EPA-AA-TEB-511-82-12
EPA Evaluation of the Turbo-Garb Device Under
Section 511 of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act
by
Edward Anthony Barth
August, 1982
Test and Evaluation Branch
Emission Control Technology Divison
Office of Mobile Sources
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
EPA Evaluation of the Turbo-Garb Device Under Section 511 of the Motor
Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act
The Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings ;;Act requires that EPA
evaluate fuel economy retrofit devices and publish a summary of each
evaluation in the Federal Register.
EPA evaluations are originated upon the application of any manufacturer
of a retrofit device, upon the request of the Federal Trade Commission,
or upon the motion of the EPA Administrator. These studies are designed
to determine whether the retrofit device increases fuel economy and to
determine whether the representations made with respect to the device are
accurate. The results of such studies are set .forth in a series of
reports, of which this is one.
The evaluation of the Turbo-Garb device was conducted upon the motion of
the EPA Administrator. The device is claimed to improve the preparation
of the fuel/air mixture and thereby improve fuel economy and
performance. The device is a one-inch thick carburetor adapter plate
which inserts a mesh screen and swirl devices between the carburetor and
intake manifold.
The following is a summary of the information EPA obtained on the device
and the resulting EPA analysis and conclusions.
1. Title;
Application for Evaluation of Turbo-Garb under Section 511 of the
Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act
2. Identification Information;
a. Marketing Identification of the Product;
Turbo-Garb available models are:
No. 1 for single venturi carburetors
No. 2A for two venturi carburetors
No. 2 'for two venturi carburetors
No. 2B for two venturi carburetors
No. 4 for four venturi carburetors
No. 4Q for four venturi carburetors
b. Inventor and Patent Protection;
(1) Inventor
Albert Fugett
Rural Route 2
Post Office Box 221
Gaston, Indiana 47342
(2) U.S. Patent No. 4,163,436
-------
c. Requestor;
Nancy A. Miller, postal inspector of the U.S. Postal Service
requested EPA to evaluate the Turbo-Garb device. EPA agreed to
conduct an evaluation of this device under the Section 511
evaluation process.
d. Manufacturer of the Product;
(1) Fugett Products Co., Inc.
Rural Route 2
Post Office Box 221
Gaston, Indiana 47342
(2) Principals
Mr. and Mrs. Albert Fugett
Rural Route 2
Post Office Box 221
Gaston, Indiana 47324
3. Description of Product (from inventor/manufacturer's literature);
a. Purpose;
The Turbo-Garb is claimed to improve the preparation of the
fuel/air mixture of the carburetor and thereby improve fuel
economy and performance.
b. : '-Theory of Operation;
The Turbo-Garb device is designed to improve the preparation of
the fuel-air mixture by atomizing the fuel and increasing the
mixture turbulence. The fuel/air mixtures are therefore more
homogenous and are therefore presumed to burn more efficiently
in the engine.
Fuel vaporization is to be improved by atomization. This is
promoted by a fine mesh screen that is supposed to break up the
fuel droplets into fine micro-sized particles that are easier to
vaporize. The device "Also acts as a heat riser to pre-heat the
mixture and AID distribution".
Mixing of the fuel-air mixture is promoted by the air chamber
containing the mesh screen and by swirl devices installed after
the screen. The applicant refers to these swirl devices as
stationary props. Also, the device increases the flow path of
the fuel air mixture slightly, thus allowing more time for the
fuel and air to combine into a homogeneous mixture.
-------
Construction and Operation;
The Turbo-Garb consists of two carburetor adapter plates (each
plate is about one-half inch thick), a fine mesh stainless steel
screen and a stationary swirl prop for each venturi. The
assembly is installed between the carburetor and intake
manifold. The two plates form a hollow chamber with the screen
sandwiched in the center of the chamber between the plates.
Thus, although the screen restricts the fuel/air flow, this
adverse effect is minimized by the large area of the screen.
The stationary props are attached to the bottom plate (intake
manifold side) and extend into the manifold. These props cause
the fuel/air mixture to swirl and thereby promote mixing. A
drawing of the device is given in the installation instructions
contained in the attachment to this report.
Specific Claims for the Product:
The sales literature/order form makes the following specific
claims for the Turbo-Garb device:
"Up to 38% increase - 5 more miles per gallon"
"smoother running engine"
"ping eliminated"
"improved performance"
"easy installation"
"less pollution of hydrocarbons"
Copies of two versions of the sales literature/order form are
given in the attachment to this report.
Cost And Marketing Information (from inventor/manufacturer's
literature);
From sales literature/order form used to purchase devices
tested, Appendix H of the Attachment
Models 1 and 2A $44.95
Models 2 and 2B $49.95
Models 4 and 4Q $54.95
plus $2.00 postage and handling
plus $2.00 postage and handling
plus $2.00 postage and handling
From sales literature/order form that apparently
current prices, Appendix G of the Attachment
reflects
Models 1 $29.95 plus $2.50 postage and handling
Models 2A, 2, and 2B $24.95 plus $2.50 postage and handling
Models 4 and 4Q $39.95 plus $2.50 postage and handling
4. Product Installation, Operation, Safety and Maintenance (from
inventor/manufacturer's literature):
-------
a. Applicability;
Model Description and Vehicle Application
No. 1 SINGLE BARREL (2-bolt only), US and FOREIGN makes,
including side-draft model carbs.
No. 2A DOUBLE BARREL-Honda, Datsun, Toyota (except 20 and 22R
engine), Mazda, Opel, Audi, Subaru, Volkswagen Rabbit,
Dasher, Scirocco
No. 2 DOUBLE BARREL (2 & 4 bolt) - Most US makes (except GM
1979-81 6 cyl 250, AMC & GMC 1980 & 81 4 cyl 151 and
V6 173, and those listed in Model 2B) FOREIGN
makes-Luv, Fiesta, Dodge Colt, Challenger, Plymouth
Arrow, Lancer, Sapporo, Capri, Courier, Fiat,
Volkswagen with Holly 2110 carb
No. 2B DOUBLE BARREL—GMC V6 1979-81 196, 200, 229 and 231
engine 4" base; GMC V8 1977-79 301, 1978-81 260;
1979-81 267 and 305 engines
No. 4 FOUR BARREL—AMC & Jeep V8 1967-74, GMC V8 1957-66,
Chrysler V8 1964-72 single carb except Carter TQ, Ford
V8 1957-74 except 351CJ & 460 Police
No. 4Q FOUR BARREL, Spread Bore & Quadra jet—AMC & Jeep V8
1975-76, Ford V8 1975-81 and 1972-74 351CJ and 460
Police, GMC V8 1966-81 Quadrajet, Chrysler V8 1971-81
Carter TQ Carb
The device is applicable only to gasoline fueled vehicles that
introduce the fuel before the intake manifold, normally a
carbureted engine.
The device is not applicable for vehicles sold in California.
b. Installation - Instructions, Equipment, and Skills Required;
A copy of the installation instructions are contained in the
attachment to this report. These instructions and the sales
literature imply that only normal hand tools and average
mechanical skills are required to install the device.
c. Operation;
The operation of the device requires no action by the driver.
d. Effects on Vehicle Safety;
The device will cause no safety hazards when properly installed.
-------
e. Maintenance;
"Primary throttle bores are self-cleaning, but secondary are not
in constant use and may possibly load up with varnish. An
occasional shot of carburetor cleaner will rid any buildup."
5. Effects on Emissions and Fuel Economy (submitted by Applicant);
a. Unregulated Emissions;
No claims or statements are made by the inventor/marketer about
the effect of the device on unregulated emissions.
b. Regulated Emissions and Fuel Economy;
Less pollution of hydrocarbons, fuel economy "up to 38%
increase - 5 more miles/gallon"
6. Testing by EPA;
A detailed report of the testing performed by the EPA is given in EPA
report, EPA-AA-TEB-82-8, "Emissions and Fuel Economy of Turbo-Garb, A
Retrofit Device" provided as an attachment. A brief description of
this testing effort is given below;
Testing of three typical 1979 model year passenger cars was conducted
at EPA's Motor Vehicle Emission Laboratory from March through May of
1982. The basic test sequence included the Federal Test Procedure
and the Highway Fuel Economy Test. These tests were performed both
without and with the Turbo-Garb device installed.
7. Analysis
Identification Information:
a. Turbo-Garb should not be confused with another carburetor
adapter with a very similar name. EPA previously conducted an
informal evaluation of a device called "Turbocarb". This is a
carburetor base plate adapter that places spinning props at the
manifold inlet. The marketer of Turbocarb, AVTEK. Automotive
Products Division, provides only literature and drawings for the
device.
b. Description;
(1) The theory of operation given in Section 3b describes the
types of effects the device might have on the fuel/air
mixture. However, incorporating a device like Turbo-Garb
in the induction system of an engine does not necessarily
guarantee an improvement. The device may not operate as
expected, for example the fuel might coalesce into droplets
after the screen, or a vehicle's induction system may
already perform efficiently, therefore no change would be
noted.
-------
(2) The device is claimed to improve performance and
emissions. However, the claims are not substantiated by
valid test data using accepted test procedures but rather
on informal testing and testimonials. Although the
individuals making these testimonials may believe the
device improved their vehicle, these testimonials represent
information obtained under relatively uncontrolled test
conditions and therefore cannot be used to substantiate the
claims for the device.
(3) The cost of the device plus installation would probably be
at least $85.00 for those users who have the device
installed by a mechanic. This is based on a device cost
ranging between $32.00 and $42.00 and installation
requiring a minimum of 2 1/2 hours at $20.00 per hour.
Since most purchasers would buy the Turbo-Garb device to
save on fuel expenses, the cost of the device should be
compared to its benefits. As noted in Section 8, the
overall expectation is that the Turbo-Carb would not
provide a fuel economy benefit although results on
individual vehicles ranged from a 1% penalty to a 4% gain.
If a particular vehicle should benefit by 4%, it would take
32,000 miles before the owner would break even.* If the
purchaser installed it himself, the break-even point would
be at 14,000 miles.
c. Installation, Operation, Safety and Maintenance:
(1) Applicability;
The base plate of each model of the device is designed to
fit a number of different carburetors. The applicability
of each device model to the carburetors of several
different vehicles is, in general, probably correct.
However, as noted in the test report, EPA encountered some
difficulty in obtaining a good fit when installing the
device on one vehicle.
(2) Installation - Instructions, Equipment and Skills Required;
Installation of the device raises the carburetor one inch.
Therefore the device can be expected to affect hood
clearance and the carburetor linkages to the throttle,
choke, and automatic transmission. Also air hoses,
electrical leads, fuel lines, and vacuum lines would
require repositioning. Therefore particular attention must
be directed toward determining what modifications and
adjustments are required to maintain proper operation of
these components.
*Assumes the cost of model 2B at $37.50 plus $50 for installation,
vehicle baseline fuel economy at 20 miles per gallon and gasoline costs
of $1.40 a gallon.
-------
The instructions were generally adequate for the
installation of the device. They addressed many of the
problems, e.g., hood clearance, the installer was likely to
encounter. Only simple tools and normal mechanical skills
were needed for the installation. However, the installer
will have to design and fabricate hardware to allow the
device to raise the carburetor linkages and still function
properly.* The installer will also need access to the shop
service manual for the vehicle in order to properly
readjust the kickdown linkage to the automatic
transmission. This adjustment is critical since it
controls the transmission shift points.
Installation, including fabrication of parts and necessary
adjustments, is judged to require more than 2 hours.
The installation instructions also provide many valid
facts, tips, and suggestions related to improving fuel
economy. The approach to determining the fuel economy
benefit of the device (good tune up, controlled test,
device installation, repeat of controlled test) is proper,
however the suggested test mileage of 20 miles, is much too
short. Even while trying to accurately measure and control
the fuel fillups, 1/2 gallon variations can routinely
occur. This variation could be as much as 50% of the
actual fuel consumed in a 20 mile trip, thus masking any
real changes. Either a sophisticated fuel measurement
device or a several hundred mile trip would be required,
neither of which is practical for the user.
The instructions provide adequate warning that, in raising
the carburetor, the device may cause hood interference.
However, one of the solutions suggested, raising the hood
by readjusting the hood latches, will cause improper fit
between the hood and fenders, thus detracting from the
appearance of the vehicle.
(3) Operation;
If the various carburetor linkages altered by the
installation of the device can be properly adjusted, the
device is judged to not have any adverse effect on vehicle
operation.
*Note: Improper replacement studs were provided for two vehicles. These
two vehicles required studs with metric threads but the kits only
included studs with SAE threads. The inventor stated he provided metric
bolts when required. However, the kits were ordered specifically for
each vehicle yet the two kits still came with the wrong studs.
The installation instruction, (Appendix F) state that an extender for the
manifold heat control choke rod tube was provided in the kit. However,
none was enclosed in any of the three kits purchased.
-------
(4) Effects on Vehicle Safety;
If the linkages are properly readjusted and the base plate
seal is leakproof, the device is judged to have no adverse
effect on safety.
(5; Maintenance;
The minimal maintenance given in Section 4e is judged to be
adequate.
d. Effects on Emissions and Fuel Economy;
(1) Unregulated Emissions;
Since the device does not modify the emission control
system and did not appreciably affect regulated emissions,
it is not expected to affect unregulated emissions.
(2) Regulated Emissions and Fuel Economy;
The marketer of the device provided no test data to support
the claims given in Section 5b. However, since this
evaluation and test program was undertaken by EPA at the
request of the Postal Service, EPA did not require
substantiating test data as a prerequisite to EPA testing.
Normally, EPA requires applicants to submit test data in
accordance with the Federal Test Procedure and the Highway
Fuel Economy Test," These two test procedures are the
primary ones recognized by EPA for evaluation of fuel
economy and emissions for light duty vehicles.*
e. Test Results Obtained by EPA;
Changes in fuel economy were small, ranging from a 1% penalty to
a 4% gain. Changes in emission levels were also small while
driveability was essentially unchanged. Moreover, installation
of the device was especially difficult in that the installer was
required to design and fabricate several parts as well as
perform critical readjustments.
*The requirement for test data following these procedures is stated in
the policy documents that EPA sends to each potential applicant. EPA
requires duplicate test sequences before and after installation of the
device on a minimum of two vehicles. A test sequence consists of a cold
start FTP plus a HFET or, as a simplified alternative, a hot start LA-4
plus a HFET. Other data which have been collected in accordance with
other standardized procedures are acceptable as supplemental data in
EPA's preliminary evaluation of a device.
-------
10
8. Conclusions
The overall conclusion is that there is no reason to expect that the
Turbo-Garb will significantly improve fuel economy or performance of
a vehicle. The Turbo-Garb failed to meet its advertised claims'of
"up to 38% fuel economy improvement" and "improved performance".
The fuel economy changes found on the three vehicles tested were
small. Two of the vehicles showed either a decrease or no change in
fuel economy and one showed a slight increase. Emissions were only
slightly affected with mixed directional results. No improvements
were observed by the test driver in the operating characteristics of
the vehicles.
Installation of the devices was considerably more difficult than
claimed. Considerable time and mechanical skills were required,
several parts had to be designed and fabricated, and a number of
critical readjustments had to be made.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT; Merrill W. Korth, Emission Control
Technology Division, Office of Mobile Sources, Environmental Protection
Agency, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105, (313) 668-4299.
-------
11
Attachment
EPA-AA-TEB-82-8
Emissions and Fuel Economy of Turbo-Garb, A Retrofit Device
Edward Anthony Barth
August 1982
Test and Evaluation Branch
Emission Control Technology Division
Office of Mobile Sources
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
12
Abstract
This report describes EPA's testing of the "Turbo-Garb" as part of an
evaluation under Section 511 of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost
Savings Act. The evaluation of this device was conducted at the request
of the U.S. Postal Service. The Turbo-Carb is a one-inch thick
carburetor adapter plate which inserts a mesh screen and swirl devices
between the carburetor and intake manifold. The device is claimed to
improve the preparation of the fuel/air mixture and thereby improve fuel
economy and performance.
Testing of three typical 1979 model year passenger cars was conducted at
EPA's Motor Vehicle Emission Laboratory from March through May of 1982.
The basic test sequence included the Federal Test Procedure and the
Highway Fuel Economy Test. These tests were performed both without and
with the Turbo-Carb device installed.
The overall conclusion is that there is no reason to expect that the
Turbo-Carb will significantly improve fuel economy or performance of a
vehicle. Changes in fuel economy and emissions were small with mixed
results of slight increases and decreases. Driveability remained
essentially unchanged. Installation of the device was found to be
considerably more difficult than claimed due to the requirement to design
and fabricate several parts as well as perform critical readjustments.
-------
13
Background
The Environmental Protection Agency receives information about many
systems which appear to offer a potential for a reduction in emissions
and/or an improvement in fuel economy in conventional engines and
vehicles. EPA's Emission Control Technology Division is interested in
evaluating all such systems, because of the obvious benefits to the
Nation from the identification of systems that can reduce emissions,
improve fuel economy, or both. EPA invites developers of such systems to
submit information on the principle of operation together with available
test data. In those cases where the system shows promise, confirmatory
tests are run at the EPA Motor Vehicle Emission Laboratory in Ann Arbor,
Michigan. The results of such test projects are set forth in a series of
Test and Evaluation reports, of which this is one.
Under Section 511 of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act,
EPA is required to evaluate devices which are claimed to improve fuel
economy for the effects on both emissions and fuel economy. The results
of these evaluations are published in the Federal Register.
The conclusions drawn from the EPA evaluation tests are necessarily of
limited applicability. A complete evaluation of the effectiveness of a
device in achieving performance improvements on the many different types
of vehicles that are in actual use requires a larger sample of test
vehicles than is economically feasible in the evaluation of test projects
conducted by EPA. The conclusions from the EPA evaluation tests can be
considered to be quantitatively valid only for the specific test cars
used; however, it is reasonable to extrapolate the results from the EPA
test to other types of vehicles in a directional manner; i.e., to suggest
that similar results are likely to be achieved on other types of vehicles.
Introduction
In November, 1981, EPA received a request from Nancy A. Miller, a postal
inspector for the U.S. Postal Service, for an evaluation of the
"Turbo-Garb" device. EPA agreed to conduct this evaluation under
auspices of the Section 511 process. Since EPA had no test data on which
to base an evaluation of this type of device, the Turbo-Garb test program
was part of this evaluation process. The Post Office provided the
devices. The results of the EPA testing of the Turbo-Garb are contained
in this report. The complete evaluation of the device is contained in
the report entitled, "An EPA Evaluation of the Turbo-Garb Device Under
Section 511 of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act,"
EPA-AA-TEB-511-82-12. The Section 511 report contains the complete
evaluation and includes this test report as an attachment.
The Turbo-Garb is an adapter plate which inserts a fine mesh screen and
swirl devices between the carburetor and intake manifold. It is
approximately one inch thick. The device is claimed to improve the
preparation of the fuel/air mixture and thereby improve fuel economy and
performance. The sales literature/order form makes the following
specific claims for the Turbo-Garb device;
-------
14
"up to 38% increase - 5 more miles per gallon"
"smoother running engine"
"ping eliminated"
"improved performance"
"easy installation"
"less pollution of hydrocarbons"
Appendices G and H are two versions of the sales literature/order form.
The marketer of the device provided no test data to support these
claims. However, since this evaluation and test program was undertaken
at the request of the Postal Service, EPA did not require substantiating
test data as a prerequisite to EPA testing.
Construction and Operation;
The Turbo-Garb consists of two carburetor adapter plates (each plate is
about one-half inch thick), a fine mesh stainless steel screen and a
stationary swirl prop for each venturi. The assembly is installed
between the carburetor and intake manifold. The two plates form a hollow
chamber with the screen sandwiched in the center of the chamber between
the plates. Thus, although the screen restricts the fuel/air flow, this
adverse effect is minimized by the large area of the screen. The
stationary props are attached to the bottom plate (intake manifold side)
and extend into the manifold. These props cause the fuel/air mixture to
swirl and thereby promote mixing. A drawing of the device is given in
the installation instructions contained in Appendix F to this report.
Purpose of the Test Program
The purpose of the EPA test program was to conduct a technical evaluation
of the device to determine if the Turbo-Garb met its advertised claims,
affected exhaust emissions, or affected safety. Emissions, fuel economy,
and installation were to be specifically evaluated. The other claims -
smoother running engine, ping eliminated, and improved performance - were
to be evaluated by noting any changes in the operating characteristics of
the test vehicle. No special test procedures were employed to evaluate
these latter claims.
Test Plan
The EPA test plan consisted of the checkout of the three test vehicles,
replicate baseline tests, device installation, and replicate device
tests. The purpose of the vehicle checkout was to insure each vehicle
was representative of a properly-tuned vehicle and would provide a
reasonable reference test condition.
The vehicles were to be tested using the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) and
Highway Fuel Economy Test (HFET). The FTP is the official EPA test
procedure for determining the exhaust emissions of a vehicle. The
results of both of these tests are also used to determine a vehicle's
fuel economy. The FTP is described in the Federal Register of June 28,
1977 and the HFET is described in the Federal Register of September 10,
1976. The vehicles were not tested for evaporative emissions.
-------
15
Installation was to be done per the instructions supplied with the
device. Since the device raises the carburetor, it was expected to
affect hood clearance and the carburetor linkages to the throttle, choke,
and automatic transmission. Also air hoses, electrical leads, fuel lines
and vacuum lines would require repositioning (relocating). Therefore
particular attention was to be directed toward determining what
modifications and adjustments are required to maintain proper operation
of these components. The time required, ease of installation, and
problems or hazards encountered were also to be noted. .
Claims for the Turbo-Carb not specifically addressed by the test plan
were engine smoothness, improved performance, and elimination of ping.
The reason for not using specific procedures.to evaluate these claims is
because these are, in large part, subjective and the procedures for their
measurement are neither well defined nor routinely used by EPA. These
latter claims were to be evaluated only by having the drivers note any
changes in the performance of the engine.
Since this 511 process was initiated by the government, EPA did not
require the invent or/marketer of the device to concur with the test
plan. However, he was informed of EPA's intention to test his device and
was invited to observe the testing.
Three typical 1979 production vehicles were used: a Ford Pinto with a 4
cylinder engine, a Plymouth Volare with a 6 cylinder engine, and a Ford
Granada with an 8 cylinder engine. All vehicles were equipped with
automatic transmissions. A more detailed description of each vehicle is
provided in Appendix A.
Conduct of Testing
The testing was conducted from March through May. All tests were
performed by the EPA at its Motor Vehicle Emission Laboratory in Ann
Arbor. The inventor/marketer was present during two days of the test
program. In general, the testing proceeded as planned. However, because
a baseline test sequence for the Pinto showed a greater than expected
variation in fuel economy, two additional baseline test sequences were
conducted on the Pinto. This baseline outlier (fuel economy unexpectedly
high) was deleted from the data set. A scrutiny of the Volare data led
to rejection of the two baseline HFETs. These two HFET's were rerun
after the device was removed from the vehicle. Since the first two
device test sequences on the Granada data indicated a possible benefit
for the device, a third test sequence was conducted to obtain sufficient
data to determine if the change was statistically significant.
Because the Granada data had indicated a possible fuel economy benefit,
additional testing was conducted to determine if the change was due to
the baseplate and readjusted linkage or to a combination of effects by
the baseplate, adjustments, screen, and stationary props. For a final
test sequence, the stationary props and screen of the device were removed
and the Granada was re tested.
There were problems encountered in installing the device on each
vehicle. These installation problems are presented and discussed with
the test results.
-------
16
Test Results - Installation
The Turbo-Garb installation was performed by an EPA mechanic using the
instructions provided with the devices (see Appendix F).
The installation of the Turbo-Garb devices raises the carburetor over one
inch and many of the problems encountered were related to the carburetor
being raised by the device. The specific problems encountered for each
vehicle are given in Appendix E and are summarized below
The device interfered with the hood closing on one vehicle and caused
a small dent in the hood when it was closed. The installer was
alerted to this problem by the installation instructions.
It was necessary to design and fabricate extensions for the kickdown
linkage between the throttle and automatic transmission for all three
vehicles.
The throttle linkage needed to be modified on two vehicles.
The choke rod linkage needed to be extended and readjusted on one
vehicle. These parts were not provided with the kit.
The device did not provide a leak proof seal on one vehicle and
required application of a gasket sealer to stop this vacuum leak.
Although the instructions do not allow the use of sealing materials,
the inventor allowed us to use it. He cautioned against any on the
screen.
Improper replacement studs were provided for two vehicles. These two
vehicles required studs with metric threads but the kits only
included studs with SAE threads. The inventor stated he provided
metric bolts when required. However, the kits were ordered
specifically for each vehicle yet the two kits still came with the
wrong studs.
The installation instructions, Appendix F, state in step 11 that an
extender for the manifold heat control choke rod tube was provided in
the kit. However, none was enclosed in any of the three kits
purchased.
The air hoses, electrical leads, fuel lines, and vacuum lines were able
to be readily rerouted to the raised carburetor and air filter. Several
metal lines had to be reworked, however no additional parts were required.
The instructions were generally adequate for the installation of the
device. They addressed many of the problems the installer was likely to
encounter when installing the Turbo-Garb. Only simple tools and normal
mechanical skills were needed for the installation. However, the
installer will have to design and fabricate hardware to allow the device
to raise the carburetor linkages to function properly. The installer
will also need access to the shop service manual for the vehicle in order
to properly readjust the kickdown linkage to the automatic transmission.
This adjustment is critical since it controls the transmission shift
points.
-------
17
Installation, including fabrication of parts and necessary adjustments,
required from 2 1/2 to 8 hours.
Test Results - Fuel Economy and Emissions
The test results for each vehicle are summarized in Table I. Emission
levels are listed in grams/mile while fuel economy is shown in miles per
gallon. The individual test results for each vehicle are given in
Appendices B, C, and D.
Table I
Summary of Test Results
FTP
HFET
Vehicle Configuration
Ford Baseline
Pinto Turbo-Garb
Average Change
Plymouth Baseline
Volare Turbo-Garb
Average Change
HC
CO
NOx MPG
HC
CO NOx MPG
1.18 4.20 1.58 22.3
1.29 3.74 1.64 22.3
+10% -11% +4% -0-
Ford
Granada
Baseline
Turbo-Garb
Average Change
.71 6.63
.60 6.08
-16% -8%
.88 4.73
.99 4.23
+13% -
1.24
1.26
+2%
1.46
1.52
+4%
19.2
18.9
-1%
14.5
15.2
+4%
Ford Baseline
Granada Mod. Turbo-Garb*
Average Change
.88 4.73 1.46 14.5
.97 5.77 1.44 14.9
+10% +22% -1% +3%
.64 .70 1.37 29.1
.77 .87 1.33 28.7
+19% +25% -3% -1%
.87 22.09 .57 26.2
.16 4.56 .45 25.9
-82_% -79% -20% -1%
.28 .51 2.21 20.5
.31 .31 1.96 21.4
+10% -39% -11% +4_%
.28 .51 2.21 20.5
.25 .27 2.06 21.2
-11% -47% -7% +4%
Note: Underlined values are statistically significant at a 90%
confidence level. Mod. Turbo-Garb emissions were not analyzed for
statistical significance.
These data were analyzed by several statistical methods (student's "t"
test, paired "t" test, and 2 way analysis of variance) to determine if
the changes were statistically significant for either an individual
vehicle or a group of vehicles.
The student's "t" test is used to compare the sample means of two
populations. It is useful when there are only a few data samples. It
allows the data to be readily compared at a given confidence level. The
individual test results given in the Appendix were compared (i.e., Pinto
FTP baseline tests to Pinto FTP Turbo-Garb tests, Pinto HFET baseline
test to Pinto HFET Turbo-Garb tests, etc.). This analysis showed that:
Pinto - Turbo-Garb did not cause a significant
economy for either the FTP or HFET.
change in fuel
*Modified Turbo-Garb: Only carburetor baseplate used, screen and
stationary props removed.
-------
18
Volare - Turbo-Garb caused a statistically significant decrease in
fuel economy for both the FTP and HFET.
Granada - Turbo-Garb caused a statistically significant increase in
fuel economy for both the FTP and HFET.
The modified Turbo-Garb also caused a statistically
significant increase in fuel economy for both the FTP and
HFET. Because this change was similar to that caused by
the complete device, this may indicate that it is the
chambered baseplate and linkage readjustments that caused
the changes and not the stationary props or mesh screen.
The student's "t" test of paired data is used to sample means of paired
observations. It is a more specialized usage of the "t" tests and has
the same features as the "t" test. The averages given in Table I were
compared for both the FTP (baseline vs. Turbo-Garb for the Pinto, Volare,
and Granada as a group) and the HFET. This paired "t" test data analysis
showed that there was no statistically significant change in fuel economy
due to the Turbo-Garb device for either the FTP or HFET for the group of
three vehicles.
The 2 way analysis of variance (2 way ANOVA) is used to compare the means
when there are several test variables (i.e., for the FTP with or without
device for several vehicles). It can be used to test if there is or is
not a significant interaction between test variables. The 2 way ANOVA
also showed that there was no statistically significant change in fuel
economy due to the Turbo-Garb for either the FTP or HFET for the group of
three vehicles.
Although fuel economy is largely influenced by vehicle weight and engine
displacement, emissions are largely influenced by the emission control
technology used by the manufacturer and this typically changes with model
year. Therefore the emission data was analyzed only by the student's "t"
test. The individual test results given in the appendix were compared
(i.e., Granada FTP baseline tests to Granada FTP Turbo-Garb tests). This
analysis showed:
Pinto - The Turbo-Garb caused a small but statistically significant
increase in hydrocarbon (HC) emissions for both the FTP and
HFET. It also caused a statistically significant increase
in carbon monoxide emissions for the HFET. However, due to
the relatively low level of the HFET CO emissions, the
actual increase was very small.
Volare - The Turbo-Garb caused no statistically significant change
in FTP emissions. The changes noted for the HFET are not
significant because this vehicle has in the past shown
considerable variability in HFET emissions, (HFET fuel
economy has not been variable). This variability is
apparently characteristic of the vehicle.
-------
19
Granada - The Turbo-Garb caused a small but statistically significant
increase in HC emissions for both the FTP and HFET. It
also caused a statistically significant change in HFET NOx
emissions. However, again due to the relatively low levels
of these emissions, the actual increases were very small.
The changes due to the modified Turbo-Garb were not
analyzed for statistical significance.
Test Results - Vehicle Performance
As noted previously, there were no special tests prescribed specifically
for evaluation of vehicle performance. The drivers were simply requested
to note and comment upon the operation of the vehicle. To insure a
reasonable comparison, the same operator drove a given vehicle for both
the baseline and device tests.
There were no changes in engine smoothness, or performance. None of the
vehicles experienced ping with or without the device. The results are
summarized below.
Table II
FTP Driveability
Pinto Volare Granada
Baseline soft spot in accel. Good Good
Turbo-Garb soft spot in accel. Good slight soft spot in accel.
The starting was good for each vehicle for both baseline and with the
Turbo-Garb device.
Table III
HFET Driveability
Volare Granada
Baseline Good Good Good
Turbo-Garb Good Good Good
Overall, there was no appreciable change in vehicle performance caused by
the Turbo-Garb device.
No safety hazards were observed with the device.
Conclusions
The overall conclusion is that there is no reason to expect that the
Turbo-Garb will significantly improve fuel economy or performance of a
vehicle. The Turbo-Garb failed to meet its advertised claims of "up to
38% fuel economy improvement" and "improved performance".
-------
20
The fuel economy changes found on the three vehicles tested were small.
Two of the vehicles showed either a decrease or no change in fuel economy
and one showed a slight increase. Emissions were only slightly affected
with mixed directional results. No improvements were observed by the
test driver in the operating characteristics of the vehicles.
Installation of the devices was significantly more difficult than
claimed. Considerable time and mechanical skills were required, several
parts had to be designed and fabricated, and a number of critical
readjustments had to be made.
-------
21
Appendix A
Test Vehicle Descriptions
Make /Model
Model Year
Type
Vehicle I.D.
Initial Odometer
Engine:
Type
Configuration
Displacement
Fuel Metering
Fuel Requirement
Emission Control
System
Transmission
Tires
Test Parameters:
Inertia Weight
HP @50 mph
Ford Pinto
1979
2 door
9T11Y186165
26390
Spark Ignition
In-line 4
140 CID
2V Carburetor
Unleaded
EGR
Catalyst
Automatic
BR78X13
3000
9.7
Plymouth Volare
1979
2 door
HL29C9B217336
32280
Spark Ignition
In-line 6
225 CID
IV Carburetor
Unleaded
EGR
Catalyst
Automatic
D 7 8X14
3500
12.0
Ford Granada
1979
4 door
9W82F123952
26980
Spark Ignition
V8
302 CID
2V Carburetor
Unleaded
EGR
Air Pump
Catalyst
Automatic
ER78X14
4000
11.1
-------
22
Appendix B
Test Results - Ford Pinto, 140 CID, 4 Cylinder
Test Test
Date #
3-25-82 2382
3-25-82 2383
4- 1-82 2854
4- 1-82 2853
4-15-82 2386
4-14-82 2362
4-28-82 2388
4-28-82 2389
4-29-82 2390
4-29-82 2391
Configuration
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Turbo-Carb
Turbo- Carb
Turbo-Carb
Turbo-Carb
Federal Test
HC CO
1.21 5.14
1.16 4.44
1.16 3.01
1.26 3.68
1.32 3.80
Procedure
NOx
1.62
1.51
1.60
1.60
1.67
MPG
21.9
22.2
22.8
22.3
22.3
Highway Fuel Economy Test
HC CO
.62 .73
.63 .72
.68 .64
.71 .87
.82 .87
NOx MPG
1.43 28.4
1.30 29.2
1.37 29.6
1.35 28.6
1.31 28.8
Appendix C
Test Test
Date #
4-14-82 2374
5- 6-82 2379
4-15-82 2380
5- 6-82 3306
4-27-82 2375
4-27-82 2381
4-28-82 3142
4-28-82 3141
Test Results -
Configuration
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Turbo-Carb
Turbo-Carb
Turbo-Carb
Turbo-Carb
Plymouth Volare,
Federal Test
HC CO
.76 6.99
.65 6.26
.62 6.49
.57 5.66
225 CID,
.Procedure
NOx
1.25
1.23
1.25
1.27
MPG
19.2
19.2
18.9
19.0
6 Cylinder
Highway Fuel
HC CO
.92 22.87
.82 21.30
.15 4.12
.17 4.99
Economy Test
NOx MPG
.59 26.1
.54 26.3
.46 25.9
.44 25.9
-------
23
Appendix D
Test Results - Ford Granada, 302 CID, 8 Cylinder
Test Test Federal Test Procedure Highway Fuel Economy Test
Date # Configuration HC CO NOx MPG EC OD NOx MPG
3-25-82 2357 Baseline .86 5.09 1.43 14.5
3-25-82 2358 Baseline .28 .69 2.22 20.4
3-29-82 2359 Baseline .90 4.36 1.48 14.6
3-29-82 2360 Baseline .28 .32 2.20 20.6
4-20-82 2363 Turbo-Garb .96 4.90 1.45 15.1
4-20-82 2364 Turbo-Garb .30 .39 1.97 21.5
4-21-82 2365 Turbo-Garb .95 3.99 1.57 15.3
4-21-82 2366 Turbo-Garb .31 .10 1.94 21.6
4-22-82 3065 Turbo-Garb 1.06 3.79 1.53 15.2
4-22-82 3066 Turbo-Garb .31 .17 1.97 21.3
5-4-82 3264 Mod. Turbo-Carb(l) .96 5.70 1.51 14.9
5-4-82 3263 Mod. Turbo-Carb(l) .24 .14 2.22 21.3
5-6-82 3304 Mod. Turbo-Carb(l) .97 5.84 1.37 15.0
5-6-82 3305 Mod. Turbo-Carb(l) .26 .40 1.89 21.2
(l)The Turbo-Garb was modified by removing the screen and stationary props
for these tests.
-------
24
Appendix E
Turbo-Garb Installation Details
Pinto
The long replacement intake manifold to carburetor bolts provided with
the kit had SAE threads. However, the manifold required metric studs
which had to be fabricated.
Installation of the Turbo-Garb required the use of the old 1/4" insulator
gasket for throttle linkage clearance and this was covered in the
instructions. However, the outside bolt hole flanges of the Turbo-Garb
interferred with other manifold bolts and flanges. This problem was
solved by filing 1/8" off the lower edge of this outer flange. This
problem could also have been solved by the user purchasing and installing
a second insulating gasket.
Fabricated extension for throttle to automatic transmission kickdown
linkage and readjusted linkage.
Fabricated one inch spacer (including metric bolts) for throttle cable
bracket.
With the spacer installed, the surfaces of the Turbo-Garb aluminum block
halves were not true, thereby inducing a severe vacuum leak. The
external application of a silicone sealer on the block mating surfaces
did not cure the leak. The device was disassembled, the aluminum blocks
halves were sanded true, and the silicone sealer was installed between
all mating surfaces (being careful to ensure the sealer did not block
screen passages). This cured the vacuum leak. Note the instructions
specifically state "DO NOT USE GASKET SEALER ON FACE or MOUNTING SURFACE
OF GASKETS!" According to the inventor this is to prevent the screen
from being blocked by excess sealer.
Since the inventor was present at this time, he was informed that EPA
intended to use a sealer to stop the vacuum leak.
The time required for the installation was 8 hours. this included the
time required to fabricate the various hardware bits, readjust the
linkages, and correct the vacuum leaks.
Volare
The Turbo-Garb device was installed on the vehicle using the long
replacement intake manifold to carburetor studs provided.
Fabricated extension for rod from bimetallic choke to carburetor and
readjusted choke linkage.
-------
25
Fabricated extension for throttle to automatic transmission linkage and
readjust linkage. With the Turbo-Garb installed the air cleaner stud
interferred with the hood closing and would need to be about 1/2 inch
shorter or the hood raised 1/2 inch.
The time required for the installation was 2 1/2 hours.
Granada
The Granada, like the Pinto, intake manifold also required metric
carburetor stud bolts.
Bent and reworked manifold heat tube to meet raised choke coil.
Bent and reworked hot air tube from engine to meet raised air cleaner.
Fabricated extension for the throttle to automatic transmission kickdown
linkage and radjusted linkage.
This was the first vehicle on which the device was installed.
Installation required 2 3/4 hours.
-------
APPENDIX F 26
IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ CAREFULLY, BEFORE INSTALLATION!
1. Check hood clearance between air-cleaner and hood on your vehicle: You will need 1 inch all models, except 4-barrel quad &
spread bore, 1Vi inch needed, less present gaskets. TO CHECK, put thickness of fresh bread on high point of air cleaner. Close
hood, open, and if bread is compressed, reduce, by thickness of present gasket to find needed clearance, and/or if possible to
install on your vehicle. NOTE: Hood may possibly be adjusted at the hinges and latch, and/or insulation, if any, over the air
cleaner cut out, to get added clearance.
2. Turbo-Carb is larger than some carburetor bases. Check for clearance around carburetor, humps or bolts sticking up on
manifold, air-conditioning and other engine components that might prevent a good seal. A thicker gasket, size of carburetor
base, may give you clearance.
3. Check length of mounting bolts enclosed in comparison to those of the engine. Must be 1 inch longer, Wt on 4-barrel quad
and spread bore types. May be cut off, if too long.
4. Check length of gas line for height needed. Longer hose or metal line may be obtained from your locaJ auto store, but prob-
ably will not be needed. On metal line, a splice of gasoline hose may be made by cutting metal line, slipping hose over ends,
and clamping.
5. Check to see if you will need some large spacer nuts, washers and longer bolts to raise the mounting bracket of throttle con-
trol cables. Also check hose connections for extra length needed if any. Due to the many different applications we do not at-
tempt to supply any of the parts. ALSO—On exhaust routhed METAL SPACER applications, you may need a NEW GASKET be-
tween spacer and manifold, generally a dealer stock item.
&. Gather all tools'and parts needed before installation. For a more accurate TEST to find your mileage gain, you should test
your vehicle right before installation of fuel saver and right after installation. As weather conditions and engine conditions can
sometimes change, which may vary your results, put your vehicle in top condition before testing! By checking points, plugs,
plug wires, distributor cap, rotor, coil condenser, air cleaner, PCV valve, carburetor and choke for proper adjustment, and
engine oil. Replace needed parts. Use top quality parts, especially plug wires; one plug misfiring in a 4-cylinder engine is like
losing 25% mileage upward and overloading the other 3 cylinders.
FUEL FACTS:
1. Radial tires have less rolling resistance, and will give you greater mileage. Also, wide tires and mud & snow tires will reduce
your mileage. Keep tire pressure at maximum levels.
2. At 50 MPH each WF. drop in temperature will lower gas mileage by about 2*.
3. A 500 Ib. gain in weight tends to reduce fuel economy by between (2) and (5) miles per gallon. A 2,500 Ib. car will tend to get
twice the gas mileage of one weighing 5,000 Ibs.
4. An automatic transmission can reduce fuel economy by up to 15%.
5. A 10% increase in your speed (from 50 to 55 MPH) will require a 33% increase in the horsepower, and more fuel needed to
overcome AIR RESISTANCE.
6. LOW OCTANE GAS, OPEN WINDOWS, ACCESSORIES ON, WET or SNOW-COVERED PAVEMENT, UPGRADED PAVEMENT,
CROSSWIND OR FRONTAL WIND ALL tend to reduce mileage, possibly up to 5 MPG.
HOW TO TEST MILEAGE
It is probably impossible to get an accurate test of city driving, due to traffic jams, more or less stops and more or less waiting
time. For a more accurate test, pick a calm non-windy day, drive to the nearest NON-stop highway or interstate where there is a
fuel station and fill your vehicle's tank to V? inch from entrance of fill spout. Some vehicles take time to do this due to air en-
trapment. Write your mileage down. Each TEST should have the same weather, temperature and road conditions, the same
LOAD and tire pressure. Move out easy on the accelerator and try to drive at an even 50 MPH in all tests. Drive 20 miles or more
from start, then return to same fuel pump, same station, same spot. As many stations have their paving downgraded in various
directions, which makes it possible for your fuel to find a different level in your tank, or air entrapment. Refill tank as before.
Then divide the number of miles traveled, by the number of gallons used. Figure to the nearest 10th of a gallon and mile.
Remember your best mileage is when it's hot and humid. If temperature fluctuates between tests, you can calculate it by using
the 2° formula as previously mentioned.
INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS
1. Check manifold vacuum at idle before removing carburetor. NOTE: A vacuum gauge is a low cost investment to analyze and
adjust your engine.
2. Remove air-cleaner, and hoses to air cleaner.
3. Remove throttle control cables and transmission linkage if any.
4. Disconnect gas line at carburetor.
5. Make diagram of carburetor, and all connecting hoses. Identify each hose with white tape or labels, numbered or etc.; then
remove from carburetor.
6. Disconnect electric choke, or manifold heat control rod. Remove throttle springs and any other connections to carburetor.
7. Remove mounting bolts and lift carburetor off. Handle carefully so as not to damage any part. Also, be careful and don't drop
any parts into manifold! Now check turbo-carb for bolt hole location on your old gasket. Some models have thin KNOCK OUT
TABS in castings and gaskets if needed. Knock out ONLY the parts that BLOCK old mounting gasket HOLES. Tap metal knock
-------
27
outs towards the inside of hole with screwdriver and hammer. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS, Model 2 and 2A ONLY: On some
engines you may need to use your old insulater gasket for throttle linkage or prop clearance—check before tightening car-
buretor down! Enclosed in kit is an extra '/»« gasket, which will allow you to use a gasket on each side of your o(d insulator
gasket. On Model 2 (ONLY on carburetors with throttle linkage on long straight side of turbo-carb), you may need to break off
lip overhang on TOP SECTION ONLY, for linkage clearance. Use pliers, break lip downward from face side and file off rough
edges.
8. DO NOT USE GASKET SEALER ON FACE or MOUNTING SURFACE OF GASKETS! Clean manifold and carburetor flange sur-
face. NOTE: If you have exhaust roughted or water heated spacer, check spacer walls for possible pits or holes in walls. Also.
replace spacer to manifold gasket with a NEW ONE, generally a dealer stock item. Install metal E.G.R. plate or SPACER if your
engine is equipped with one.
9. Install stud bolts, and bottom section of fuel saver. Use ruler and locate center of bar in each
manifold hole. Mark with pen or pencil. Remove bottom section and mount stationary prop on each
center mark as follows: Spread cotter key just enough to go over bar, push all the way down, pinch
together under bar with pliers, insert through prop with large hole towards bar and cotter key in slot.
Holding prop firmly, use knife, spread cotter key and with needle point pliers, twist each leg of cotter
key over the side, using the shaft as leverage to tighten. (NOTE: Prop must fit centered on bar in each
manifold hole without side movement possible for best results.) Subject to heavy turbulence.
A. Install thin bottom gasket, part (c)
B. Install bottom section, part (d), check alignment of bore holes
C. Place frame gasket, part (e) on top of bottom section .
D. Place screen, part (f) on gasket (e)
E. Place frame gasket, part (e) on top of screen (f)
F. Place top section, part (g) hollow side down on top of gasket (e)
G. Must use thick gasket (h) on top section for screen clearance (g) IMPORTANT: Before mount-
ing lay OLD gasket on your NEW gasket. Check to see if any cut outs or holes through your OLD
gasket are BLOCKED; if so, mark. You will need to drill same size through new gasket and top section
of fuel saver, or make a channel in new top gasket over to the throttle bore hole. These vacuum
passages are necessary and your vehicle may not run if BLOCKED. (Hondas have hose connections
on their mounting gaskets. You will need to use your old spacer gasket in this case.)
H. Keep gasket alignment with turbo-carb around all edges flush and place carburetor on gasket
(h) and nuts on studs. IMPORTANT: Fasten carburetor by alternately tightening each nut a little at a
time, evenly, so as not to WARP your carburetor mounting flange. Tighten to OEM recommendations.
Do not OVER TIGHTEN. Main throttle plates and shafts and vacuum operated secondary throttle
plates MAY NOT OPEN if the BASE is WARPED, or may BIND.
10. Reverse procedure of disassembly of attachments to carburetor.
11. If you have manifold heat control choke rod, cut into at center of longest vertical part of rod and in-
stall tube extender enclosed. Cut to desired length, with distance of length of rod as previously deter-
mined in preliminary instructions No. 1, allowing tube '/» inch slipover on end of rods.
12. Be sure heat hose to air cleaner is installed and thermostat therein is working properly. The air
must be kept hot in order to get the best efficiency from your FUEL SAVER! Always use air filter to
protect screen from blockage and keep your engine clean, and prevent fire in the carburetor.
13. IMPORTANT: Be sure gas line is attached to carburetor. Check to see if throttle cables, choke rod,
throttle springs and plates all move freely without any binding all the way to full throttle. You may
need to raise throttle cable mounts and other parts where necessary.
14. Start engine. Check for fuel line leaks.
15. If engine does not idle properly, and all hoses to carburetor and air cleaner are connected, check
for air leaks around gaskets and check to see if choke is properly set. See that throttle lever sets
against idle-stops and choke is all..the way open after engine has completely warmed up, and closed
when coid. Also check manifold vacuum as in the beginning and compare. Gasket and hose connec-
tions may be checked for leak by using un-lit propane torch. Engine will speed up if leak, may be
sealed by using Hl-temp buytle type gasket sealers on the edges (stocked by auto stores). A bad
vacuum leak can cause your engine to run rough, foul your timing and cause your engine to use more
gas! Check cruise control chain if you have one. If too loose, cruise control may not work properly. If
too tight, will not let throttle touch idle stop.
16. Generally NO engine modifications are NECESSARY. TIMING, may possibly beset up for even greater savings due to the
ATOMIZED, VAPORIZED MIXTURE. DO NOT MOVE TIMING, unless you are equipped with knowledge and timing equipment to
do so! Maximum advance of manufacture recommended.
17. CONGRATULATIONS: You are now ready for a second mileage test, and greater mileage and performance! REPEAT: As in
the first test EXACTLY the SAME. Good luck and tell your friends about your mileage gain! (Don't forget to put your BUMPER
STICKER on your vehicle!) We appreciate comments and testimonials — Thank You.
MAINTENANCE: Primary throttle bores are self-cleaning, but secondary are not in constant use and may possibly load up with
varnish. An occasional shot of carburetor cleaner will rid any build up.
THE 55 M.P.H. SPEED LIMIT WILL SAVE GAS AND MONEY!
The U.S..Dept. of Transportation has rated a 4,000 pound car for gas consumption relative to speed. Results showed that the
car got 11.08 m.p.g. at 70 m.p.h.; 13.67 m.p.g. at 60 m.p.h.; 16.98 m.p.g. at 50 m.p.h.; and 14.89 m.p.g. at 40 m.p.h. Maximum
mileage was reached between 50-55 m.p.h. Speed above and below did not save gasoline.
-------
INCREASED GAS SVS1LEAG
28
APPENDIX G
w
Up to 38% Increase — 5 More Miles Per Gallon — Smoother Running Engine — Improv-
ed Performance— Ping Eliminated — Easy Installation. THINK OF IT! Even a 10% IN-
CREASE would be like receiving 12 cents EXTRA GASOLINE per gallon that you buy
at S1.20 per gallon! Oon't be looled by the claims of those who offer devices to in-
crease mileage, but actually restrict the flow of air and reduce engine power. (Win-
dow Screen (256) holes per sq. inch. BLOCKS OUT about 40% AIR FLOW). The
PATENTED TURBO-CARS compensates (or AIR restriction by redirecting the (low of air
from the carouretor through an Enlarged Air Chamber. CARBURETOR MANUALS say.
1 . Raising your Carburetor Up. 2. Atomizing the Fuel for better Vaporizing. 3. Giving
me Fuel Mixture Turbuiance. ALL tend to give IMPROVED Distribution, Economy, Per-
formance. Less Polution and Longer Engine Life. TURBO-GARB Provides ALL (3) of
those FEATURES! Place a drop of liquid on your hot intake manifold and watcfi it
spread out. but a fine micro-size speck will instantly vaporize! A course spray and
large drops of fuel pass from carburetor into intake manifold, making it almost im-
oossible to completely vaporize and mix with the right amount of air. You see why
much of your fuel is wasted and not burned! That's one reason car manufacturers
use a catalytic converter in the exhaust system to burn the unburned gas. which
should nave been burnt in the engine! With me PATENTED TURBO-CARS fuel saver,
large liquid droplets of fuel are broken into a fine micro-size particles. With a poten-
tial of 10.000 per square inch! This makes the fuel much easier to vaporize, while a
stationary prop provides propulsion turbulence to mix and direct the "tog-like"
atomized fuel against the hot intake manifold walls, (or more complete vaporizing,
energizing and economy! With less pollution of hydro carbons and longer engine life!
TURBO-CARS fuel saver has unique PATENTED FEATURES! Why not SPINNING
PROPS? Because the AIR FLOW Controls the Props, SO Where's Resistance to cause
Turbuiance and Mix? STATIONARY PROPS Tested an Increase over the Spinning
Props! There are no moving parts to wear out. or electrical parts to burn out.
Screen— RED HOT 5 Min. BLOW TORCH Tested without any delects except discolora-
tion! Also cesigned to prevent stalling of engine from the possibility of temporary ic-
ing of screen during warm up. And it's safe when properly installed. Mounts under
carburetor, mounting instructions, bolts and gaskets included.
HOW TO OBOEH:
i. Check wnicn moaef neefled below. Must know me numoer of barrels, as single and double/or
douole and lour Parrel are sometimes standard on trie same engine model.
2. CSsck nood clearance Between air-cleaner and hood on your venicle. You will need 1 incn all
moaels. exceot 4-oarrel Quad and spread core. I 3/3 incn needed, less present gasket. To
cr.ccx. placa .'.(COEL t'.izxnes; of ;~j;r. Ssil on Sign ssim a! a? clsaner. ::ci3 need, open: if
dougn aall is compressed, reduce oy tnicxness of present gaskel to lina needed clearance.
ana/or it possible to install on your venicle.
NOTE. Hooo may possioly oe aojusted at me ninges and latcn. and/or insulation il any over ine air
cleaner cut out ro get aooed clearance.
MODEL DESCRIPTION:
No. t . SINGLE 3ARREL (2-ooit only), US and FOREIGN makes, inducing side-draft model caros.
No. 2A
,-;o 2
DOUBLE 3AHHEL— Honda. Oatsun. Toyola (except 20 and 22R engine). Mazda. Opel.
Audi. SuOaru. Volkswagen Raooil. Oasner. Scirocco
DOUBLE BARREL (2 & 40011). Most US makes (except GM 1979-81 6cy250. AMC 4 GMC
1 980 4 81 4 cy 151 and V6 173. and tnose listed in Model 23) FOREIGN makes— Luv.
Fiesta. Ooage Colt. Challenger. Plymouin Arrow. Lancer. Sapporo. Capri. Courier. Fiat.
Volkswagen with Holly 2110 carO
OCU8LE 3ARREL— GMC V6 1979-31 196. 200. 229 and 231 engine 4" base: GMC V8
1377-79301. 1973-81 260. 1979-81 257 and 305 engines
NO. i FOUR BARREL— AMC 4 Jeeo V8 1967-74, GMC V8 1957-66. Chrysler V8 1964-72 single
caro exceot Carter TO. Fora V8 1957-74 except 351CJ 4 460 Police
•iO. iQ FOUR BARREL. Spreafl Bore 4 Ouadraie!— AMC 4 Jeeo V8 1975-76. Ford V8 1975-31 and
1972-74 351CJ ana «60 Police. GMC V8 1966-31 Ouaaraiet. Chrysler V8 1971-81 Carter
TO catb.
DEALERS Invited • Purchase a Sample, Credited as a FREE Sample on
Initial Order of Approved Dealerships!
(.•(Of FOR SALE !.'! CALIFORNIA)
iCasyngm '980 By FUGETT PRODUCTS CO.. INC. ALL SIGHTS SESEflVEO
FUEL-SAmS VAPQH ENEBGIZEB
U.S. PATENT NO. 4,163,436
MADE FOR AMERICAN AND FOREIGN VEHICLES
• DIE CAST ALUMINUM
MOUNTING HOLES
STATIONARY PROPS
STAINLESS STEEL
SCREEN 10,000
HOLES PER SQ. INCH
AIR CHAMBER TO
'.IMPROVE GAS/AIR
MIXTURE
MANIFOLD INTAKE
FREE 60 OAY TRIAL—41 for any reason you ar» not fully satisfied with your
purchase of a TURBO-CARS, return within 61 days after dsilvery for FULL RE-
FUND, installation or removal excluded. FREE Part replacement available up to
(1) year in event of Defects in Material and/or Workmanship, installation,
removal, or retnstallatton excluded.
TESTIMONY
*0n a 77 Chevy Van I was getting 15 mpg, it increased to 20 mpg, my Performance
Improved, it took the "Ping Out" and the Installation was Easy.—Gene Glaze. IN
*l am really thrilled about it! Gas mileage is really improving on my '73 Chev.
Wagon. My performance has improved.—Charles Wootard, Indiana
"I am very pleased. It not only did what you said, but also makes my motor on my
Subaru wagon run MUCH smoother! They are a Real Gas Saver!—Roy Sriskey, TM
"It's hard for me to believe the results I'm getting on my '77 Ford LTD. I went 'mm
10 to 13.8 mpg, about 50% highway and 60% city driving with a lot of idling.
Again thanks (or a superb product.—Mr. Philip Sirota, New York
'For a '75 Ford Granada, it increased our mileage about 4. M.P.G. Enc;osed check
for a 1981 Ford Pick-Uo—Henry Lilly, Birch Tre», MO
PLACE YOUR ORDER NOW! As there is a LIMITED SUPF1Y. Order on? for eacn vehi-
cle! And Save! Postage and handling PAID with order of two or more TUR80-CAS8S!
FUGETT PRODUCTS CO., INC. fl.R. 2 BOX 221 GASTON, IN. 47342
MODEL
1 a ZA a 2 a 28 a
S29.95 $34.95
Plus S2.50 Postage and Handling
IN. Residents Add 47. Sales Tax
G CHECK D MONEY ORDER TOTAL
4 D 40 D
S39.95
YEAR
MAKE
MODEL
EM-.NESIZE i
i
i
MAILING LABEL - PLEASE PRINT
NAME:
ADDRESS:.
CITY:
. STATE:
.ZIP
-------
29
APPENDIX H
INCREASED GAS MILEAGE UP TO
35% WITH
FUEL-SAVING VAPOR EHERGIZER
U.S. PATENT NO. 4,163,436
IN TEST RESULTS:
THINK OF IT! Even i 20% INCREASE would oa Ilka getting 24 cents EXTRA
GASOLINE oer gallon mat you ouy 11 SI.20 per gallon! Most venictes tested were in
:ne 20-PLUS-flange ol INCREASE Hignway Driving.
1976 Eldorado CiQUUc. 500 cu. in. ing. Irom 16.99 to 22.97 Increase 35%
1973 Chevy 9 pass Wagon. 400 cu. in. Eitg. Irom 17.0 to 22.20 Increas* 30%
' Test Results Avaiiaoie an aoova and oiner venicles on request.
Jon i oe looiad Ov me claims ol mose wno oiler devices to increase mileage. 5ut ac-
;uaiiv restrict tna Mow ot air. {Window Screen (256) doles oar so. incn. 3LOCXS OUT
JGOUI 40% AIR FLOW). Th* P« FEN TED ruR80-CAH8 compensates lor Alfl restncran
ay ^directing me (low ol air from tne carouretor tnrougn an Enlarged Air Chamoer. II
ALSO acu as a ncai risar to pre-fleai tne mniure and AID oistndunon! CARBURETOR
MANUALS say. lor eiticiency, gerformanca. and less pollution, me fuel must oe
atomized and vaoorized! Praia a droo ot liquid on your not intake manifold and oaten
it soread out. Out a line micro-sue soacx will instantly vaoonze! A course soray and
large oroos ol turn pass Irom carourator into intake mamioiO. making it almost im-
Mssioie lo completely vaoonza and mix witn ma rigm amount ol air. You see wny
inucn at your luel is wasted and not Ournea! That's ona reason car manufacturers
•jse a catalytic convener in tna unaust system to Ourn me unournad gas. wnicn
snould nave 0«en ournt in ma engine! Witn tne PATENTED TUR80-CAR3 luel saver.
Urge liquid arooieis of luel are oroken into a line micro-sue oanicies. witn a poten-
tial ol 10.000 oar suuari incn! This makes ma luai mucti easier to vaoorizt. wmla a
. stationary oroo orovidn propulsion turouianca to mix and direct tna "tog-like"
jiomizeo luet against tne hot intake mam/old walls, ior more comoieia vaoorizmg.
energizing and economy! Witn less ooilution at nydro caroons and longer engine life!
TURBO-ORB fuel saver ros unique PATENTED FEATURES! Wny not SPINNING
PROPS? Secause ma AIR FLOW Controls me Proas. SO wnere's Resistance to causa
Turoulanca and Mix? STATIONARY PROPS Tested an Increase over me Spinning
Proas! There are no moving part] to wear out. -or electrical pans to Ourn out.-or
causa fouling or stalling at your engine! And it's safe wnen properly installed.
'•founts under carouretor. mounting instructions, soils and gasket] included.
HOW TO 0«OB:
I CMC* wmen model nMOM Mow.
2. C3«CK flood ciuranca oatwon jir-ciuMr and noon on vow v*mda. You wiM n*ad 1 tncft all
™oe*«. ncaot 4-oarrn ouid and soraad bore. I 3/8 incn
-leedaa. ina OTBMM gui«. ro cmcx. MCI MODEL micxMas ol msn w«M on inqn OOMK
m aif n*ww» ^v»v» fvwrt. oowi. jno il ttr«»o t, comoresMO. '«0ue» Oy in«nn«s * o^wam
5JJKM n find nwoM durvic*. and/or it aossiOM to inatan on your vefiictt.
SOTE. :-4ood irav oouidv M Miiutad at tnv ningta ana latcrt. ana/or mwunon it any ovaf mt air
::ean«f cul out 10 g« aooed ooaranca.
MOOR
'to. i.
DESClllfTlON:
SINGLE 9ADRH. (2-w omyi. US and FOREIGN maun, mouom) u»-«nn moan am.
10. 2A OOUBLE 3ARREL.—Honda. Oatsun. Toyota (nc. 20R jnqmal. Uuoa. Oo«. Audi.
. Volhswaoan RiofM. Qa*nar. Scirocea
10. 2
OOU8LE 34BB6L. 124480111. US main me. IMC 4 CMC 1980481 TO. rord V8 1957-74 ncrol 3JICJ 4 460 fnca
•lo JO FOUR 8ARR6L. Sortad 8ora i Ouaoraiei—»MC VJ 1975-78. Ford VS 1975-78 and
1972-74 3SICJ and «60 PWica. GMC V8 196S-JI Quadraial. Cnrysar V8 1971-31 Carter ,
TO card. |H*0 KM AMC tnq. nel JVMMM jn on imj n«o« I
sOTE: Snionwms usually 'T^ao• wimn 48 nows al recaiol ol your order wnen inveniorias oetmtr. A
.imiiod suooiv So Hurry! Get your order in early.
Don I oe left out! Order on* for eacn venicia! Ana Save! Postag* ana nanoling PUO
««n oraer ot rwo or more TURBO-CARBS!
SAVE! S3.00 EACH—ORDER WITHIN 10 OAT'S Of POSTMARK AND OEflUCT
FROM PRICE ON COUPON—4nduda Postmark as fnat.
i«w » ruotrr TKOUCTS co . me.
5 nfsuvto
FUGeTT PRODUCTS CO.. INC. 3.H. 2 SOX 221 GASTON. IN 47342 I
-oca: . • FE3 * E81 -.
I 3 2AO 28 2B C3 4 Q -UJQ
544 95 14495 S49.91 149 .95 SS4.9S SV 95 S
Plus $2.30 Postage and Handling
Post Paid on Orders ot Mo or mnr» S
IN. Aeiidems Ada 4% Silt* Tn S
C CHECX C MONEY OHOEfl
YE
/9'7
.'?;
/vv
AR MAKE
? /'/.,V.1.'.'?.'1
•7 FJ>I"*
V ftif.rf
U4MH
CITY- .
ZIP-
TOTAL S
MODEL ENGINE SIZE
'/C/'l^i £Z-T" AT/
(V'iv^'W/^ •$() 2. . Ji tCi'.
r^-fo ^. 3L. vt,:-,^
sTATF-
PHnNC
------- |