Water 4 Gas

[fishbob]

To answer your questions:

"Yes."

He has installed 6 devices on different cars and trucks, and with each one, witnessed increased horsepower and milage.

That said, no "Dyno" was used, simply because such a machine is unavailable.

He wired it into the engine's fuel pump electricity source, so that the more the fuel pump worked, the more the power the unit received.

On one truck the MPG went from 7 to 13.

You can not 'witness' an milage. You have to measure fuel consumption and distance traveled over several tanks of fuel, maybe a thousand miles. Milage based on a single tank of gas could give you highly erroneous results.

Also, any pickup truck should get at least 13 mpg when driven reasonbly. Any pickup truck getting only 7 mpg has something seriously wrong - either mechanically or with the way it is driven. Put the new gizmo in, stop driving like a moron, and presto - 13 mpg.

 

[Cuddles]

Yes but Cudles, you are basing your calculations on full throttle horsepower. Do them again, only this time use the 15 hp that is all that is used in light cruise.

That's why air conditioning use is so bad on mileage. They suck only 3-4 horsepower, but that is 20% of the cruising out put.

Fair point. In that case I still make lights only 2% of the power. Is that really significant? In normal driving conditions I'd expect to see a lot more variation than anyway.

That's wrong. The math is dam annoying but I'm certain that straight power conversion is not correct. It tends to screw up where you are operating on the torque-rpm curve which then in turn affects efficiency. It's the exact antithesis of the reason why GreyICE described hybrids as being so efficient. Ahhhh... Yes. IEEE. The bastion of electrifying information. Lopping off 100 watts of power is the same exact fuel savings as loping of 110 pounds of a car. So yeah... 100 watts is a lot of waste.
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/print/1420

110 pounds? That's less than a person. I don't follow my mileage very closely, but I can easily have four big people in my car and not notice any difference at all. A quick scan of that site says that 200W will waste about 1mpg, which is close enough to the 2% above. It's clearly measurable under test conditions, but a lot of waste? I doubt most people would even notice that. For example, I get between 4-500 miles out of a 10 (ish) gallon tank. There's no way I'd notice a 10 mile difference.

Getting back to the original question, whether this makes a significant difference to your mileage or not, is there any chance someone could actually notice the difference just by listening to the engine? My car's not in the best condition and varies by up to a few hundred rpm while idle. Would even a brand new car be stable enough that you'd notice the difference from a 200W load?

 

[roger]

I heard the engine run without the device, and then when it was activiated.

It ran more smoothly...

Then after a full tank of gas was used, the guy 'claimed' he got 6 mpg more.

What 'I' heard was a 'noticibly' smoother running engine.

What you heard was a car running under a load, which will be more smooth than an idle if the idle is not well adjusted.

Oh, and you also heard an unverified anecdote.

 

[Freethinker]

Would even a brand new car be stable enough that you'd notice the difference from a 200W load?

You can certainly hear the difference in both the engine and the alternator when the lights are turned on, particularly as the computer adjusts the idle to compensate. Another thing to keep in mind is that the alternator is not very efficient. IIRC less than 60%, which needs to be taken into account when considering the effect on fuel efficiency. I can't remember whether that takes the belt and pulley into consideration or not.

 

[XYNG]

But that is no where even close to the painting being portrayed here.
Water will not in any way help the combustion, has the waste is not on the unburned fuel, but the necessary heat you need to give away in order for the engine to work in the first place.

OK I have a Invention that will BEAT all those Hydrogen Generator cars, it is called the AIR Car, already in Production and can get as much as 2,000 Miles on just one Full Tank full of Air Pressure with very little Gas. Impossible you experts say, look again and think what Ford or GM can do to help the U.S. Ecomonony if they can get the Patent ot re-sale in the US of the following AIR Car. any thoughts, by all means lets hear them:
GM Buy this Air Car, 2,000 miles, on one tank will put GM on the Map. IMO 16 minutes ago
GM Buy the Patent for the following Car that Runs on Air, YES I said Air Pressure.
You can get 2,000 miles on just one tank of gas with Air Pressure.
Buy it before Ford buys it out. IMO

View this Video for yourself, then you will beleive it works.

 

[XYNG]

OK I have a Invention that will BEAT all those Hydrogen Generator cars, it is called the AIR Car, already in Production and can get as much as 2,000 Miles on just one Full Tank full of Air Pressure with very little Gas. Impossible you experts say, look again and think what Ford or GM can do to help the U.S. Ecomonony if they can get the Patent ot re-sale in the US of the following AIR Car. any thoughts, by all means lets hear them:
GM Buy this Air Car, 2,000 miles, on one tank will put GM on the Map. IMO 16 minutes ago
GM Buy the Patent for the following Car that Runs on Air, YES I said Air Pressure.
You can get 2,000 miles on just one tank of gas with Air Pressure.
Buy it before Ford buys it out. IMO

View this Video for yourself, then you will beleive it works.

But that is no where even close to the painting being portrayed here.
Water will not in any way help the combustion, has the waste is not on the unburned fuel, but the necessary heat you need to give away in order for the engine to work in the first place.
OK I have a Invention that will BEAT all those Hydrogen Generator cars, it is called the AIR Car, already in Production and can get as much as 2,000 Miles on just one Full Tank full of Air Pressure with very little Gas. Impossible you experts say, look again and think what Ford or GM can do to help the U.S. Ecomonony if they can get the Patent ot re-sale in the US of the following AIR Car. any thoughts, by all means lets hear them:
GM Buy this Air Car, 2,000 miles, on one tank will put GM on the Map. IMO 16 minutes ago
GM Buy the Patent for the following Car that Runs on Air, YES I said Air Pressure.
You can get 2,000 miles on just one tank of gas with Air Pressure.
Buy it before Ford buys it out. IMO

View this Video for yourself, then you will beleive it works.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fm8RCww3cUY&feature=related:)

 

[Freethinker]

any thoughts, by all means lets hear them:

The membership agreement prohibits my doing so.

 

[King of the Americas]

Alrighty...

I am now prepared to conceed to EVERY point made against me and this "HHO" device.

I managed to get exactly what I came here for. Thank you, everyone.

I spoke at length with my friend about the Laws of Thermodynamics, and how the car IS using HP by having to power the device that is producing this Hydrogen. He is still not convienced and he's preparing to take his truck to a lab with a dyno, to verify 'his' findings.

That said, I also spoke with him about powering said device NOT with the engine, but with a seperate source, perhaps a solar panel. So, that you could be collecting and store small amounts of energy throughout the day, to power the device when it comes time to do the actual driving.

If you lived in a windy area, maybe you could use a small wind turbine (that collapses as to not cause any undo wind resistance) to do the job?

But I can't help but wonder if you couldn't get exactly the same gain, by just running your car off of the panel itself...


Wire the panel directly into your car's electrical system, so that instead of using the alternator to power your radio or the A/C, you'd be using the panel...?

What kind of gain, 'could' you accomplish with such an application?

Just cut the "HHO" system completely out of the loop.

---

How would one go about analyzing how much hydrogen one of these devices actually uses?

 

[dudalb]

When researching this for an article, I was surprised and amused about how the same snake oil devices come up every time there's a spike in gas prices. They've been around for decades.

Doesn't anyone ask themselves why Toyota and GM don't just add these to their cars, and save them a few billion dollars in R&D?

I think these scams first got real traction in 1973, in the Oil Crisis caused by the 1973 Arab Israeli dust up. And every time there has been a drastic spike in Oil Prices, they come back like clockwork. The only question I had this round was when they would come back.

 

[quarky]

That's exactly the thing I was wondering about after I'd read half of this thread and decided to step outside for a smoke..

With my old, skanky van, I could heat the the gas sucking V8 "rev down" when I turned on the lights, but with my newer. less skanky van I haven't noticed that effect.

I got to wondering whether turning on the lights didn't increase demand on the alternator ( and therefore didn't increase resistance and power demand on the motor ) or whether the computer system just compensated for the increased power demand and upped the fuel consumption a little.

I got to thinking that this might just be a plausible idea, assuming of course that the demand and resistance on the alternator *might* just be constant on my newer vehicle and started wondering whether I could tap into this "wasted" power.

Then I got to wondering, just how much power is output by that alternator, and would it even have an impact on my mileage at all. I mean, what sort of percentage energy output is generated by my alternator when held up to the power generated by my engine ? Is it even significant in the grand scheme of things ?

Quarky...that idea of running electrolysis-derived hydrogen through the motor....that's Stan Meyers isn't it ?

I hadn't heard of anyone suggesting such a thing; I simply came up with it as a bad example. I hope someone isn't trying it or selling it.

Solar panels would add very little, considering the cost. What would help is light weight vehicles on low friction tires, with aerodynamic shapes.

Thermodynamics is always a rascal in these efforts.
Here's an idea I had to increase fuel efficiency in a car:

Being as most of the inefficiency is in waste heat, cars would come with a system to store that heat. It would be used later to heat a room.
This would cut the fuel bill, overall, but is full of trouble, even though it is sound thinking.

The problems would be the mass to hold the heat, and its effect on fuel consumption; the need for more heat in the winter, which is when you'd want some of it in the car, too; the fact that during warm times, you don't really need more heat; the difficulty in venting the heat from the car to the room, etc.

Its almost always like that.
Rascally thermodynamics.

 

[dudalb]

OK I have a Invention that will BEAT all those Hydrogen Generator cars, it is called the AIR Car, already in Production and can get as much as 2,000 Miles on just one Full Tank full of Air Pressure with very little Gas. Impossible you experts say, look again and think what Ford or GM can do to help the U.S. Ecomonony if they can get the Patent ot re-sale in the US of the following AIR Car. any thoughts, by all means lets hear them:
GM Buy this Air Car, 2,000 miles, on one tank will put GM on the Map. IMO 16 minutes ago
GM Buy the Patent for the following Car that Runs on Air, YES I said Air Pressure.
You can get 2,000 miles on just one tank of gas with Air Pressure.
Buy it before Ford buys it out. IMO

View this Video for yourself, then you will beleive it works.

If this guy is not pulling our leg, then he is headed for a close relationship with the Fraud Division of his local police department.

 

[roger]

Alrighty...

I am now prepared to conceed to EVERY point made against me and this "HHO" device.

Great!

On the solar panel idea, see what the rating is for the panel you are looking at. You don't get much energy at all from a small panel. It'll take a long time to even break even, and I'm disregarding whatever air drag it will inevitably introduce.

As for splitting water, it's very inefficient - the bonds are strong, and breaking the bonds takes a lot of energy that you don't recover (I suppose a bit of heat, but you can't efficiently translate that into vehicle motion). You'd definitely be better off using the panel to help supply the electrical needs of the vehicle, reducing the load on the engine.

I am nottrying to be rude, but auto companies, university's, etc., have spent billionsresearching making cars and fuels more efficient. What do you think are the chances of you running to radio shack, buying a solar panel or such, and succeed where they have failed? Honestly? Not to mention the tens of thousands of amateurs trying to beat "big oil" or whatever.

 

[GreyICE]

There are a number of ways that you can improve your car's gas milage significantly without spending money on expensive devices that do nothing though.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/FEG/driveHabits.shtml

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/FEG/maintain.shtml

All of these will give you real, measurable savings, and the best part is the cost is minimal.

 

[TMiguel]

OK I have a Invention that will BEAT all those Hydrogen Generator cars, it is called the AIR Car, already in Production and can get as much as 2,000 Miles on just one Full Tank full of Air Pressure with very little Gas. Impossible you experts say, look again and think what Ford or GM can do to help the U.S. Ecomonony if they can get the Patent ot re-sale in the US of the following AIR Car. any thoughts, by all means lets hear them:
GM Buy this Air Car, 2,000 miles, on one tank will put GM on the Map. IMO 16 minutes ago
GM Buy the Patent for the following Car that Runs on Air, YES I said Air Pressure.
You can get 2,000 miles on just one tank of gas with Air Pressure.
Buy it before Ford buys it out. IMO

View this Video for yourself, then you will beleive it works.

Compressed Air works, (it suxs allot on storing) but it can work. There is only one problem tough. How do you compress the air into the bottles again? Ah yes, you need another engine that burns fuel to do it (not exactly 100% environmentally friendly has they seem to claim), but none of the less if done in the right way can reduce the consumption and increase the efficient by having “pump” + “pressure car” then to have “combustion engine imbedded in car”. It requires good engineering to make one best then the other.

 

[my_wan]

Without checking what already posted too closely I came up with this in a short time;

I was reading their glossary and came across this;

EFIE: Electronic Fuel Injection Enhancer, a device to correct the stoichiometric (see def.) level programmed into a car in order to accommodate waterfuel technology. Manufactured exclusively by Eagle Research (www.Eagle-Research.com)

So they are installing a device to change the fuel/air mixture independent of any other fuel being injected. As a matter of fact look at their definition of "stoichiometric";

Stoichiometric: Describing a (fuel/air) mixture of “proper” proportions. According to automotive conventional wisdom it should be 14.7:1 but in actual fact these are arbitrary numbers. A car can drive just as nicely on 25:1. In fact if you were to design it in a slightly different way, its so-called “Stoichiometric” balance would now be 25:1 (for example).

This is illegal in most states and illegal for a mechanic to do for you under federal law. No wonder he specifically advises you not to go to the experts.

This alone explains the idle you heard without even installing the actual injection device. Now if you want to read some REALLY hokey stuff go to that website in the first quote. Here it states;
http://www.eagle-research.com/browngas/whatisbg/whatis.html

Normal electrolyzers encourage the hydrogen and oxygen to drop to their di-atomic state. Di-atomic means the hydrogen formed H2 and the oxygen formed O2. The di-atomic state is a lower energy state, the energy difference shows up as heat in the electrolyzer. This energy is now unavailable to the flame.

WHAT IF a significant number of these H and O atoms did not reform into di-atomic molecules? We start by adding 442.4 Kcal per mole to split water using electrolysis. This is an endothermic (energy absorbing) action. But if we have no, or little, 're-bonding' into di-atomic molecules, then our electrolyzer wouldn't heat up, because there would be no exothermic reaction that would cause excess heat, beyond the agitation of the fluid by the bubbles. This 'lack of heat' in the electrolyzer is what I noted in my experiments that actually produced Brown's Gas.

So this guy claims he has a bottle of monatomic oxygen and hydrogen!!!

Here's what consumer affairs had to say;
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2008/07/water4gas.html

Consumer affairs mentioned something I noticed. The range of sites purporting to be independent reviews is a tactic where consumer affairs tracked the source of the advice for sellers to do just that. The see info for their affiliate program go here.
http://easywatercar.com/kayakosuppo...ebase&_a=view&parentcategoryid=8&pcid=0&nav=0

Consumer affairs also figured out who this Ozzie Freedom behind this is. He is behind a number of other ventures.
Magnet4cash.com which now redirects to water4gas.com which is a clone of easywatercar.com. You can see the original Magnet4cash.com site here;
http://web.archive.org/web/20061109042604/http://www.magnet4cash.com/
Also the inventor of "Spongebee";
http://www.magnet4cash.com/spongebee.com/index.htm
Also the founder of "Sane Computers";
http://www.sanecomputers.com/
Also has an award "Sponsor For Total Freedom" by the International Association of Scientologists.

It's fitting that the first words on his Magnet4cash.com site was a Zig Ziglar quote: "Money isn't everything, but it ranks right up there with Oxygen."

If you haven't ducked and ran yet I can't help you....

 

[TMiguel]

Alrighty...

I am now prepared to conceed to EVERY point made against me and this "HHO" device.

I managed to get exactly what I came here for. Thank you, everyone.

I spoke at length with my friend about the Laws of Thermodynamics, and how the car IS using HP by having to power the device that is producing this Hydrogen. He is still not convienced and he's preparing to take his truck to a lab with a dyno, to verify 'his' findings.

That said, I also spoke with him about powering said device NOT with the engine, but with a seperate source, perhaps a solar panel. So, that you could be collecting and store small amounts of energy throughout the day, to power the device when it comes time to do the actual driving.

Solar panel can be used to recharge a battery. The common use for electric power on mobility application generally involves an electric engines (has they are more efficient then fuel engines), although it may not be always efficient or applicable to have electrical engines (with or without the fuel engines has well). You have to deal whit issues of autonomy, and if what you can get from the electrical engine compensates for the extra work required to carry his weight. It may not be practicable to use it for instance in a large truck, although it can be a completely different story in the future.

If you lived in a windy area, maybe you could use a small wind turbine (that collapses as to not cause any undo wind resistance) to do the job?

You can store energy is several ways, you could use a wind generator to recharge a battery to use it latter. Although I do not advise you to use it on your moving car, because it creates drag and may not compensate to have it.

But I can't help but wonder if you couldn't get exactly the same gain, by just running your car off of the panel itself...

This is a tricky issue, electric engines are by far more efficient the fuel engines, and if you charge directly a battery instead of converting it chemical energy, preventing you from wasting energy on the apparatus to produce the gas.
Current batteries doesn’t store all that much (and forces to carry permanent weight), and they do deplete over time (long time, don’t freak out).
Chemical energy allows to store more (and the weigh is reduce by the rate you consume it), but they bring issues on its own. You will need a good quality sealed container in order to prevent the gas from leaking away to fast, and on production you must guarantee that O2 doesn’t get in to the container or your car might spontaneously explode for apparently no reason (apparently, a shortage or any other source of heat might trigger a reaction, and accidents do happen).

Wire the panel directly into your car's electrical system, so that instead of using the alternator to power your radio or the A/C, you'd be using the panel...?

I wouldn’t advise to wire it directly to devices, because it may not give you the right voltage. A correcting circuit is important.
(A/C? I don’t know if cars use any A/C, unless it’s Air Conditioner and not Alternated Current.)

What kind of gain, 'could' you accomplish with such an application?

For what I know, probably not much.

How would one go about analyzing how much hydrogen one of these devices actually uses?

You must make a balance of the input versus output, you must be some one understood on the subject to be able to perform the job corretly.

 

[technoextreme]

Fair point. In that case I still make lights only 2% of the power. Is that really significant? In normal driving conditions I'd expect to see a lot more variation than anyway.



110 pounds? That's less than a person. I don't follow my mileage very closely, but I can easily have four big people in my car and not notice any difference at all. A quick scan of that site says that 200W will waste about 1mpg, which is close enough to the 2% above. It's clearly measurable under test conditions, but a lot of waste? I doubt most people would even notice that. For example, I get between 4-500 miles out of a 10 (ish) gallon tank. There's no way I'd notice a 10 mile difference.

Getting back to the original question, whether this makes a significant difference to your mileage or not, is there any chance someone could actually notice the difference just by listening to the engine? My car's not in the best condition and varies by up to a few hundred rpm while idle. Would even a brand new car be stable enough that you'd notice the difference from a 200W load?

Yeah.... Your still slitting your throat with Occam's razor. Did you even bother to read my article?

 

[h.g.Whiz]

I don't think its a good idea to sustitute gas with water. The demand for water is high enough already.

 

[Hindmost]

Water 4 gas seems to be the ultimate wack-a-mole thingy...it keeps popping up and we keep wacking it back down. Expensive oil will continue to bring out the woo and we will have to keep dragging out law one and law two.

glenn

 

[fishbob]

I'm willing to bet KotA is pulling our leg.

I sure hope you are right.