from the RPG letter, my
conversation with Kent Anderson, as well as a partial listing of event
winners equipped with Boswell's.

Joe Portale of RPG said in his letter that George Boswell and Phil
Walker of Chrysler, encouraged him to explore the unknown and find the
operating window of the Boswell carbs and Super Cyclers. He said that
once in the window he became a true believer in the Boswell Principle
of Differential Vapor Injection (DVI). Joe goes on to say that
something was happening, and he wanted to know what. He said his team
had to learn each step of carburetor tuning all over, from the ground
up, to find the window. When they did, they went on to win the 1995
IJSBA Overall National Championship in Runabout 640!

Theory:
The basic difference here is in the early de-stablization of the
liquid fuel into a vaporized fuel, essentially omitting the atomized
stage. Boswell calls this a phase shift, moving from liquid to gas
directly. The highly polished carb mouth are more than just "Hokey" as
Kent Anderson explained. they conceal a dimensional change milled into
the venturi that creates this rapid phase shift. This apex in the
venturi increases air speed, much as an aircraft wing creates lift.
This increased air speed in the venturi also decreases pressure,
creating a differential pressure, or relative vacuum, in the flow
paths close to the venturi walls.

Boswell adds sensing devices that he calls Trigger Circuits, along the
flow paths. These can add, slow, or reverse fuel flow as changes in
the high velocity path demand, and you suddenly have INSTANTANEOUS
THROTTLE RESPONSE UNDER ALL CONDITIONS, resulting in near instant
acceleration!

Most engine builders realize that you can pack as much as 30% more
vapor into the same displacement as stomized fuel. As kent Anderson
stated, Jetting Charts of the past have no meaning with the Boswell's.
His Pro Stock Storm with standard carbs was jetted with over 800 mains
and when he received his Boswell's with 500 mains installed he was on
the phone to Boswell to voice his concern. George Boswell assured him
the 500 mains would not burn down his engine and to give them a try.
Geroge Boswell states when you inject vapor into a motor, everything
changes. Joe Portale states "It's like 1910 and you're looking at your
first motor all over again, except this time there are no emissions of
unburned fuel, no carbon monoxide, no waste. (no catalytic
converters!)". Remember folks, were talking about 2-stroke engines
here.

Why:
Joe Portale states "Because the combustion chamber size is fixed, we
use less fuel to fill it with vapor than we do with atomized fuel."
(That means we will get better fuel mileage too!)

Because the fuel is releasing heat energy as it vaporizes it tends to
cool the motor much the same way freon cools air. Fuel vapor can be as
much as -100 degrees F as it enters the motor, and quite capable of
absorbing heat, while flashing to a temperature where it is no longer
capable of phasing back onto liquid under compression. This eliminates
a major tuning problem in conventional carburetors, and wer get higher
HP at lower exhaust temps (by as much as 500 degrees).

Because fuel vapor burns 400 times faster than atomized fuel, and 30%
more vapor can be compressed into a chamber, combustion chamber design
limits can be thrown out the window too, clains Joe Portale. Boswell's
Principle of Differential Vapor Injection most likely will led to
entire new engine designs.

Because of the fuel vapor's tendency to equalize under pressure,
elevation changes of 7,000 feet have been reported with no jetting
changes. Boswell states that once in the vapor window stability is
very strong.

Something is happening here as everyone will attest and it is giving
higher HP and Torque, at lower BSFC, EGT's and fuel flows. And all of
this with near zero emissions!

Super Cyclers:
The bottom line is HP in a performance engine, and as Joe Portale
discovered, a 10 - 15 HP gain is truley achievable on a properly tuned
Boswell Carb and Super Cycler combo.

The Super Cycler in effect, captures the return pulse energy at the
boundary layer and prevents it from re-entry into the carb, by
reversing it and adding it back to int intake flow. this
super-charging effect is measurable, however, it must be tuned in, not
just bolted on.

Boswell's are not interchangeable with any other known carburetor
because they are not really caarburetors anymore. They have become
vapor injectors! Not fuel droplet injectors, with all kinds of
electronic or mechanical controls attached, but simple mechanical
vapor injectors. Its a whole new world in fuel delivery systems, with
new rules and new standards.

Kent Anderson stated his first encounter with Boswells came the day
Tom Zeller set a world speed record in NSSR 1995 competition of 140.7
mph on a '94 Storm. He stated Tom pushed the record up by 4 mph. The
competitors felt perhaps the rules were being bent because for the
past few seasons they had been challenging the record with increases
of 1/10 mph. To have someone jump the record by 4mph in one week was
indeed remarkable.

Kent stated that after he discovered Tom Zeller's subtle change, he
put a set of Boswell's on the very next week. Kent when on to state
that he run out of season to capture the record, but watch out Tom
Zeller, He will have his Boswell's tuned and ready for next season.

Partial List of Real World Winners:

Dale Loritz and Jeff Judwig took First and Second at the Eagle River
World Championship and Camoplast formula 1 series.

Sam Rivers set a world record of 120mph on a '94 XLT

Mike Knapp won ISR World Series Champion 700 Improved Stock and 1000
Improved Stock in 1995

Dale Loritz: '95 world Champion, 1st place Champ 440, 2nd place F1
Eagle River

Wahl to Wahl wins (9 for 9)

Terry Wahl wins 3 of 4 Boswell Super Sled Series Races for a $50,000
prize

Dave Wahl: World Champion Eagle River F1, 1st Place Brainerd, MN, 1st
place Boswell Super Sled Series, Beausejour

Mike Houle: F1 & F3 Champion Eagle River

Jerry Solem: Pro-Stock '95 World Champion

Mike Campbell: F3

The list goes on and on but I feel Joe Portale of RPG sums it up best
when he stated "We ain't all crazy, Just nuts about our Boswell's".

Sorry this posting is so long, but I am truly e***d about this
emerging fuel delivery system and I am proud to offer this product to
our dealer network.

If you would like specific information to convert your snowmobile,
please feel free to respond by E-Mail.

--
==================================================
Ron Bertsch
Equipment Chase - (product supplier)

Phone: 701-852-5037
Postal: PO Box 3010
        Minot,ND 58701-3010 USA
==================================================

 
 
 

Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Post by David Wo » Fri, 10 May 1996 04:00:00

Quote:

><<Boswell info deleted>>
>Only problem is that Dynotech still hasn't been able to get any of the
>Boswell claims to materialize in their dyno room.  I believe they even
>issued a challenge in the last issue to anyone who could get it to work.
>I don't know that the Boswell stuff doesn't work, but for what is claimed
>and the money involved I'd sure like to see it verified in a controled
>invironment before I spent the money.
>Dan Canfield

>89 Indy 707
>89 FJ1200
>RP90

You are right to be very skeptical. After I read the Boswell SPAM er post I
expected it to claim to restore hair growth and cure impotence. Unless it means
something different than when I took my physics class, all that phase shift
jive means to vaporise the fuel into a gas instead of atomised droplets. I find
it hard to believe that engineers and scientists involved in fuel/fuel systems
research don't know about such things. Early carburetors were surface type
that used heat to evaporate gasoline. They changed from that type to atomizing
type.
    There may be a breakthrough in the physics of fuel delivery systems but I
doubt it would come from a small company that sells performance parts to
snowmobilers. They certainly wouldn't need to SPAM newsgroups to sell
their products.
Make 'em prove it.

-Dave

 
 
 

Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Post by SteveM52 » Fri, 10 May 1996 04:00:00


Quote:
(David Wood) writes:
>jive means to vaporise the fuel into a gas instead of atomised droplets

One thing that is of note here is that a fuel that has been "pre"
vaporized will have a tendency to burn better in the cyls.  This is more a
theroretical claim more than actual proof I believe.  The idea is that
you'll need less gas in the cyl to ensure a better burn (especially if you
add some type of swirling combustion chamber, which would be the next step
in the "BOSWELL" design).  There are some theroretical limitations to the
problems thou.  One of which is that combustion only occurs so fast with a
certain octane level (right DON ??) this adds to the problem of combustion
designs.  Boswell is indicating that improvements in combustion design
along with a "different" carburation method will improve the "overall"
power output and combustion efficiency.  I for one would like to believe
this can happen.  I do believe it will when we see some improvements in
engine designs based on "direct injection" .  The BOSWELL design should
help to get us there.  

Steve M...
Ps... (I've never met Boswell and I have no idea who promotes him,  so
hold down your dandor ! )

95 Formula S
87 Formula Plus

 
 
 

Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Post by Michael Ha » Fri, 10 May 1996 04:00:00


Quote:

>Only problem is that Dynotech still hasn't been able to get any of the
>Boswell claims to materialize in their dyno room.  I believe they even
>issued a challenge in the last issue to anyone who could get it to work.
>I don't know that the Boswell stuff doesn't work, but for what is claimed
>and the money involved I'd sure like to see it verified in a controled
>invironment before I spent the money.

It is also funny that most of the races they claim to dominate are
where sleds are setup to run WFO for the most part. While claiming
better BSFC that does not mean they make more HP.

I strongly suspect much of the hype and racing presence is due more to
contingency money.

Michael

 
 
 

Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Post by David Wo » Fri, 10 May 1996 04:00:00

Quote:


>(David Wood) writes:
>>jive means to vaporise the fuel into a gas instead of atomised droplets
>One thing that is of note here is that a fuel that has been "pre"
>vaporized will have a tendency to burn better in the cyls.  This is more a
>theroretical claim more than actual proof I believe.  The idea is that
>you'll need less gas in the cyl to ensure a better burn (especially if you
>add some type of swirling combustion chamber, which would be the next step
>in the "BOSWELL" design).  There are some theroretical limitations to the
>problems thou.  One of which is that combustion only occurs so fast with a
>certain octane level (right DON ??) this adds to the problem of combustion
>designs.  Boswell is indicating that improvements in combustion design
>along with a "different" carburation method will improve the "overall"
>power output and combustion efficiency.  I for one would like to believe
>this can happen.  I do believe it will when we see some improvements in
>engine designs based on "direct injection" .  The BOSWELL design should
>help to get us there.  
>Steve M...
>Ps... (I've never met Boswell and I have no idea who promotes him,  so
>hold down your dandor ! )
>95 Formula S
>87 Formula Plus

What does he claim for specific fuel consumption for his carbs?
Is it any better than conventional carburettors? Better than fuel injection?
I remain skeptical. Nothing in previous posts offers any real comparisons.
Just hype. Hey, prove me wrong. I wouldn't mind extra power and mileage
and will gladly eat my words if it can be shown to be true.

-Dave

 
 
 

Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Post by Race ral » Sat, 11 May 1996 04:00:00


writes:

Quote:
> find the
>operating window of the Boswell carbs and Super Cyclers

This is a very interesting post, and contains quite a bit of accurate
information, and plenty of theory. Makes for good reading.

However, I will state a challange presented by Jim Czekala and the
DynoTech staff - the following is from Volume 6, Number 6 issue of
DynoTech, page 10, as written by Jim Czekala -

"This window is something that neither this nor any other dyno testing
facility I've spoken with has experienced. There have been many times that
we dropped the fuel flow below that at which maximum power occured, and
never encountered this vapor window Joe described."

"We're all willing to learn new things, and it would be the best if
someone can show us the elusive 'window' by doing a demonstration here, on
any engine (your engine, please). The DynoTech challenge is that I will
take anyone's engine, running with 80 degree F water temp, using fresh gas
and standard Mikuni carbs, and make as much HP at as low a fuel flow as
any modified Mikuni carb, size for size. That's what I've seen in the
past. That's the DynoTech challenge. No animosity or jealousy - I'll be
the first to shake the hand of anyone who can show us max sustained torque
on a snowmobile engine at .43lb/hphr. Kevin Cameron will be the second.
All four snowmobile manufacturers, who are sweating out impending
emmissions regulations, will be fighting to be third, checkbooks in hand.
Could this be a reincarnation of the fabled 100 mpg carburetor that the
oil companies mysteriously continue to quash year after year ? The proof
is in our dyno."

We all remain cautiously optimistic.

Kevin Beilke
Managing Editor
Snowmobiler's Race & Rally Magazine

 
 
 

Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Post by Michael Ha » Sat, 11 May 1996 04:00:00


Quote:


>(David Wood) writes:

>>jive means to vaporise the fuel into a gas instead of atomised droplets

>One thing that is of note here is that a fuel that has been "pre"
>vaporized will have a tendency to burn better in the cyls.  This is more a
>theroretical claim more than actual proof I believe.  The idea is that

Yes! Typical electronic fuel injectors (used in most cars today and
ultra high tech stuff like the cars you see running at Indy right now)
only spray fuel. Droplets typically are like 25 micron and hardly
vaporized by the injector. Yet they are remarkably efficient for power
emissions and economy???

Now it there was a better system don't you think you'd see it at Indy?

Also 2 strokes purposely add extra fuel to quench the cylinders to
prevent burndown. They run far richer than stoichiometric. A heavy
vapor (if possible) would also drastically alter flame travel wouldn't
it?

Michael

 
 
 

Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Post by David Wo » Sat, 11 May 1996 04:00:00

-snip-
 - I'll be

Quote:
>the first to shake the hand of anyone who can show us max sustained torque
>on a snowmobile engine at .43lb/hphr.
-snip
>Kevin Beilke
>Managing Editor
>Snowmobiler's Race & Rally Magazine


Just out of curiosity, what is a typical fuel consumtion rate
for a modern, water cooled snowmobile engine?

-Dave

 
 
 

Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Post by Sidewin » Sun, 12 May 1996 04:00:00

Well for what its worth this Boswell Guy is one savey marketing guru!!!!
He went from a nobody to being interviewed at the Eagle River World
Championship Races !!! If nothing else he may be the "Tucker" of the 90's.
Now if he's onto something look out cause he'll be in on the ground floor
with this "cutting edge" tech. He may just be the next Miku. or Tilletson
wouldn't that be great :)

Just my 3 cents

Rod M

 
 
 

Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Post by David Wo » Sun, 12 May 1996 04:00:00

Quote:

>Yes! Typical electronic fuel injectors (used in most cars today and
>ultra high tech stuff like the cars you see running at Indy right now)
>only spray fuel. Droplets typically are like 25 micron and hardly
>vaporized by the injector. Yet they are remarkably efficient for power
>emissions and economy???
>Now it there was a better system don't you think you'd see it at Indy?

My understanding is that fuel systems engineers put a lot of research into
droplet size and how it affects vaporization, mixing and burning. There are
droplet sizes that are too small. Engines in good running condition actually
burn the fuel pretty efficiently. The emissions/economy problems with 2 strokes
are( like you say) running rich for cooling, port overlap blowing unburned gas
out the exhaust pipe and the difficulty of controlling the fuel/air ratio with
such a rapidly pulsing (and resonant tuned) intake and exhaust systems.
A good direct cylinder injection or even one of the indirect transfer port
injection shemes should cure most of the problem. It's hard to see how
a carburettor can- especially the port overlap/blow by part.

-Dave

Quote:
>Also 2 strokes purposely add extra fuel to quench the cylinders to
>prevent burndown. They run far richer than stoichiometric. A heavy
>vapor (if possible) would also drastically alter flame travel wouldn't
>it?
>Michael

 
 
 

Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Post by Scott Will » Mon, 13 May 1996 04:00:00

Quote:

>This is a very interesting post, and contains quite a bit of accurate
>information, and plenty of theory. Makes for good reading.

        Yes Kevin, it is. . . . . .  It is the stuff I think about when I
drift off into R.E.M.  . . . . .  

Quote:
>Could this be a reincarnation of the fabled 100 mpg carburetor that the
>oil companies mysteriously continue to quash year after year ? The proof
>is in our dyno."

        I remember that carb, Kevin,  a friend of mine even had an order
placed for one and his money was sent off to make the purchase.  He
did receive his money back with a thanks anyway type of letter.   The
company was bought out by those oil companies . . . .

Makes ya wish you could just get rid of all of our engineering
paradymes and invent something new, huh?

----------------------------------------------------------------

'96 ZRT600 Mountain Cat  2" Track  http://www.vii.com/~scott/
Northern Utah
----------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Post by SteveM52 » Tue, 14 May 1996 04:00:00


Quote:
Hart) writes:
> Droplets typically are like 25 micron and hardly
>vaporized by the injector. Yet they are remarkably efficient for power
>emissions and economy???

They hold their own for sure...  But problems are on the horizon for
California emissions specs... We need better...

Quote:
>Now it there was a better system don't you think you'd see it at Indy?

There is better.   It is in the form of a "ultrasonic Injector"... It will
break up the aprox. 25 micron size "droplets" into a usable range that is
far lower.  Theory exists and the injector is available. Needs a good
implementation... ANYONE Listening?

Quote:
>Also 2 strokes purposely add extra fuel to quench the cylinders to
>prevent burndown. They run far richer than stoichiometric. A heavy
>vapor (if possible) would also drastically alter flame travel wouldn't
>it?

Yes true,,  Quenching is part of the reliability..  They'll get the bugs
out... The lower emissions is reality... Calif. is forcing it to happen.
Also, ever heard of "oxygen enhancing fuels"  this is another effort to
add a better burn pattern to the existing lineup.  This also helps
emissions and power.  I believe it was Leif N.  who had some input on this
last year.

Steve M....

95 Formula S
87 Formula Plus

 
 
 

Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Post by SteveM52 » Tue, 14 May 1996 04:00:00


writes:

Quote:
>Makes ya wish you could just get rid of all of our engineering
>paradymes and invent something new, huh?

Hey,  all ya got to do is to break out of the "Engineering square" type !
Ha.. good one huh !  

Steve M....

95 Formula S
87 Formula Plus

 
 
 

Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Post by Michael Ha » Tue, 14 May 1996 04:00:00


Quote:
: Hart) writes:

: > Droplets typically are like 25 micron and hardly
: >vaporized by the injector. Yet they are remarkably efficient for power
: >emissions and economy???

: They hold their own for sure...  But problems are on the horizon for
: California emissions specs... We need better...

Controls are being redesigned to meet Federal mandates, most of which
have been more toward diagnostics and mis-fire detection which had some
big loopholes in the past. There are systems that can alter fuel mixture
and timing according to how EACH cylinder burned the last few. Think what
that would do for 2-strokes...

Really advanced injector design is going on for diesels... The direct
injection presents more problems and particulate matter can be reduced
with better burning. But seeing as you are in the diesel biz you already
know that huh?

Michael

 
 
 

Boswell Energy Systems (Do these GO Fast Carbs really work)

Post by Mark A Zimmerm » Tue, 14 May 1996 04:00:00

: >Now it there was a better system don't you think you'd see it at Indy?

: There is better.   It is in the form of a "ultrasonic Injector"... It will
: break up the aprox. 25 micron size "droplets" into a usable range that is
: far lower.  Theory exists and the injector is available. Needs a good
: implementation... ANYONE Listening?

     I saw an hour long video on that and that injector definately does
break up the fuel into more of a vapor instead of the pressurized blast
of gas that the present injectors are doing.  And yes, it was on a direct
injection 2-cycle engine that was mounted in a concept car in California.
The result was more power, lower emissions and better fuel economy.  It
showed the differences in the fuel concentrations as they had a regular
injector spray and the new style injector spray.  There was no comparison
and the new style had the fuel vaporized much finer with the same fuel
flow.
     Maybe they'll get something like that on a sled someday but I doubt
it as today's engines are still using the same thing that they used 20
years ago because it allows acceptable operation with tunability that can
be done by nearly anybody, anywhere and that's what sledders like -
something they can work on themselves.
     Until they come out with some really tricked out EFI that is
customer tunable, I don't think EFI will ever become really widespread
like it has on automobiles.

Mark Zimmerman, Indy 650, Central Wisconsin