1 Steam Cars : Phorum
General Steam Car topics
CARBURETOR BURNERS-THE FORGOTTEN FISH-
Posted by: George Nutz (IP Logged)
Date: April 29, 2003 08:59PM
<HTML> Carburetor type burners have always had an advantage of being rather good at self adjusting to altitude changes and air fuel ratio demands over large fuel rates. The famous "E" Doble originally had a carburetor for its air/fuel provider and worked very well in boiler tests and with the added exhaust draft booster that pushed it to higher levels. The problem with the classical carb is that the fuel droplet size is rather large and burning heavier fuels like diesel and #2 not very reliable. A while back we had a good thread on the forgotten WILLIAMS OILOMATIC air aspirated nozzle and that its fuel particle size was 1/10th the diameter of a conventional oil burner nozzle, this equates to 1/1000th the droplet size. Thanks to Mike Brown(the maker of steam engines) a good amount of information has been received on the forgotten FISH carburetor. He manufactured this carburetor for severla years with the approval of John Robert Fish's son. Before computer controlled systems and even after fuel injection came along, the Fish carburetor had test and real life resuts outdistancing the best of systems at its time. Higher horsepower output, better acceleration, higher top speed and most important about 30% better fuel milage. This was not a folly but proven in many tests including dyno tests. Appropriately the Fish Carburetor Company was based in Daytona Beach, Florida and many race cars at the time used them. 4 barrel carbs replaced with a single Fish carb resulted in large improvements. The intrigueing aspect is that the Fish carb could burn many waste fuels and is claimed to have a much better performance due to much smaller fuel particle size----I think you can see where this is going! It is mentioned that some sidedraft units were made for racing boats and would that not be a good carb for use on a modern steam car boiler. Self adjusting, very clean burning due to smal fuell particle size, only three moving parts. This could allow a fuel/air metering system that would remain almost constantly on and its burn rate controlled by rising or falling boiler pressure by controlling the air blower input. No more on/off puffs of smoke system. I would think that 18 a GPH burn rate would be possible with a standard Fish carburetor.
So may a good discussion take place on the pros and cons of this applicaton of the forgotton Fish carburetor to usage on steam boilers.</HTML>
So may a good discussion take place on the pros and cons of this applicaton of the forgotton Fish carburetor to usage on steam boilers.</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR BURNERS-THE FORGOTTEN FISH-
Posted by: Howard Randall (IP Logged)
Date: April 30, 2003 09:39AM
<HTML>Sounds exciting, George. Perhaps this is just what we need to breath new life into our "Old Maid" Stanleys. Got any steam? ...No! ...Go Fish!
Are there any drawing or published articles?
Dotty says hello!</HTML>
Are there any drawing or published articles?
Dotty says hello!</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR BURNERS-THE FORGOTTEN FISH-
Posted by: Howard Randall (IP Logged)
Date: April 30, 2003 03:32PM
<HTML>Check Out: http: //www.fireballroberts.com/</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR BURNERS-THE FORGOTTEN FISH-
Posted by: George Nutz (IP Logged)
Date: April 30, 2003 03:44PM
<HTML>Howard,
Thanks, I will! The neat thing about the FISH carb is that the throttle plate shaft is hollow and has 6 very small holes in it, the fuel is delivered into this shaft and the fuel aspirated by the air passing over these holes. The amount of fuel is ingeniously metered by a regulating swing arm inside the float chamber. Sorta reminds me of the babington burner using a curved spherical surface with a minute slit in it to get extremely small fuel particle size. In the FISH case it is air passing over a cylindrical surface at very high velocity. I have one old Fish M-1 carb(thanks to Mike Brown) and is very intrigueing.
He may still have literature for sale on this carburetor.
George</HTML>
Thanks, I will! The neat thing about the FISH carb is that the throttle plate shaft is hollow and has 6 very small holes in it, the fuel is delivered into this shaft and the fuel aspirated by the air passing over these holes. The amount of fuel is ingeniously metered by a regulating swing arm inside the float chamber. Sorta reminds me of the babington burner using a curved spherical surface with a minute slit in it to get extremely small fuel particle size. In the FISH case it is air passing over a cylindrical surface at very high velocity. I have one old Fish M-1 carb(thanks to Mike Brown) and is very intrigueing.
He may still have literature for sale on this carburetor.
George</HTML>
CARBURETOR - FORGOTTEN
Posted by: C Benson (IP Logged)
Date: April 30, 2003 05:29PM
<HTML>Gee I think I recall something like this,,,,racing carb,,,,1925 + --,,Ben</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR - FORGOTTEN
Posted by: Caleb Ramsby (IP Logged)
Date: April 30, 2003 08:23PM
<HTML>Howard,
Check out [www.mikebrownsolutions.com]
It is the table of contents of the book that Mike Brown sells on the Fish carburetor.
Ben,
I wouldn't doubt it. Most new "inventions" are just old one rediscovered or reinvented.
George,
Having one to look at, how well do you think that this carburetor could be scaled up? Would it be realitively easy to machine?
Thanks to Jim's information on the Doble, I am really liking the look of a carburetor for a steam car. Especially one that can operate on a variety of liquid fuels.
How gravity sensitive do you think that the Fish carburetor is?
Does it look like there are many dangers of distortion of the feed tube through the center of the carburetor due to flame radaition?
Caleb Ramsby</HTML>
Check out [www.mikebrownsolutions.com]
It is the table of contents of the book that Mike Brown sells on the Fish carburetor.
Ben,
I wouldn't doubt it. Most new "inventions" are just old one rediscovered or reinvented.
George,
Having one to look at, how well do you think that this carburetor could be scaled up? Would it be realitively easy to machine?
Thanks to Jim's information on the Doble, I am really liking the look of a carburetor for a steam car. Especially one that can operate on a variety of liquid fuels.
How gravity sensitive do you think that the Fish carburetor is?
Does it look like there are many dangers of distortion of the feed tube through the center of the carburetor due to flame radaition?
Caleb Ramsby</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR - FORGOTTEN
Posted by: Caleb Ramsby (IP Logged)
Date: April 30, 2003 09:23PM
<HTML>George,
This is a little off subject, but since his name came up, what do you think about Mike Browns new 20 horsepower steam engine?
[www.mikebrownsolutions.com]
Before he put up this information he had the horsepower estimates for 200 psi. and I believe 600 psi. Now he says that the engine shouldn't be operated over 200 psi. I wonder if there was some trouble in test's or mabey he just wanted the engine that much overbuilt.
Whatever the case I am disapointed, I would have been able to accept 600 psi., which I still think is far too low for a car, but 200, no way.
However, it does look like it would make a good stationary engine to do some chores with.
Since you have a product of their making in your possesion(the Fish), what do you think about their work? Is it as good as they claim?
Howard,
What is your experience with pilot lights in the boiler? I am asking this because when I eventually make a steam system I want to use a carburetor/fan induction burner system that is light with an electrical spark or a heating ellement(like a home furnace system). I would use the pilot light, along with a flue dampener, to maintain full boiler pressure when the system was at rest.
What is involved in lighting a pilot light of the Stanley style? Do you have to preheat anything to make it function? I believe that the fuel is motivated into the pilot light by air pressure in the pilot light fuel tank. Is this correct? If so, how often to you have to pump the pressure back up to nominal?
Thanks all,
Caleb Ramsby</HTML>
This is a little off subject, but since his name came up, what do you think about Mike Browns new 20 horsepower steam engine?
[www.mikebrownsolutions.com]
Before he put up this information he had the horsepower estimates for 200 psi. and I believe 600 psi. Now he says that the engine shouldn't be operated over 200 psi. I wonder if there was some trouble in test's or mabey he just wanted the engine that much overbuilt.
Whatever the case I am disapointed, I would have been able to accept 600 psi., which I still think is far too low for a car, but 200, no way.
However, it does look like it would make a good stationary engine to do some chores with.
Since you have a product of their making in your possesion(the Fish), what do you think about their work? Is it as good as they claim?
Howard,
What is your experience with pilot lights in the boiler? I am asking this because when I eventually make a steam system I want to use a carburetor/fan induction burner system that is light with an electrical spark or a heating ellement(like a home furnace system). I would use the pilot light, along with a flue dampener, to maintain full boiler pressure when the system was at rest.
What is involved in lighting a pilot light of the Stanley style? Do you have to preheat anything to make it function? I believe that the fuel is motivated into the pilot light by air pressure in the pilot light fuel tank. Is this correct? If so, how often to you have to pump the pressure back up to nominal?
Thanks all,
Caleb Ramsby</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR - FORGOTTEN
Posted by: Howard Randall (IP Logged)
Date: April 30, 2003 11:18PM
<HTML>Re: Stanley Pilot
Do you have to preheat anything to make it function? Yes, a short vaporizing tube (shape depending on style/ manufacturer) and pilot casting.
Fuel is motivated into the pilot light by air pressure in the pilot light fuel tank. Yes,this is this correct? Early style Stanley and some after market burners used single fuel source for pilot and main fire. Later dual fuel Stanleys used a separate pressurized pilot fuel tank.
If so, how often to you have to pump the pressure back up to nominal?
If the tank has enough "air over fuel " capacity, you can often go all day on the same charge. I use a fuel pressure regulator in-line that gives good control of my Maxwell style pilot. Latter cond. cars carried an air tank to recharge the pilot tank. Early cars had a hand pump fitting on the dash mounted pilot gauge for recharge.
I worked on the now Jay Leno Doble fitted with a Carburator. Ignition was via one or two spark plugs fired via a distributor and coil if my memory serves me right. I was very impressed with this sytem for its simplicity and reliability.
We fired the car on gasoline but other fuels (kero.) are possible. We wanted to keep the exhaust smell in check so as not to smell up the new interior and also to insure reliable ignition.</HTML>
Do you have to preheat anything to make it function? Yes, a short vaporizing tube (shape depending on style/ manufacturer) and pilot casting.
Fuel is motivated into the pilot light by air pressure in the pilot light fuel tank. Yes,this is this correct? Early style Stanley and some after market burners used single fuel source for pilot and main fire. Later dual fuel Stanleys used a separate pressurized pilot fuel tank.
If so, how often to you have to pump the pressure back up to nominal?
If the tank has enough "air over fuel " capacity, you can often go all day on the same charge. I use a fuel pressure regulator in-line that gives good control of my Maxwell style pilot. Latter cond. cars carried an air tank to recharge the pilot tank. Early cars had a hand pump fitting on the dash mounted pilot gauge for recharge.
I worked on the now Jay Leno Doble fitted with a Carburator. Ignition was via one or two spark plugs fired via a distributor and coil if my memory serves me right. I was very impressed with this sytem for its simplicity and reliability.
We fired the car on gasoline but other fuels (kero.) are possible. We wanted to keep the exhaust smell in check so as not to smell up the new interior and also to insure reliable ignition.</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR - FORGOTTEN
Posted by: George Nutz (IP Logged)
Date: May 01, 2003 11:11AM
<HTML>Caleb,
The FISH carb that I have is an original type M1 made by Fish Co. at Daytona Beach, it is very well made. I am searching for one of the rare side draft versions that would be applicable for boiler use. I believe the Brown Carburetor Company made an equally fine and improved product and many thousands were made and used with satisfaction.
In regards to his new 20HP KISS-1 engine prototypes have not yet been built but are in process. The engine is derated significantly in order to rate them for constant duty service at full 20HP output, it is more designed for constant power generation or sawmills. The engine is capable of far more pressure , rpm and horsepower than 200/700/20 but "hotroding" the engine will void any warranty. Giving a warranty for one year(9000 hours) of constant running 24 hours per day requires a lot of derating! There are a few modifications that would increase bearing sizes(and cost) and expand to an inline 3 cylinder or a V-4 version with variable valve timing but that is in the future, at this time I believe only this first version is to be made.
Howard,
Yup the Doble carb worked great on gasoline and fairly well on early kerosine when the firebox was hot---the white heat firebox became a vaporizer in reality. Supposidly smoky with any fuel heavier than K-1.
The idea that a FISH carb could do a better job and give a much smaller fuel particle size is interesting. Abner Doble mentioned that with kerosine he could burn 600,000BTU's/CuFt-hr and with gasoline 1,000,000. I think the early fuels he was using were more volatile than our present "gasoline" and "kerosine".
Oh to find a sidedraft FISH carb for experimentation!
George</HTML>
The FISH carb that I have is an original type M1 made by Fish Co. at Daytona Beach, it is very well made. I am searching for one of the rare side draft versions that would be applicable for boiler use. I believe the Brown Carburetor Company made an equally fine and improved product and many thousands were made and used with satisfaction.
In regards to his new 20HP KISS-1 engine prototypes have not yet been built but are in process. The engine is derated significantly in order to rate them for constant duty service at full 20HP output, it is more designed for constant power generation or sawmills. The engine is capable of far more pressure , rpm and horsepower than 200/700/20 but "hotroding" the engine will void any warranty. Giving a warranty for one year(9000 hours) of constant running 24 hours per day requires a lot of derating! There are a few modifications that would increase bearing sizes(and cost) and expand to an inline 3 cylinder or a V-4 version with variable valve timing but that is in the future, at this time I believe only this first version is to be made.
Howard,
Yup the Doble carb worked great on gasoline and fairly well on early kerosine when the firebox was hot---the white heat firebox became a vaporizer in reality. Supposidly smoky with any fuel heavier than K-1.
The idea that a FISH carb could do a better job and give a much smaller fuel particle size is interesting. Abner Doble mentioned that with kerosine he could burn 600,000BTU's/CuFt-hr and with gasoline 1,000,000. I think the early fuels he was using were more volatile than our present "gasoline" and "kerosine".
Oh to find a sidedraft FISH carb for experimentation!
George</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR - FORGOTTEN
Posted by: Caleb Ramsby (IP Logged)
Date: May 01, 2003 04:58PM
<HTML>Howard,
Thanks for the information, experience is a great thing, especially when one can borrow someone elses.grin
I think that I will use the pressureized pilot fuel tank with the auxilarry pressure tank for refill's.
However using a vaporizing pilot burner is not what I would call user friendly. I will have to use an atomizing system.
Thanks again.
George,
I had a feeling that they were way under rated. I keep on forgeting that he makes work horses not race horses! Defenitaly a good engine to produce electrical power, run a saw mill or power the machines in a machine shop. He also says that they can be coupled, I think up to three in line. 9,000 hours of high load use is a lot of work and deserves more respect than I was giving it.
I should just buy the Fish book that he sells and make my own carburetor, that way it would fit exactly the application I need it for.
Caleb Ramsby</HTML>
Thanks for the information, experience is a great thing, especially when one can borrow someone elses.grin
I think that I will use the pressureized pilot fuel tank with the auxilarry pressure tank for refill's.
However using a vaporizing pilot burner is not what I would call user friendly. I will have to use an atomizing system.
Thanks again.
George,
I had a feeling that they were way under rated. I keep on forgeting that he makes work horses not race horses! Defenitaly a good engine to produce electrical power, run a saw mill or power the machines in a machine shop. He also says that they can be coupled, I think up to three in line. 9,000 hours of high load use is a lot of work and deserves more respect than I was giving it.
I should just buy the Fish book that he sells and make my own carburetor, that way it would fit exactly the application I need it for.
Caleb Ramsby</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR - FORGOTTEN
Posted by: Peter Brow (IP Logged)
Date: May 02, 2003 08:31AM
<HTML>George: Interesting idea -- Fish carb burner for steam cars. I've heard of the Fish, and also the Pogue and some other types of "alternative carburetors", but know few details. Worth a look. The fuel mileage improvement claims for these and other alternative carbs (in gas cars) have been exaggerated on occasion, and allegedly "debunked" in road tests. Of course that is of no concern for steam purposes -- if a device gives better fuel/air mix, it is worth checking out on that basis, especially if the equipment is simpler, cheaper, or otherwise more desireable than a conventional carburetor for steam car burner use.
Caleb: An atomizing burner in pilot light size may be problematic. Pilot burners for steam cars are extremely small. Fuel jets would have to be incredibly tiny, and then there is the constant electricity drain from the blower, if it is to run on standby 24/7. Simple premix vaporizing burners are hard enough to design in pilot-light sizes.
Might be better to briefly cycle the main burner on/off at long intervals & perhaps low firing rates, to prevent freezing, minimize internal/external tube corrosion & thermal cycling, keep up steam for instant getaway, etc.. Maybe just leave the boiler "on", and have your inlet/exhaust flaps close to minimize heat loss whenever burner cycles "off". Flaps open when burner cycles "on". With a fan burner, the flaps could be lightly spring- or -weight loaded to open and close by exhaust pressure/air suction. Voltage sensor could shut down the burner to avoid draining battery in extended standby.
For a constantly-running pilot light, the only two options that look feasible to me are premix vaporizing (like Stanley or Coleman) and pot burners. Pot burners might be hard to design for clean burning, and may be picky about fuels and hills. Sure are simple, though. Graham Baker has successfully used a pot burner as pilot light in combination with fuel-injector/fan-type main burner (see Karl Peterson's Website; link is on my "Steam Links" page, go to [www.geocities.com] & check links under "Website Index"). As I recall, his pot-burner pilot also lit the main burner.
Peter</HTML>
Caleb: An atomizing burner in pilot light size may be problematic. Pilot burners for steam cars are extremely small. Fuel jets would have to be incredibly tiny, and then there is the constant electricity drain from the blower, if it is to run on standby 24/7. Simple premix vaporizing burners are hard enough to design in pilot-light sizes.
Might be better to briefly cycle the main burner on/off at long intervals & perhaps low firing rates, to prevent freezing, minimize internal/external tube corrosion & thermal cycling, keep up steam for instant getaway, etc.. Maybe just leave the boiler "on", and have your inlet/exhaust flaps close to minimize heat loss whenever burner cycles "off". Flaps open when burner cycles "on". With a fan burner, the flaps could be lightly spring- or -weight loaded to open and close by exhaust pressure/air suction. Voltage sensor could shut down the burner to avoid draining battery in extended standby.
For a constantly-running pilot light, the only two options that look feasible to me are premix vaporizing (like Stanley or Coleman) and pot burners. Pot burners might be hard to design for clean burning, and may be picky about fuels and hills. Sure are simple, though. Graham Baker has successfully used a pot burner as pilot light in combination with fuel-injector/fan-type main burner (see Karl Peterson's Website; link is on my "Steam Links" page, go to [www.geocities.com] & check links under "Website Index"). As I recall, his pot-burner pilot also lit the main burner.
Peter</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR - FORGOTTEN
Posted by: Jim Crank (IP Logged)
Date: May 02, 2003 12:53PM
<HTML>George & Peter,
Before heading out the door, there is one thing I want to know about the Fish carburetor. I had one many years ago, and it seems to me that there was a tapered groove in the bottom of the bowl where that vane sits. THAT altered the fuel flow rate, not the vacuum differential across the venturi.
If so, the only way to alter the flow rate was to move the throttle butterfly. It didn't work exactly like a common carburetor. You could change the relationship of the vane to the butterfly disk and thus alter the air/fuel ratio.
Or am I thinking about some other device?
A common carburetor alters the air fuel ratio as the flow rate increases automatically.
I do know with the Doble carburetors, both the E and the F, they work splendidly with gasoline and kerosene; but don't atomize #2 Diesel well at all. The fuel comes out in globs and streams.
Jim</HTML>
Before heading out the door, there is one thing I want to know about the Fish carburetor. I had one many years ago, and it seems to me that there was a tapered groove in the bottom of the bowl where that vane sits. THAT altered the fuel flow rate, not the vacuum differential across the venturi.
If so, the only way to alter the flow rate was to move the throttle butterfly. It didn't work exactly like a common carburetor. You could change the relationship of the vane to the butterfly disk and thus alter the air/fuel ratio.
Or am I thinking about some other device?
A common carburetor alters the air fuel ratio as the flow rate increases automatically.
I do know with the Doble carburetors, both the E and the F, they work splendidly with gasoline and kerosene; but don't atomize #2 Diesel well at all. The fuel comes out in globs and streams.
Jim</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR - FORGOTTEN
Posted by: George Nutz (IP Logged)
Date: May 02, 2003 02:21PM
<HTML>Jim,
Thanks for the info on the Doble carb, I believe it was true that it was started up on gasoline to get things hot and then switched over to kerosine when the firebox was warmed up. It would be rather smelly with kerosine when cold.
I believe you are correct in that the air/fuel ratio could be changed by varying the position of the throttle plate to the fuel pickup arm that slided along that tapered metering groove. However it did have a acceleration jet built in that would vary the ratio under higher velocity conditions. Indeed it is different than a regular carb in that it was not a "U" tube syphoning device but the float chamber sealed to atmospheric pressure and fuel pushed into the throttle shaft by the positive velocity pressure of the equalizing tube that was fed into the sealed float chamber---it was not sensitive to changes in fuel level sloshing around in the float chamber. Regular carbs are very sensitive to this changing fuel level. It would be nice to test one and really see how much better they were in reducing the fuel partical size. This was a very legitament carburator, not one of the many 100+mpg types hyped up in that period. I thing the Pogue was one of the unrealistic ones. The FISH worked and was on many race cars.
How big a throat diameter do you think required for a 10GPH fuel rate, or in your case a 20GPH fuel rate?
Thanks, George</HTML>
Thanks for the info on the Doble carb, I believe it was true that it was started up on gasoline to get things hot and then switched over to kerosine when the firebox was warmed up. It would be rather smelly with kerosine when cold.
I believe you are correct in that the air/fuel ratio could be changed by varying the position of the throttle plate to the fuel pickup arm that slided along that tapered metering groove. However it did have a acceleration jet built in that would vary the ratio under higher velocity conditions. Indeed it is different than a regular carb in that it was not a "U" tube syphoning device but the float chamber sealed to atmospheric pressure and fuel pushed into the throttle shaft by the positive velocity pressure of the equalizing tube that was fed into the sealed float chamber---it was not sensitive to changes in fuel level sloshing around in the float chamber. Regular carbs are very sensitive to this changing fuel level. It would be nice to test one and really see how much better they were in reducing the fuel partical size. This was a very legitament carburator, not one of the many 100+mpg types hyped up in that period. I thing the Pogue was one of the unrealistic ones. The FISH worked and was on many race cars.
How big a throat diameter do you think required for a 10GPH fuel rate, or in your case a 20GPH fuel rate?
Thanks, George</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR - FORGOTTEN
Posted by: Jim Crank (IP Logged)
Date: May 02, 2003 03:23PM
<HTML>George,
I have to get packed and out of here: but here goes.
Yes, the E and E Dobles used a small gasoline tank to get things going. The F didn't use one and no problem starting up on kerosene. Diesel, NO.
Right, the Fish uses sealed float chamber and does not depend on a U tube syphon to work.
Newer carbs may be sensitive to float chamber level; but once set, they stay there. Unless in a race car, then like the Corvette I raced a couple of times, would blubber coming out of a turn when you put your foot in it, black smoke.
The Fish idea was certainly based on solid ground; but it seems to me that one would have to use a blower pressure operated, spring biased, diaphram to open the throttle more as draft went up.
My thinking was a Holly racing carb that was designed for 750 cfm. I suppose the collective throat area was something like 3" for a four barrel, or one throat with a Hilborn BIG injector. They also make a 4" injector.
Jim</HTML>
I have to get packed and out of here: but here goes.
Yes, the E and E Dobles used a small gasoline tank to get things going. The F didn't use one and no problem starting up on kerosene. Diesel, NO.
Right, the Fish uses sealed float chamber and does not depend on a U tube syphon to work.
Newer carbs may be sensitive to float chamber level; but once set, they stay there. Unless in a race car, then like the Corvette I raced a couple of times, would blubber coming out of a turn when you put your foot in it, black smoke.
The Fish idea was certainly based on solid ground; but it seems to me that one would have to use a blower pressure operated, spring biased, diaphram to open the throttle more as draft went up.
My thinking was a Holly racing carb that was designed for 750 cfm. I suppose the collective throat area was something like 3" for a four barrel, or one throat with a Hilborn BIG injector. They also make a 4" injector.
Jim</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR - FORGOTTEN
Posted by: Caleb Ramsby (IP Logged)
Date: May 02, 2003 04:44PM
<HTML>Peter,
Thinking more about the pilot light, I agree with you they are not nescessary. I would be utilizing a Doble style exhaust turbine system to run the fuel pump and draft inducer. I think that a line coming from the boiler with a pressure regulator in line to the turbine would work to run the fire when the engine is not going. This assumes that the boiler is already at pressure, I would use an electric motor to run the burner system to startup from cold. To keep boiler pressure I could just have a pressure actuated switch that opens the line going to the exhaust turbine. Thus eliminating the need for a pilot light.
Using forced circulation and very high burner rates I think that for the "perpetuation" cycle the burner rate(via steam line) would be kept to the lowest possible.
Please feel free to use my exhaust/intake dampners idea for the boiler. It looks like spring loaded would work best in the forced air induction system, thanks for the idea. With them I think that heat loss from the boiler could be kept very low. I would also use a small steam seperator which would give me a larger than a flash type boiler energy storage.
The Fish,
So, let me get this straight. For use in a boiler the Fish would need to have a air flow sensor much like the mechanical sensor used in a mechanical fuel injection system?
I would be very interisted in finding out exactly how well the carburetor atomizes the fuel.
Caleb Ramsby</HTML>
Thinking more about the pilot light, I agree with you they are not nescessary. I would be utilizing a Doble style exhaust turbine system to run the fuel pump and draft inducer. I think that a line coming from the boiler with a pressure regulator in line to the turbine would work to run the fire when the engine is not going. This assumes that the boiler is already at pressure, I would use an electric motor to run the burner system to startup from cold. To keep boiler pressure I could just have a pressure actuated switch that opens the line going to the exhaust turbine. Thus eliminating the need for a pilot light.
Using forced circulation and very high burner rates I think that for the "perpetuation" cycle the burner rate(via steam line) would be kept to the lowest possible.
Please feel free to use my exhaust/intake dampners idea for the boiler. It looks like spring loaded would work best in the forced air induction system, thanks for the idea. With them I think that heat loss from the boiler could be kept very low. I would also use a small steam seperator which would give me a larger than a flash type boiler energy storage.
The Fish,
So, let me get this straight. For use in a boiler the Fish would need to have a air flow sensor much like the mechanical sensor used in a mechanical fuel injection system?
I would be very interisted in finding out exactly how well the carburetor atomizes the fuel.
Caleb Ramsby</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR BURNERS-THE FORGOTTEN FISH-
Posted by: George Nutz (IP Logged)
Date: May 25, 2003 01:36PM
<HTML> I made a sidedraft mockup of the FISH carb using an exhaust flamge adapter and 1/4" hobby tubing for the air pressure pickup and the throttle shaft with .030" diameter holes in it. My carburetor bowl was a sealed mason jar that could be raised up and down to regulate "fuel" level. Put a 150CFM 12VDC blower on the intake and it did draw the water thru the throat. The velocity head pressure was 2" water and the airfoil drop in pressure on the hollow throttle shaft another 2" for a total of 4" water pressure from the sealed fuel chamber to the carb venturi. Unfortunately the "fuel" flow was low and the droplet size bigger than expected---but a first try! The blower could be modulated with a PWM unit, thanks Peter Heid. Droplet size appeared smaller than a regular carburetor however and water has about the same absolute viscosity as kerosine. Particle size with gasoline would be smaller.
After about 10 minutes of testing shut it down and went over to my lathe that is 10-12 feet away---it was covered with small water droplets that I hadn't visibly seen! Didn't realize the 60mph air coming out of the carburetor would carry it that far, oh well another screwed up experiment. Gotta go and wipe down the lathe and all the tools.
George</HTML>
After about 10 minutes of testing shut it down and went over to my lathe that is 10-12 feet away---it was covered with small water droplets that I hadn't visibly seen! Didn't realize the 60mph air coming out of the carburetor would carry it that far, oh well another screwed up experiment. Gotta go and wipe down the lathe and all the tools.
George</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR BURNERS-THE FORGOTTEN FISH-
Posted by: Caleb Ramsby (IP Logged)
Date: May 26, 2003 10:55PM
<HTML>George,
Thanks for the update!
It sounds like you had a fun initial test. I hope the others go well.
What type of fuel pressure do you think the Fish needs to get the desired fuel atomization size?
Vaporizing Burners,
I was looking through Haslucks metal working book that I have from Lindsay's Publications and found an intruiging vaporizer design. It is for a small model boiler. I think that the same design scaled down and up would work great for a pilot and main burner design. I think that for the ignition of the pilot I am going to try using a small "mechanical atomizer"(basically a point in front of the fuel output, much like the mechanical lawn waterer) to make the fuel lightable with a heating element(from a home furnace).
The vaporizor burner consists of:
1. A bronze pipe cap
2. four pieces of 1/4" bronze tube about 4" long
3. one piece of bronze tube 1/4" o.d. that will just pass a No. 29 wire through, about 1" long, this could be a drilled plug
3. a bronze disk that will fit snugly into the bottem of the cap
Five holes are drilled into the top of the pipe cap, in a + pattern.
Two holes are drilled into the disk, that will corespond with two outer oposing holes in the cap.
Two tubes are cut to length that will go from the two holes in the disk, through the two coresponding holes in the cap and meet about 3" from the top of the cap. The disk is soldered into the bottem of the cap and the tubes to the disk and the top of the cap.
Then the other two tubes are placed so that they go through the top of the cap and barley into the space between the disk and top of the cap. They are cut to a length that will make them meet the tops of the other two tubes. These two tubes are soldered to the top of the cap.
Then all of the tubes are filed at their tips and bent until they are able to be soldered together at their tips and make a spear/football(american football that is) like shape. The centers of the tubes must be able to comunicate at their tips.
Then there is a short pipe about 1/2" to 1" long, that is soldered into the center hole that is drilled in the pipe cap.
Then this whole aparatus is screwed onto the fuel feed line.
Here is how it works:
1. The fuel goes into the two holes in disk
2. Then the fuel goes through the two tubes that are soldered in the holes and through the top of the cap to the union of all four tubes.
3. The fuel by this point is being heated to a vapor by the flame and goes back to the cap through the other two tubes
4. Once in the space between the disk and top of the cap the vapor goes out the small center tube and being sprayed on the point of the tip is ignited
Around this whole vaporizing unit is a pipe that directs the combustion air and flame size/patern.
The thing that I like instantly about this design is that it could simply be screwed off and on for any replacement or cleaning.
I will try and make a few different sizes and see what happens. I don't know how well this design will work with forced induction but I will just give it a shot and see what happens!
Caleb Ramsby</HTML>
Thanks for the update!
It sounds like you had a fun initial test. I hope the others go well.
What type of fuel pressure do you think the Fish needs to get the desired fuel atomization size?
Vaporizing Burners,
I was looking through Haslucks metal working book that I have from Lindsay's Publications and found an intruiging vaporizer design. It is for a small model boiler. I think that the same design scaled down and up would work great for a pilot and main burner design. I think that for the ignition of the pilot I am going to try using a small "mechanical atomizer"(basically a point in front of the fuel output, much like the mechanical lawn waterer) to make the fuel lightable with a heating element(from a home furnace).
The vaporizor burner consists of:
1. A bronze pipe cap
2. four pieces of 1/4" bronze tube about 4" long
3. one piece of bronze tube 1/4" o.d. that will just pass a No. 29 wire through, about 1" long, this could be a drilled plug
3. a bronze disk that will fit snugly into the bottem of the cap
Five holes are drilled into the top of the pipe cap, in a + pattern.
Two holes are drilled into the disk, that will corespond with two outer oposing holes in the cap.
Two tubes are cut to length that will go from the two holes in the disk, through the two coresponding holes in the cap and meet about 3" from the top of the cap. The disk is soldered into the bottem of the cap and the tubes to the disk and the top of the cap.
Then the other two tubes are placed so that they go through the top of the cap and barley into the space between the disk and top of the cap. They are cut to a length that will make them meet the tops of the other two tubes. These two tubes are soldered to the top of the cap.
Then all of the tubes are filed at their tips and bent until they are able to be soldered together at their tips and make a spear/football(american football that is) like shape. The centers of the tubes must be able to comunicate at their tips.
Then there is a short pipe about 1/2" to 1" long, that is soldered into the center hole that is drilled in the pipe cap.
Then this whole aparatus is screwed onto the fuel feed line.
Here is how it works:
1. The fuel goes into the two holes in disk
2. Then the fuel goes through the two tubes that are soldered in the holes and through the top of the cap to the union of all four tubes.
3. The fuel by this point is being heated to a vapor by the flame and goes back to the cap through the other two tubes
4. Once in the space between the disk and top of the cap the vapor goes out the small center tube and being sprayed on the point of the tip is ignited
Around this whole vaporizing unit is a pipe that directs the combustion air and flame size/patern.
The thing that I like instantly about this design is that it could simply be screwed off and on for any replacement or cleaning.
I will try and make a few different sizes and see what happens. I don't know how well this design will work with forced induction but I will just give it a shot and see what happens!
Caleb Ramsby</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR BURNERS-THE FORGOTTEN FISH-
Posted by: Caleb Ramsby (IP Logged)
Date: May 26, 2003 11:51PM
<HTML>Note: My last message contains a condensed version of the description of the burner from the Hasluck book. If you want a more finite descrition of any particular aspect, then just ask and I will try to inform you.
Keep your pilots light,
Caleb Ramsby</HTML>
Keep your pilots light,
Caleb Ramsby</HTML>
Fish Carburetor Burner -- Fishy Link
Posted by: Peter Brow (IP Logged)
Date: May 27, 2003 08:21AM
<HTML>Check out:
[minnowfish.co.uk]
for cutaway view of a Fish M-1 carburetor (prints out beautifully), plus lots of other info, history, reviews, and taken-apart photos of the things. If, like me, you knew practically nothing about Fish carbs before browsing around this website, you'll understand the basics afterward.
Minnow Fish claim to manufacture these carbs right now, so maybe one of their units can be adapted to steam car burner use -- but probably only for a smaller burner (maybe 8 gph?). One of their 3 models is a drop-in unit for 1500/1600 aircooled VWs, and I am sorely tempted to install one in my old Bug despite technical (need another vac fitting for my "Auto Stick" tranny) and (California) smog law problems.
The Fish is a good simple carb design, which sounds like an on-the-level performance/efficiency improvement for gas cars; too bad it didn't see mass production & widespread adoption before carburetors became obsolete. Maybe it has a future in steam car & other light steam powerplant burners?
Linking the Fish's butterfly/meter arm to a suction-side air butterfly on the burner air blower, with the fuel metering groove calibrated accordingly (or a proportioning cam between the carb & air-inlet butterflies), would probably do the trick. Link this to a steam-diaphragm control pressurestat, maybe via another proportioning cam, and you could have a continuously-variable firing rate perfectly calibrated to steam pressure. Add a preheat to the firebox lining, and no smog, smoke or fire quenching, even on start-up. The ingenious accelerator-pump feature could be omitted for this app..
Peter</HTML>
[minnowfish.co.uk]
for cutaway view of a Fish M-1 carburetor (prints out beautifully), plus lots of other info, history, reviews, and taken-apart photos of the things. If, like me, you knew practically nothing about Fish carbs before browsing around this website, you'll understand the basics afterward.
Minnow Fish claim to manufacture these carbs right now, so maybe one of their units can be adapted to steam car burner use -- but probably only for a smaller burner (maybe 8 gph?). One of their 3 models is a drop-in unit for 1500/1600 aircooled VWs, and I am sorely tempted to install one in my old Bug despite technical (need another vac fitting for my "Auto Stick" tranny) and (California) smog law problems.
The Fish is a good simple carb design, which sounds like an on-the-level performance/efficiency improvement for gas cars; too bad it didn't see mass production & widespread adoption before carburetors became obsolete. Maybe it has a future in steam car & other light steam powerplant burners?
Linking the Fish's butterfly/meter arm to a suction-side air butterfly on the burner air blower, with the fuel metering groove calibrated accordingly (or a proportioning cam between the carb & air-inlet butterflies), would probably do the trick. Link this to a steam-diaphragm control pressurestat, maybe via another proportioning cam, and you could have a continuously-variable firing rate perfectly calibrated to steam pressure. Add a preheat to the firebox lining, and no smog, smoke or fire quenching, even on start-up. The ingenious accelerator-pump feature could be omitted for this app..
Peter</HTML>
Re: Fish Carburetor Burner -- Fishy Link
Posted by: George Nutz (IP Logged)
Date: May 28, 2003 09:53PM
<HTML>Caleb & Peter,
Have been away a few days so enjoy cathcing up to all your ideas and thoughts.
There is no fuel pressure required for the FISH(except a very low pressure fuel pump to fill the sealed float chamber) and it may take 2" water column to achieve an efficient fuel flow thru the venturi. The FISH, to my knowledge never needed or had an accelerator pump, but there was an M1, M2, and M3 according to Mike Brown. I will get back to it and try on kerosine, it would be a safe time to do it as it has rained 80% of the time the last two weeks and would be hard to set fire to my woodlot. In a steamer no complex metering arm or rotating butterfly would be needed as the blower air pressure would/like the Doble carb/ provide for variable firing rate.</HTML>
Have been away a few days so enjoy cathcing up to all your ideas and thoughts.
There is no fuel pressure required for the FISH(except a very low pressure fuel pump to fill the sealed float chamber) and it may take 2" water column to achieve an efficient fuel flow thru the venturi. The FISH, to my knowledge never needed or had an accelerator pump, but there was an M1, M2, and M3 according to Mike Brown. I will get back to it and try on kerosine, it would be a safe time to do it as it has rained 80% of the time the last two weeks and would be hard to set fire to my woodlot. In a steamer no complex metering arm or rotating butterfly would be needed as the blower air pressure would/like the Doble carb/ provide for variable firing rate.</HTML>
Re: Fish Carburetor Burner -- Fishy Link
Posted by: Terry Williams (IP Logged)
Date: May 29, 2003 12:45AM
<HTML>No,, the Fish carb didn't have an accelerator pump. In the late 1950's, a friend and I raced a 41 Merc coupe with a modified 312 set back 14 inches. We used a Fish carb (was on it when we got it). After a while, we decided that a one barrel carb could not do what a 4 barrel carb could do so we replaced it with a Holley. Try as we might, we never got either the horsepower or the economy that we got with the Fish. Naturally we took the thing apart, hardly any parts at all inside. The butterfly was fat and the fuel entered it through the shaft. Interesting mechanism. tw</HTML>
Re: Fish Carburetor Burner -- Fishy Link
Posted by: Peter Brow (IP Logged)
Date: May 29, 2003 07:08AM
<HTML>Hi George and Terry,
There is no conventional accelerator pump per se on the Fish, but the metering arm in the float bowl does have an easily-overlooked and practically invisible detail which does the same job. What happens is that when you stomp the gas pedal, the arm swings along its calibrated fuel groove ("radial groove") rapidly. The "leading edge" of this arm ("fuel arm") has a aperture/passage ("pressure block port") that scoops fuel in and delivers it to the metering groove. This creates some extra pressure right at the point where the main fuel supply drilling in the arm communicates with the groove, so some extra fuel is delivered. According to the tech info at minnowfish.co.uk, this "scoop" feature also prevents vapor-lock/cavitation at the fuel pick-up port in the swinging arm.
The fuel arm swings in its own chamber separated from the float bowl by a plate with two holes. The holes admit fuel from the float bowl. One hole is open, and the other one, toward which the arm swings when the "accelerator pump" feature comes into play, has a non-return flap/feather valve which prevents the arm from pushing fuel out of the arm compartment during acceleration. That valve sort of holds the fuel in place while some of it is getting scooped up during pedal-punching/acceleration pumping, and may also prevent the float chamber fuel level from rising suddenly during "pedal punch".
Really an ingenious device, or "instrument", as one of the tech brochures at minnowfish describes it. Yes, it could be simplified for a steam car burner. If you took out the butterfly valve and the fuel metering arm, though, all you'd have is a sort of crossbar atomizer with a float bowl attached. Well, that might be all we need. But I wonder if that would give accurate enough fuel/air mix, without the metering/proportioning feature. Then again, these burners should run with excess air and a perfect fuel/air ratio is not as crucial as in an Otto engine -- as long as it doesn't burn rich & smokey! A decent mix ratio (little excess air) is probably needed for good lightoff, though.
Also, I think the turbulence downstream from the butterfly valve is part of the atomizing/mixing process. The drawing on the Minnowfish page notes that "vortex forms under throttle" (butterfly plate). Great drawing, well worth printing out for detailed study; it is marked "Fish M-1 Carburetor Daytona Beach, Florida", so these features are not later Minnowfish mods but original to the "instrument".
Is it just me, or is that calibrated groove darned reminiscent of the one in the White flowmotor?
Peter</HTML>
There is no conventional accelerator pump per se on the Fish, but the metering arm in the float bowl does have an easily-overlooked and practically invisible detail which does the same job. What happens is that when you stomp the gas pedal, the arm swings along its calibrated fuel groove ("radial groove") rapidly. The "leading edge" of this arm ("fuel arm") has a aperture/passage ("pressure block port") that scoops fuel in and delivers it to the metering groove. This creates some extra pressure right at the point where the main fuel supply drilling in the arm communicates with the groove, so some extra fuel is delivered. According to the tech info at minnowfish.co.uk, this "scoop" feature also prevents vapor-lock/cavitation at the fuel pick-up port in the swinging arm.
The fuel arm swings in its own chamber separated from the float bowl by a plate with two holes. The holes admit fuel from the float bowl. One hole is open, and the other one, toward which the arm swings when the "accelerator pump" feature comes into play, has a non-return flap/feather valve which prevents the arm from pushing fuel out of the arm compartment during acceleration. That valve sort of holds the fuel in place while some of it is getting scooped up during pedal-punching/acceleration pumping, and may also prevent the float chamber fuel level from rising suddenly during "pedal punch".
Really an ingenious device, or "instrument", as one of the tech brochures at minnowfish describes it. Yes, it could be simplified for a steam car burner. If you took out the butterfly valve and the fuel metering arm, though, all you'd have is a sort of crossbar atomizer with a float bowl attached. Well, that might be all we need. But I wonder if that would give accurate enough fuel/air mix, without the metering/proportioning feature. Then again, these burners should run with excess air and a perfect fuel/air ratio is not as crucial as in an Otto engine -- as long as it doesn't burn rich & smokey! A decent mix ratio (little excess air) is probably needed for good lightoff, though.
Also, I think the turbulence downstream from the butterfly valve is part of the atomizing/mixing process. The drawing on the Minnowfish page notes that "vortex forms under throttle" (butterfly plate). Great drawing, well worth printing out for detailed study; it is marked "Fish M-1 Carburetor Daytona Beach, Florida", so these features are not later Minnowfish mods but original to the "instrument".
Is it just me, or is that calibrated groove darned reminiscent of the one in the White flowmotor?
Peter</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR - FORGOTTEN
Posted by: Dennis Petersen (IP Logged)
Date: February 16, 2004 02:46AM
<HTML>Interesting comments concerning the Fish carburetor. Many years back, I tried one of Mike Brown's Fish carburetors and he guraranteed that the unit would improve mileage over an existing stock unit by 20%. Well, guess what? It exceeded my expectations, it did a 27% increase over an existing Holley factory 2-barrel. More low-end, high-end torque plus better mileage. I've got the bigger 500 cfm unit and need to try to find an older V8 engine car to use it on. There is a manufacturer overseas that is making these carburetors. I wouldn't be afraid to try one of the smaller units on a V6. One thing to remember concerning this carburetor, you need to know how to set it up. Mike has documention on how to set them up. They are tricky and it has to be done right!
Dennis</HTML>
Dennis</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR - FORGOTTEN
Posted by: Raymond Sorin (IP Logged)
Date: March 12, 2004 06:46PM
<HTML>Why aren't they making these anymore, if they're so efficient? I know many people who'd line up to buy them, and I'd be the first.
Raymond Sorin</HTML>
Raymond Sorin</HTML>
Re: Fish Carburetor Burner -- Fishy Link
Posted by: Skip Thomsen (IP Logged)
Date: May 28, 2004 02:24AM
<HTML>I've been scouring the Web for info on the M3 Fish and came across your posting. I can find precious little data on the Web on this unit; only the newer ones seem to be covered. Sounds like you are knowledgable on these units so I'm taking the liberty to butt in here:
I just found my old M3 in a box of other treasures from a time gone by. I would love to put it to use again, but I'd really like to get some performance data on it, like what size engine it would work best with, etc. Back some 35 yrs ago, I machined an adaptor and installed it on my 63 Corvette! I recall it worked great, right up until the RPMs peaked at about 3000. So there must be an ideal displacement that would work with this unit, right?
I'd like to buy a clean old car that would be well suited to the M3 and play with it again.
Any leads would be very much appreciated. I love the simple (but elegant) engineering of this little unit and I'd like very much to put it to use again! (Do I really need a project?)
Thanks for listening!
Skip Thomsen
Hilo, Hawaii</HTML>
I just found my old M3 in a box of other treasures from a time gone by. I would love to put it to use again, but I'd really like to get some performance data on it, like what size engine it would work best with, etc. Back some 35 yrs ago, I machined an adaptor and installed it on my 63 Corvette! I recall it worked great, right up until the RPMs peaked at about 3000. So there must be an ideal displacement that would work with this unit, right?
I'd like to buy a clean old car that would be well suited to the M3 and play with it again.
Any leads would be very much appreciated. I love the simple (but elegant) engineering of this little unit and I'd like very much to put it to use again! (Do I really need a project?)
Thanks for listening!
Skip Thomsen
Hilo, Hawaii</HTML>
Re: Fish Carburetor Burner -- Fishy Link
Posted by: Skip Thomsen (IP Logged)
Date: May 28, 2004 02:28AM
<HTML>One more thing . . . the minnowfish.com website seems to not be working. Is there a new address for them? I get "forbidden" messages when I try to go there.
Thanks!
Skip Thomsen</HTML>
Thanks!
Skip Thomsen</HTML>
Re: Fish Carburetor Burner -- Fishy Link
Posted by: Peter Brow (IP Logged)
Date: May 28, 2004 08:06AM
<HTML>Hi Skip,
I just got the same problem you did when trying to go back to the Minnowfish website. Looks like a dead link now. They had dozens of pages of excellent, very detailed information there, really "Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About The Fish Carburetor And Then Some", hope the website will be back up and running some day soon. That, and the posts here, were my only sources of information on the Fish carburetor. Back when this thread started, I spent many hours reading the articles at that website, now I wish I had downloaded or printed out the pages. I wonder if Minnowfish can be contacted by phone or snail mail, perhaps via some UK trade directory?
I hope the Minnowfish website's disappearance doesn't fuel more "suppressed technology" theories ... Minnowfish looks to have been a one-man operation, maybe he just retired or moved on to other projects, and shut down the website?
Peter</HTML>
I just got the same problem you did when trying to go back to the Minnowfish website. Looks like a dead link now. They had dozens of pages of excellent, very detailed information there, really "Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About The Fish Carburetor And Then Some", hope the website will be back up and running some day soon. That, and the posts here, were my only sources of information on the Fish carburetor. Back when this thread started, I spent many hours reading the articles at that website, now I wish I had downloaded or printed out the pages. I wonder if Minnowfish can be contacted by phone or snail mail, perhaps via some UK trade directory?
I hope the Minnowfish website's disappearance doesn't fuel more "suppressed technology" theories ... Minnowfish looks to have been a one-man operation, maybe he just retired or moved on to other projects, and shut down the website?
Peter</HTML>
Re: Fish Carburetor Burner -- Fishy Link
Posted by: Will Taylor (IP Logged)
Date: October 28, 2004 09:04PM
<HTML>I remember when they still made the fish carb back in the eighties. I almost bought one but didn't follow through. I just got an 86 suburban with a 350 I'd like to try a fish on. Anybody have one they don't want laying around?
thanks Will</HTML>
thanks Will</HTML>
Re: Fish Carburetor Burner -- Fishy Link
Posted by: leroy d smalley (IP Logged)
Date: December 09, 2004 01:19AM
<HTML>I am looking for a fish-brown carburator can you help
Roy</HTML>
Roy</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR BURNERS-THE FORGOTTEN FISH-
Posted by: William Lewis (IP Logged)
Date: December 24, 2004 11:37PM
<HTML>George!</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR BURNERS-THE FORGOTTEN FISH-
Posted by: William Lewis (IP Logged)
Date: December 24, 2004 11:40PM
<HTML>Its' Bill Lewis cvall me at 324-9111</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR BURNERS-THE FORGOTTEN FISH-
Posted by: Gary Merrill (IP Logged)
Date: April 13, 2005 05:51PM
<HTML> What I wonder is why when you turn to the left with any good speed the engine wants to stall, as if starved for furl.
I had a brown carburetor in a 1978 Cadilac or that seems to be the age i remember.
The engine came with a gudrajet on it and got about 6 miles to the gallon with the 500 CID engine. With the browh it got about 26 miles per gallon, not 200 MPG but five times better than the stock carburetor.
When tha car came up for the smog check it passed with very low readings. But the state of california would not let the car pass because the Brown was not approved.</HTML>
I had a brown carburetor in a 1978 Cadilac or that seems to be the age i remember.
The engine came with a gudrajet on it and got about 6 miles to the gallon with the 500 CID engine. With the browh it got about 26 miles per gallon, not 200 MPG but five times better than the stock carburetor.
When tha car came up for the smog check it passed with very low readings. But the state of california would not let the car pass because the Brown was not approved.</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR BURNERS-THE FORGOTTEN FISH-
Posted by: matt shean (IP Logged)
Date: September 16, 2005 02:01AM
<HTML>hello,
how would one go about purchasing a fish carburetor?</HTML>
how would one go about purchasing a fish carburetor?</HTML>
Re: Fish Carburetor Burner -- Fishy Link
Posted by: terry stuchlik (IP Logged)
Date: October 17, 2005 01:39PM
<HTML>Greetings, I have 2 NSU cars and I have used both of the British Fish downdrafts successfully on them. I know NOTHING about steam cars but I do know in a comparison test a 1 1/2" downdraft Fish produced only 2 horsepower less than either a Weber 40DCOE or similar Dellorto carb, on a Mini-Cooper type motor. Compared to the venturi size of the 2-barels that is impressive. Minnow is re-making them now-have address and phone in Scotland if anyone interested. Only 3 models being made-2 1 1/4 and a 1 1/2". The things tended to be pretty rich at part-throttle maybe contributing to emissions woes and hence no longer in major production? Again, there were 2 competing British companies in the 60s thru 80 selling slightly different Fishes! The Minnow vented the float chamber into the venturi, while the Reece directly above the float chamber. No rwal venturi on Reeces, a nice one on Minnows. Terry Stuchlik</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR BURNERS-THE FORGOTTEN FISH-
Posted by: terry stuchlik (IP Logged)
Date: October 17, 2005 05:13PM
<HTML>I'll bring in their address and phone tomorrow-NOT cheap! They might now be kaputt(explaining why website seems "gone"). I have a friend in England who can find some, tho, used, but probablly still good. That comparison test to which I referred-the Fish had 73 horsepower, the Weber and Dellorto 75.</HTML>
Re: Fish Carburetor Burner -- Fishy Link
Posted by: terry stuchlik (IP Logged)
Date: October 18, 2005 12:36PM
<HTML>The Minnow-Fish company address is Manse Brae, Lochgilphead, Argyll, Scotland, PA31 8RB, phone is complete, called from here-011 44 1546 602418. If no luck there try Dave Smithies in England=jai54@tiscali.co.uk. He can find some good used ones, more Reece than Minnow. If anyone wants more info on these let me know and I'll send a bit more info thru the mail. Terry Stuchlik</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR BURNERS-THE FORGOTTEN FISH-
Posted by: bob freymiller (IP Logged)
Date: November 08, 2005 01:36AM
<HTML>I have a couple of fish carburetors in use and a couple in the shop . also have book on tuning which is as valuable as carb. will sell one would like $500 with instructions.</HTML>
Re: CARBURETOR BURNERS-THE FORGOTTEN FISH-
Posted by: terry stuchlik (IP Logged)
Date: November 18, 2005 04:03PM
<HTML>Hi Bob, Are yours the US older versions, or the made in England Reece or Minnow versions?</HTML>
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.