For street-driven engines that address both emissions and fuel economy (fewer grams/mile based on a reduction in net engine airflow), this was a plus. In a racing engine where we'd like to increase the oxygen content of inlet air (cooler is better) in combination with improved fuel atomization, we need to explore other means. Especially for engines not fitted with fuel injectors that inherently improve atomization beyond that of carburetors, seeking ways to mechanically break down liquid fuel is an option . . . which brings us right back to our previous discussion about wet-flow surfaces, increased carburetor efficiency, proper airflow quality, and improved means to reduce or eliminate air/fuel separation, both in the inlet track and combustion space.
Ideally, we'd like to combine the benefits of good air/fuel homogeneity and "generated" turbulence. In particular, the latter condition tends to accelerate the combustion process which, if accomplished in a controlled fashion, can enable a reduction in initial spark ignition timing and a corresponding increase in net torque at the flywheel. This concept has also been discussed in one of our previous CT offerings.
In addition, there have been fuel conditioning systems that employ ultra-sonic wave activity; an example provided by the use of piezoelectric discs through which pre-combustion liquid fuel was passed to mechanically produce ultra-small droplets. Such technology has not proven successful for racing applications but could possibly be adapted through further research and refinement. The results I've seen from such experiments were dramatic to the extent power was sustainable from air/fuel mixture ratios much leaner than typical of conventional atomization methods (e.g., fuel injection, carburetion, and so on). All this is simply validation of the fact improved fuel atomization can lead to faster combustion, reduced spark timing, and increased power. Obviously, from the practical perspective of a racer, that's a goal.