why is rich better for power ??

[Terry Martin]

Seth wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 6 Sep 1997, Johnny wrote:
> 
> > Robert Harris wrote:
> > >
> > > Try this thought pattern.  Gasoline is a blend of different chemicals -
> > > ranging from methanol, butane to toluene etc...
> >
> > No not at all. I got it... 
> > BTW, the slower burning elements have the higher octane rating.
> >
> > -j-
> >
> I wonder about this as the reid vapor pressure, burn rate, and molecular
> weight of several constituents of gasoline that are considered "octane
> boosters" are quite different.
> 
> Seth Allen

Now we're back to fizzy stuff :-). Given that heat engine power is a
complex process, no wonder there are individuals, (not necessarily
stupid or uneducated), that propose extra-ordinary means to convert fuel
to propulsion. Just provide extra-ordinary proof.

The most efficient mechanical means of producing crankshaft energy from
combustion must necessarily be by methods of injection. As time is a
factor in combustion, as it is in crank rotational efficiency, it makes
sense to bring the energy release curve from combustion as close as
possible into the leverage efficiency curve of the crank.

It would be particularly nice if one could ignore the fact that we
co-exist with emissions from vehicles, however, we don't, and vehicles
breath more in one day than many humans do in a lifetime, and operate
outside the evolved processes of nature which keep us breathing, not to
mention moving.

However, to deliberately ignore such relationships is not ignorance, but
stupidity, & EFI is our best guess at making the transition from fossil
fuels to a synergistic system simply because a computer can deliver
injected fuel to an engine more efficiently than a human can with a gas
pedal. (Stomp)

Rich is better for power simply because "better" is strictly defined as
crank output. If it were a closed system, (and it is, just bigger than
us), fuel/power ratio's would include time and total system
requirements. 

I don't need to go anywhere if I'm dead, much less more quickly, and I
don't need to go anywhere if it means I am going to be dead more
quickly.

Terry