David Lindahl : The Webster-Heise Valve
A Significant Improvement in the Internal Combustion Engine and its Fuels?
Congressional Research Service Report 820176 ENR
Appendix Two
Summary of Tests
[ Test 1 / Test 2 : Pages missing in my copy ]
Test 3
Place: Environmental Testing Corp (Aurora, CO)
Date: August 15-26, 1980
Equipment: WH test car was a 1979 Monte Carlo with a 6-cylinder
250 cu in engine with a compression ration of 8.06:1. The
baseline was provided by the same car without the device. No EGR
or catalytic converter was used on either car.
Test: 50 mpg steady-state test
Test: EPA cold-start city test
Result:
With 75 octane fuel (WH) the ping point was 2 degrees after TDC. With 97-octane (baseline) it was 8 degrees before TDC, confirming test vehicle variation for ping.
Figure 14 ~ 50 MPH Steady-State Test (Baseline)
Source: Environmental Testing Corp.
Figure 15 ~ 50 MPH Steady-State Test (With Webster-Heise
Valve)
Source: Environmental Testing Corp.
Test 4
Place: Environmental Testing Corp (Aurora, CO)
Date: October 14-15, 1980
Equipment: Same as Test 3. Timing was set at 13 degrees initial
advance
Test: EPA Highway test
Witnessed by representatives of GM< Ford, Chrysler, Sohio, Chevron, Cities Service, marathon, Texaco, Amoco, Gulf, ARCO, Gulf Science and Technology CO., Phillips, Heningson Durham and Richardson, PACE CO, and the Swedish Embassy.
Results:
Test 5
Place: Ford Motor Co., Engine Dynamometer Lab, Dearborn, MI
Date: January 26,1981
Equipment: 2.4 liter 4 cylinder production Ford engine run on 78
RON (74 R/M+2) fuel with a compression ratio of 8:1, with and
without WHV.
Test: Torque, fuel economy, and spark advance (octane
requirements) tests were conducted at 8 inches of manifold
vacuum and at wide-open throttle on an engine dynamometer.
Results:
Figure 16 ~ Torque Comparison Test (Webster-Heise Valve
versus Ford Production System)
Source: Ford Motor Co.
Figure 17 ~ Fuel Consumption During Torque Test
(Webster-Heise Valve versus Ford Production System)
Source: Ford Motor Co.
Figure 18 ~ Engine Performance Comparison
Test 6
Place: Environmental Testing Corp (Aurora, CO)
Date: July 10-12, 1982
Equipment: 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme, 231 cu in 3.8
liter V-6,8:1 compression ratio. Note: The 3-way converter was
recalled by GM during the test.
Test: Torque tests were conducted at steady-state wide-open
throttle. EPA highway economy tests were conducted with 10.3 hp
road load. All tests were conducted with standard manifold heat
and all pollution equipment was operational. The manifold was
not cooled on the WH modification and the electronic carburetion
and closed loop calibration was not altered.
Results:
Highway Economy Test-Bag
(Measured after catalytic conversion. Note: The 3-way converter
was in recall at the time of the test. The baseline testing was
done first and may have contaminated the converter prior to the
Webster-Heise test. The HC reading in particular may have been
affected as indicated by the low engine-out reading for HC
during the same test in the table above)
Figure 19 ~ Torque Test at Wide-Open Throttle
(Baseline w/o valve, 97 octane)
Figure 20 ~ Torque Test at Wide-Open Throttle
(Baseline w/o Valve, 75 octane)
Figure 21 ~ torque Test at Wide-Open Throttle
(With Webster-Heise Valve, 75 octane)
Figure 22 ~ Letter to David Lindahl
Informal Tests and Observations by the Webster-Heise Corporation ~
During the development of the WHV, numerous in-house tests (totaling over 100,000 miles) were conducted. Several test cars (including a Chevrolet Monte Carlo, Chevrolet Monza, and an Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme) were used which, in addition to the data obtained in the formal tests, provided some information about the use of the valve. The disassembly of the Monte Carlo engine after 80,000 miles of testing also provides some interesting insight into the workings of this device. These observations were made by the Webster-Heise Corporation and are included here as an unverified supplement to the formal test data:
Fuel economy in road tests increased by 15 to 25%.
Driveability was improved with considerably more response at low rpm and a lighter throttle was required.
Cold starts were greatly improved with the valve. The modified car would start cold with no choke and would sustain combustion. The same car, unmodified, would not start without choking and stalled at least once with it.
No engine deposits were detected when the engine was disassembled after 80,000 miles (including many miles at high temperatures on dynometers). Cylinder wear was only 0.0025 inch instead of the expected 0.0100 to 0.0150 inch that would normally be expected. Crankshaft wear was not apparent.
No lubricant oil was consumed except for extended-interval oil changes. No discoloration or contamination of the oil was detected.
Coolant water temperature was lower than normal. One third of the radiator was covered to bring the engine temperature to the desired level of 195° F.