CW wrote:
You want something in print, you'll have to dig it up yourself. About a year
ago, there was an interview, on a radio talk show, with the maker of the
carburetor that had so much BS behind it. It was not represented as a "100
hundred mile per gallon" conversion. It wouldn't really improve anything on
a standard passenger car. It was intended for the RV market, where engines
were under a heavy load. The difference was the spraybar. It forced
atomization instead of relying on airflow as in a regular carb. This
improved combustion efficiency. The improvement was not earth shattering but
was there. The host of the show had heard all of these wild claims that were
going around and, wanting to get the real story, tracked this guy down. The
conspiracy theorists said that the oil companies bought this guy out, had
him killed, ect. Not at all true. The reason that he ceased production was
due to the advent of fuel injection. It was more efficient than any
carburetor.



" I was quite ready to discuss the myths and realities of this (the
realities
you are obviously unaware of) but you immidiatly took your prick stance. In
that case, go **** yourself."

What does the above radios show citation have to do with the Fish
carburetor? If you're going to make claims, you'll have to provide proof
yourself. Why should I have to do it for you?

Bob