Anyone heard of the Ecotek cb-26p combustion device ?

steviewonder7 · Unread post by **steviewonder7** » 05 Apr 2008, 16:05

Just wondering,to those of more knowledge than me when it comes to the workings of cars,if any of you have heard of this device which is supposed to improve the effieciency of the combusion process in petrol driven cars and therefore give improvements on fuel consumption and gives better response throttle wise.

I had one of these fitted to my old jap car several years ago and didnt notice too much difference only in raspy engine noise emitted from the device.

Now the literature that I still have says that it only works for petrol driven engines because of the 'vacuum' derived from the inlet manifold.
Could this not,at a stretch, also work for diesel engines for the same reasons?

There's a vacuum device fitted to the xantia's i believe,is there not?I'm not a technical buff by far,but what would stop this from being used on diesel engines?
Would be greatful to hear from those much more knowledgeable than moir

By the way I dont work for these guys or advocate the devices,I'm just curious.

There's further info,if i maybe so bold to include here at www.ecotekplc.com

regards Steve

AndersDK · Unread post by **AndersDK** » 05 Apr 2008, 16:27

I cant really overlook whats its all about ?
Is it better response to pedal bottoming - or what ?

It all seems so overwhelmingly documented by marginal diffrences in lots and lots of tables and diagrams - that you cant really figure out whats it all down to - or up to

On a 1.4L engine you wont exactly get race performance in a 1ton bodyshell anyway - whatever you do to the engine

I mean - what use do you have of a 0-60 figure reduced from 18 seconds to 17 seconds ?

Unread post by **CitroJim** » 05 Apr 2008, 18:34

It is easy to dismiss these devices as mere "snake oil" but in the case of the Ecotek it does indeed have a valid claim. It has been about for years and years.

It works, as far as I can tell from the blurb, by improving the air-fuel homogenisation by inducing turbulence in the inlet tract and thus helping fuel droplets mix better with the air. This is the reason they state this:

For carburettor and early petrol injected cars, improvements, particularly in emissions and petrol consumption, can be dramatic:

This is the clincher.

In engines with carburrettors and monopoint injection systems, the inlet manifold will be "wet" and their designs are a compromise that do not, at all times, offer good swirl and turbulence properties and under some conditions, particularly when the air-mass is slow-moving the fuel droplets can "drop-out" of the air and condense on the mainfold walls. The Ecotek can help here by keeping the air turbulent and thereby keeping the fuel well mixed with the air.

The benefits with modern multipoint injection systems are less tangible. The inlet manifold is "dry" and only ever contains air; the fuel being injected directly behind the inlet valve. An increase in turbulence does still help slightly though as turbulent air entering the inlet port will still help to fully homogenise the fuel/air charge. In fact, the Activa engine has a special "lump" on it's throttle butterfly to increase turbulence at small throttle openings as an aid to better running. I also suspect that the Ecotek has a "dump valve" function to indeed, as they say, break a high vacuum and allow a manifold air flow to change speed/direction more rapidly under accleration.

In a diesel it will not work at all. The very heart of diesel combustion is based on turbulence and all diesel engines are designed to generate as much of the stuff as is possible. The Ecotek is not going to help one iota in this respect as the inlet tract of a diesel is wide open at all times and all the turbulence needed is generated within the combustion chamber mainly before the onset of injection to ensure the fuel is injected into very hot, very turbulent air.

So, good on an older petrol engine, marginal at best on a modern one and totally non-applicable to any diesel.

steviewonder7 · Unread post by **steviewonder7** » 05 Apr 2008, 19:24

I get the gist after reading more and reading what you say citrojim.I was thinking if some device like this would bennefit if it could enduce further turbulance in the entrance to the diesel inlet port's of the combustion chamber making the air fuel mixture 'more' efficient,but if you say there's no chance of this happening with a diesel like the Xantia etc then so be it.
Shame as in this day and age when fuel prices are escalating a device like I thought for little outlay might save you a bob or two ang give slightly better mpg and emissions
I take the hdi engines(like in later xantia etc) are more efficient at this because they are direct injection and therfore dont have to produce too much swirl in the combustion chamber?
Anyway it was just a thought that I thought might have lead somewhere encouraging

As a side issue,would ram induction ever work on a plain old diesel/Turbo diesel engine?

Regards Steve

Unread post by **CitroJim** » 05 Apr 2008, 19:46

The HDi engine works with loads and loads of swirl and again, needs all it can get. It is more efficient than the old XUD in that it is direct injection (DI) straight into the combustion chamber. The necessary swirl and turbulence is generated in a specially shaped cut-out in the piston crown and helped along by inlet ports that encourage the incoming air to swirl. In the Indirect injection (IDI) XUD the swirl is generated by forcing the air into a swirl chamber (or pre-chamber) connected to the main combustion chamber via a narrow throat. This works well to create a quiet, high-speed engine that will run well over a wide rev range but the downside is a serious loss of heat efficiency and thus overall fuel efficiency. The big advantage of an IDI is it is its quietness (very little diesel knock) and the use of low pressure injection via a cheap mechanical distributor pump.

The high speed DI engine had to overcome the noise issue, a narrow speed range and emissions before it could displace the IDI. This could only ecomonically be done with electronically controlled high pressure common rail systems and very careful combustion chamber design. Old Ford Transits, Sherpas and the like used pre common rail DI engines. Slow, noisy, rough and dirty but far more fuel efficient than any XUD!

The XUD is about as economical as it can be in the Xantia, the only real improvements to be gained are from driving technique. Feathering off the throttle to just maintain cruiseing speed is a big saver, as is making sure the rolling resistance is is low as possible.

steviewonder7 wrote:As a side issue,would ram induction ever work on a plain old diesel/Turbo diesel engine?

Yes, I believe it would. The fundamental petrol engine tuning principles are more or less directly applicable to diesels. Compare a 1.9TD XUD and a 2.1TD XUD and you'll feel the 2.1TD has a lot more low and mid-range torque than a mere 183cc increase in displacement and an extra inlet valve can account for. Now look at the inlet manifold runners on the 2.1. They're getting on for twice as long as the 1.9TD - hence, I believe, the increase in low and mid-range torque. Long runners make mid-range torque at the expense of top end in a petrol engine and this feels to be the case with the 2.1TD when compared against the 1.9TD.

Kowalski · Unread post by **Kowalski** » 09 Apr 2008, 22:38

How does a device fitted to a pressurised fuel line increase turbulance in the manifold? Any turbulance that it can induce in the pressurised fuel line will be lost when the fuel is turned into a fine mist by the injector. The fact that the fuel line is pressurised (to injection pressure by the fuel pump) means that not a lot of air is going to be added to the fuel.

Until I see peer reviewed scientific study of such devices proving that they work I'd tend to agree with the US Government funded studies that showed them to be ineffective.

Unread post by **CitroJim** » 10 Apr 2008, 15:14

Kowalski wrote:How does a device fitted to a pressurised fuel line increase turbulance in the manifold?

Forgive me but I was under the mistanken impression this device went into the inlet tract

XantiaMan · Unread post by **XantiaMan** » 10 Apr 2008, 17:35

This device works well on the older cars, great if they run a carb. The idea is simple, bleed a small amount of air in at part throttle and idle, but when you put your foot down the vacuum goes and shuts the valve off, leaving performance unaffected. Unless on anything modern as they already run lean enough, and a diesel always has a constant bleed of air via the air filter

Unread post by **lolingram** » 10 Apr 2008, 17:35

Probably only true up to a point with ID combustions chambers - see The High Speed Internal Combustion Engine by Ricardo & Hempson.

This due to the relavely large fuel droplet size with the lower injection pressures. With HDi/CR pressures, I am pretty sure that max turbulence will decrease cylinder filling considerably and reduce BMEP. CR injection technology can vary droplet size, duration and direction almost infinitely.

In a diesel it will not work at all. The very heart of diesel combustion is based on turbulence and all diesel engines are designed to generate as much of the stuff as is possible.

Kowalski · Unread post by **Kowalski** » 10 Apr 2008, 22:35

citrojim wrote:
Kowalski wrote:How does a device fitted to a pressurised fuel line increase turbulance in the manifold?
Forgive me but I was under the mistanken impression this device went into the inlet tract

It must be another one of the fuel saving devices that fits into the fuel line.

Is introducing a vacuum leak a good thing? Why not adjust the mixture screws on the carbureter and lean the mixture out that way?

If your carb isn't set up correctly, or if your air filter is dirty, an ecotek valve can compensate to some degree. Personally, I'd adjust the carb or change the air filter rather than adding parts that serve no purpous.

Have you thought about what effect the ecotek valve will have on a fuel injected engine? None whatsoever, the engine will compensate for the vacuum leak.

XantiaMan · Unread post by **XantiaMan** » 11 Apr 2008, 07:13

Kowalski wrote:
citrojim wrote:
Kowalski wrote:How does a device fitted to a pressurised fuel line increase turbulance in the manifold?
Forgive me but I was under the mistanken impression this device went into the inlet tract
It must be another one of the fuel saving devices that fits into the fuel line.

Is introducing a vacuum leak a good thing? Why not adjust the mixture screws on the carbureter and lean the mixture out that way?

If your carb isn't set up correctly, or if your air filter is dirty, an ecotek valve can compensate to some degree. Personally, I'd adjust the carb or change the air filter rather than adding parts that serve no purpous.

Have you thought about what effect the ecotek valve will have on a fuel injected engine? None whatsoever, the engine will compensate for the vacuum leak.

It really does depend on the car. On some carb cars if you set them up lean, they run hotter, and dont perform so well, with flat spots. Fitting a vacuum bleed like this means the car can basically run as normal.

Not all fuel injection systems will compensate for a vacuum leak either, but i would not consider using on of these valves for the money they cost.