Condensator - What Every Internal Combustion Engine Needs

In the late 1980's I came across a simple product called the Condensator. The inventor and manufacturer of the device claimed that when the product was installed on an internal combustion engine it would increase fuel milage, reduce harmful tailpipe emissions, decrease maintenance and extend the life of the engine. I was skeptical but after viewing the sales person's test data and testimonials I decided to buy one and give it a try.

My test vehicle was a 1989 Ford F150 pickup with a six cylinder engine that had about 30,000 miles on it. Before I installed the Condensator I first tuned up the vehicle and established it's baseline emissions and fuel consumption. After running the Condensator for a couple of weeks there was no doubt that it worked. Fuel milage increased by about 20% and tailpipe hydrocarbon emissions dropped in half. However, just to be sure I unhooked the device and ran it for another two weeks to see if the emissions and mileage went back to baseline - they did.

Tests on other vehicles showed an increase of fuel efficiency as high as 35% and a reduction in tailpipe emissions as high as 75%. The product was so simple yet had such such an amazing impact. The impact on newer cars was less but still impressive in most cases.

How it works
Internal combusion engines are imperfect and leak within from the high pressures and temperatures involved in a running engine. Oil, exhaust and unburned fuel is leaked past piston rings and valves into the crankcase where the rapidly spinning crankshaft mixes everything with the oil. A hot oily vapor builds up and is vented outside the engine. Up until the early 60's the blow-by gases were simply vented out of the engine and into the air. California Governor Jerry Brown obtained a patent on a device called the Positive Crankcase Ventilation Valve or PCV valve. He mandated its usage in California as a way to reduce smog and it started to become part of the standard design of car engines.

The PCV system balances the pressure inside the engine with the vacuum of the intake and routes the blow-by gases back into the engine's intake system. The problem with the PCV system is that basically force feeds an engine its own excrement. Blow-by gases do not burn well and inhibit combustion and reduce engine efficiency.

The Condensator works by condensing out the heavier non-combustable parts of the blow-by gases from the lighter combustible fuel. The result is more thorough combustion. Better combustion means less waste in the form of carbon, carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions. More energy is converted into motion instead of waste. This mean less carbon build-up in the engine - which keeps the oil cleaner longer.

Auto manufacturers eagerly embraced the PCV system because they knew that putting blow-by gases into the engine intake would reduce combustion efficiency and thereby increase fuel consumption and maintenance costs. Oil gets dirty faster, carbon builds up quicker, spark-plugs foul quicker, etc. This all means more money for car companies, parts manufacturers, mechanics and oil companies.

Once I saw for myself how well the Condensator worked I contacted the manufacturer and negotiated distribution rights for the US and other countries. The product had been around since the mid 70's but had never been marketed properly. I felt that with proper marketing the product could be successful and could reduce the amount of pollution produced by cars and reduce fuel consumption.

My method for marketing the device was to approach TV stations and show them the test data and offer to cover the cost for them to install one on their vehicles if they did an honest story on the outcome. Our test data included reports from the US Navy and School Districts. Several TV stations took me up on the offer and all them found that the device did indeed work as claimed and they all ran positive news stories. At the time of the news broadcast we ran TV ads. Mechanics sold the product and installed it. At the peak we were selling 1000 units a month in two markets. Every unit was sold with an unconditional lifetime money-back guarantee. If anyone wasn't happy with the product we would gladly give them their money back. Out of the thousands of units sold, only one person ever asked for their money back and it was a little old lady whose son had told her that she didn't need a Condensator.

We also marketed the product directly to cities. One city that responded favorably was Santiago, Chile. They had a horrible smog problem and in winter had to pull half the cars off the road to keep people from dropping dead from simply breathing the air. They invited me down to demsontrate the product. After the demonstrations the head of the Environment Protection Agency agreed to mandate the installation of the Condensator on every car in Santiago, provided that I paid one of his buddies a consulting fee of $5000 first. I told him that I didn't do business that way and that if they wanted to clean up their air they would have to do business honestly with me. He said that the 'fee' was required. I told him that they could continue to choke on their smog. I knew that the $5k was only the start and that once they established that I was willing to pay bribes they wouldn't stop with a mere $5k. We did line up a dealer in Santiago but he never bought any product.

There was one TV station that just ignored me and the Condensator for several months. It was the largest station in Denver and was owned by a major network. After other stations in Denver and Phoenix had run stories, the station's Environmental Reporter, Paul Day, called me and said that they wanted to test the device and do a story. Little did I realize at the time that it was a setup initiated by powers on high. I should has suspected something when they told me that they were only going to measure carbon monoxide. They made the silly claim that carbon monoxide "is the only harmful component of auto emissions". While carbon monoxide is harmful, its the hydrocarbons that play a major role in the formation of smog. Since I knew that the Condensator reduced carbon monoxide as well as hydrocarbons I wasn't worried about the test.

The test was conducted at an EPA approved 'National Emissions Test Lab' at the University of Colorado in Ft. Collins. They had an old junk truck they kept around just to run tests on. They got the engine warmed up and then ran the baseline. After installing the Condensator the carbon monoxide dropped by an impressive 24% - "impossible" the lab technician said. So, he unhooked the Condensator and then ran the test for a few more seconds. It takes several minutes for the emissions to travel down a tiny tube to the bank of sensors and for the computer to register changes. To properly evaulate any vehicle they normally run tests for hours to obtain enough data to establish statistical averages. By not actually testing the emissions after the Condensator was removed they could salvage the fraud, although for anyone that knows about emissions testing it was an obvious lie because the baseline would not change by 24% unless something very significant was going on.

Given that the whole test was a fraud by design, the positive results were ignored and data was falsified to show that the product didn't work. The next morning a news broadcast claimed that the Condensator did not work and that my company was under investigation from the State Attorney General's office. I got dozens of calls from concerned but supportive customers and dealers. Locals started calling the Condensator the Tuckervator because of what had happened to the Tucker car when the big three auto manufacturers decided to put Tucker out of business for simply making a vastly superior car.

I immediately called the State Attorney General's office and demanded to know why they were investigating my company since we had plenty of test data to backup all our claims, offered an unconditional lifetime money-back guarantee and had never had a single customer complaint. They claimed that there was no investigation and that they had never heard of my company or the product. The claim by the TV station that my company was under investigation was nothing more than a big lie.

A day after the broadcast of the bogus TV story I got a letter from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) threatening me with criminal and civil prosecution if I did not "cease and desist" from marketing the product because I did not have EPA test data to backup our claims. I had already looked into EPA 'testing' and found that out of all of the products they had 'evaluated' only two were acceptable. One was a glue-on spoiler to improve the aerodynamics of some cars and the other product switched off a car's airconditioner when going up hill. Other products which had been well founded and proven in a wide variety of independent laboratory testing were rejected by the EPA. It cost about $200,000 and took at least a year to have the EPA evaluate a product and their decision could not be appealed. EPA testing was certain death for any serious product. While there was no law that prevented me from making legitimate claims and the FTC didn't have a case it didn't mean that they couldn't simply bankrupt me through protracted legal costs or just arrest me on unfounded charges.

The bogus news report was transmitted by satellite and seen by people all over North America. With the threat of prosecution by the FTC and the slander by the TV station, my days selling the Condensator were over. The manufacturer wasn't willing to go up against the federal government or to even pay for more impecable test data. I didn't have the resources or stomach to fight the federal government on my own.

My next call and calls twice a day for the next two months went to the TV station's Environmental Reporter, Paul Day. After two months he finally returned my call and told me stop calling. I told him that I would stop calling him if he would answer one question - Why did he do it? He said "We got a call from GM and they said that they had tested the product and that it didn't work and that we should do a report on it letting people know that it didn't work. Our station is owned by the network and receives a lot of advertising revenue from GM. When they talk we listen."

A single powerful corporation had effectively stopped a product that could have saved countless lives and vast sums of money. While the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency (NOOA) estimates that air pollution causes 50,000 premature deaths and $150 billion in economic damage each year, the damage caused by the auto is incalculable. The conspiracy to keep making ineffecient cars is not only costing innocent lives due to preventable illness and destroying the environment, it has caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents from America's oil wars. I was proud to promote a product that could make a dent in such an unneccesary evil but was furious that I could be stopped so easily. Boycott GM forever! Buy an electric, hybrid or bio-fuel car from a non-American manufacturer.

The Condensator is still manufactured and can be purchased online from www.condensator.com. The current version is different than the one I sold in that it is made of plastic versus glass & cast aluminum and has a fresh air intake which will 'lean' the fuel air mixture.

Empower +
I didn't completely give up right away. I decided that I had too much time, energy, money and too much of my soul invested in making such a small but positive contribution to a better world. Selling the Condensator was no longer feasible but there was no reason that I couldn't develop a better product and avoid making any claims that could be challenged by the FTC. I called the new product the Empower +. It was designed to be mass produced for the auto market and I had another model for large diesel engines. Even though there were 14 other patented products that addressed engine blow-by, my product was patentable as an "un-burned fuel recovery system", however I decided to not pursue a patent. There were already too many patents in the public domain that products could be manufactured under and I wanted the product to be manufactured and sold as widely as possible.

I built several prototypes and conducted testing not so much on fuel milage and emissions but on horsepower. The EPA doesn't claim dominion over claims regarding horsepower. Horesepower output is a direct measure of the conversion of fuel to energy. If a device increases combustion efficiency it will be demonstrated by dynamometer tests of horsepower. Click on the images at the left to view some test reports.

Three local trucking companies were willing to let me test the Empower + on their trucks. Anything that would decrease their fuel costs was of interest to them. Tests were conducted at a local Cummins Diesel Engine Dealer and included all engine and environmental variables. Engine temperature, fuel pressure, intake manifold pressure, blow-by pressure, and RPM were monitored. In every case, the Empower + showed a significant and immediate increase in horsepower. Average horsepower increase was 4% with a maximum increase of nearly 8%. One test showed an increase of 19% at high RPMs but was discounted as dynamometer operator error. All tests were done by certified mechanics. All of the mechanics were flabbergasted and had trouble believing that something so simple could be so effective.

In order to sell the Empower + in California I had to have the product evaluated by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and exempted from the ban on after-market products that might affect a vehicles emissions. It took the CARB a few months to review my test data and determine that the Empower + would not increase emissions. They were not really interested in whether or not the product worked, as long as it didn't increase emissions.

I also sought assistance from the Coalition for Clean Air, a non-profit organization that claimed to be dedicated to cleaning up the air in the Los Angeles basin. However, I found them to be interested only in generating publicity for themselves and raising money. The didn't seem to really care about cleaning up the air. However, one of their staff was kind enough to test the product at my expense and accurately report the results.

I had a booth at the 1991 Los Angeles Eco-Expo, sold a few units and got the interest of a guy named Dino that claimed that he could get me the $50,000 I needed to go into mass production. However, after spending several months in LA I found that while he did indeed have the connections to raise the money he didn't want to actually accept any money until he had control of the product. Eventually I ran out of time, money and patience. I transferred the whole thing to a friend of Dino's who promised to pay me $12k for it. Dino's friend never paid me for the business and didn't do anything with the Empower +.

Even though such a device can make a significant difference, no device similar to the Condensator or Empower + has had any measure of success. After more than twenty years after I gave up on trying to introduce a product to increase the effeciency of cars the PCV system remains virtually unchanged and internal combustion engines are only a little more efficient. Perhaps we are meant to kill the planet by burning fossil fuels in ineffecient vehicles. As an individual you have a choice and can make your own vehicle more effecient.

2013 Update - I still have a Condensator on my 2000 Dodge Ram pickup which now has close to 200,000 miles on it. The engine does not burn any oil, after 10,000 miles the oil does not turn black and the spark plugs do not foul after 25,000 miles. Engine compression is almost the same as when the engine was new. I have had to rebuild every other part of the drive-train but the engine remains in good condition.

Automotive model of the Empower + which could be mass-produced by injection molding

You can build your own 'blow-by condensing system'. Following are copies of some of patent drawings of some other devices.

Patent Number 4,627,406
Patent Number 5,024,203
Patent Number 4,136,650
Patent Number 4,409,950