1985WS6transam

How are GM and other companys concept hydrogen cars fueled if there isnt a pressurized tank? I know that there are working prototypes of them.

XxCoLTxX

This is water things very intresting,I doubt it would work....I think I know where he got his Idea and design.http://nationalfuelsaver.com/ check it out. This one injects platinum in a liquid form,supposedly platinum mixed with fuel increases effeciency By 22%, and gives you a cleaner more complete burn. idk they have some intresting claims,saying your cars engine last longer cause it burns cleaner.

creepingdeath

You can run a petro engine on rum. farmers have too much time on their hands..

Vanilla Sky

I've been toying with giving this a shot on an old lawn mower engine. I just want to see if I can make more fuel than I use. If you can make more than is used, then you can bleed of the excess electricity to power your home.

Again, something that has lots of scientific evidence going back many years, saying that it won't work, but then again, Tesla was ridiculed about AC current. The electric chair has been used as a demonstration of the deadly power of AC current.

dirtywhiteZ28

Once you get rolling a couple of alternators mounted to the rear axle could provide quite a pop of electricity without being a big drain on the actual motor. Circle track and other racing bodies have used them for years.

Toehead

Not to mention that AC power is the only thing that makes long distance transmission of power possible in the first place.

Live Free

well a gas turbine to run a car was more than just a pipe dream in the 60's and Chrysler pulled it off... just takes time and money to see if it can be done.
----------
there is already at least one gasoline/HHO hybrid car running about using this system. even if you couldn't run on just hydrogen its still worth looking into to boost the efficiency (MPG) of engines.

87IROCZCamro

hahaha when you use a jelly jar for the product you know its not gonna work

__________________

http://www.cardomain.com/ride/3001567

danika

i have the "run your car with water" guide, and im looking for someone to try it for me. i saw your post and if your interested please reply. i paid 50 for it just for kicks. i will send it to you for free if your willing to do it. my email is theoriginaldanika@yahoo.com

birdonnos

here is a good link to keep some of you informed, watch the news video and the other video and make you own judgement, i paid 4 dollars and 10 cents a gallon for diesel gas today. this is old news but worth looking at.
http://waterpoweredcar.com/stanmeyer.html

download his pdf.files its 243 pages of information on how to make it work and explains how it works onboard without the chances of it being explosive. they aired his work on the news only once. kinda makes you wonder if its really true. he said it would only be $1500 to install on most cars and could run on snow, salt water, or any kind of water.
http://waterpoweredcar.com/pdf.files..._Full_Data.pdf

Cadillac

Indeed!

As a fellow L03 owner and Georgian by the grace of God, I hope this dialog continues. What will be the final chapter for our cars? Is a conversion possible one day?

madmax

Platinum, sure... thats a good way to get things done. People are stealing catalytic converters to sell the platinum flakes in them if that gives you any idea what platinum costs.

I see a lot of by people with absolutely no experience, gee I wonder why. Dont you think that if this actually worked, that every car manufacturer would have already done it? They have countless dollars available from the US Govt for research into alternatives and there's no running example from them even with this stuff having been around longer than most people here have been alive for. How about the banter stops and some of you so insistent this is Tesla's next coming throw some money at it and prove the naysayers wrong?

BeNnYBooPy

Another fellow Mech. Engineer bored at work here! I have researched this stuff in the past and it is possible for it to work. The sites claiming it can output more energy that it uses and such is a myth. Theoretically it should be possible to get better gas mileage though because Hydrogen has a higher energy content that gasoline (stores more per amount of mass). Im going to keep reading up on this stuff and post more later tonight if i find anything interesting. Does anybody here know where to find info on setting up a gaseous fuel system (like the cars that run on forms of natural gas). As per why the big manufacturers arent using these systems....My guess would be that as cool as it is to have the entire electrolysis process exist within the car, It is not necessarily the safest practice to do so. Even after years of development, automotive manufacturers are just now finally getting hydrogen cells to the point where they are safe to put in a car. For a while I know BMW or honda was looking at having an electrolysis machine come with the car, sorta like a washing machine to put in your garage. When you need to fill up, just connect your car again. So the manufacturers are looking at storing hydrogen in more of a liquid form, which is expensive, but holds a lot more energy per capacity. These browns gas systems store the water, and minimize the amount of "fuel lines" because the gaseous hydrogen being produced isnt very dense. So...theoretically...all this does seem possible, who wants to be a guinnea pig?

PolarrrBearrr

Not to add fuel to the fire, but I need to drop my two cents here.

I have been looking into this for my Camaro. (Whoever wants a guinea big, here I am). Also for my truck, but I want to try it on the car first. My uncle turned me on to it, and the reason I want to do it is this - every year, the emissions laws get tougher and tougher, and anyone in Cali or Jersey (me!) will tell you it gets harder and harder to get the vehicle past inspection.

Here's the basic skinny on it - you are not running the car on water. Quite far from it. What you are doing is supplimenting the regular gas with hydrogen supplied by the water. You are not getting rid of the gas, you are basically extending the distance you can go on a gallon. Allegedly, the percentages are astronomical in increased MPG. (I can't vouch for their validity though).

Essentially, the water as two pieces of metal (specific metals, which I do not remember right now) attached to either end of a battery. When current is applied, the metals create hydrogen gas in the water. (This is enclosed in a glass jar, which is the reason for the pickle jar.) The gas is piped into the air intake, mixing with oxygen into the engine, creating a cleaner burning engine.

Think of it this way - ever see a bunson burner in science class? The more oxygen in the flame, the dirtier and more orange/red the flame gets. Add more gas, the flame becomes smaller, hotter and blue. Same theory.

By having a cleaner burning engine, you have reduced emissions, and therefore a longer lasting engine because there is no "sludge buildup" in the engine. Allegedly, the need for oil changes as often is also reduced.

Am I a scientist? No. Am I an engineer? No. Do I work for the company? No. (Though one is based in Jersey). What I am is someone who likes his older vehicles, and is looking for a way to keep them on the road. Eventually, the gov't may come along and tell me that I need to crush the truck and car, and buy a grass powered flying car - but first they'll have to pry my cold, dead hands from the steering wheel.

If this device means I spend a little cash and keep my ride longer - then I am all for testing the theory.

Oh, and for those wondering about the volume of hydrogen - you can add as many jars as you want. They are wired in series, and the more you have, the cleaner and more efficient the engine.

Anyway, that's all I got. I've got a Camaro with a V6 and a carb and if anyone in the Jersey area wants to come and help me figure it out, then let's get together and end the debate.

madmax

See, this is the problem. Just now manufacturers are getting fuel cell cars safe? I was at a GM event 5 years ago and they had a running hydro car that they were giving drives in. How many years prior to that do you think they had an 'unsafe' version? This isnt new technology, there havent been any breakthroughs, and there's no new news. You need to waste energy to get energy. How much you have to waste is the question. So you use electric power from an overtaxed engine driven alternator to split hydrogen from water (not an efficient process in itself) and then supplement (not replace) some gas for hydrogen. I'll bet you the reason you arent seeing GM et al doing this is because the net energy equation does not add up to a benefit. But go ahead, do it. Stop saying hey it could work, go prove it. I'll be waiting and laughing in the meantime.

longhorned

MADMAX, your request for someone to actually try it and confirm the results appear to have been already done by KMCCONKAY, you just choose not to believe him, so i think a better post from you would be to say what it would take to convince you.

As to the process itself i have no idea if it works, however, it would seem highly improbable that you could gain a perpetual motion machine from water, but equally i don't think that is what is being suggested here.

Or to put it another way i don't think they are suggesting that the hydrogen gas you get out of the water has a higher energy value than the electricity you put in producing it.

What i think they are suggesting is that a modest amount of hydrogen or more accurately HHO when mixed with your regular gasoline, allows the combustion process to run more efficiently, and that this efficiency increase is greater than the energy cost required to produce the HHO. This theory does not in itself break any of the laws of thermodynamics, as your external energy source is the gasoline, its is just an efficiency modifier.

Now i have no idea if this is an accurate assumption, and i would agree it would seem highly implausable for such a simple process to have been over looked for all these years, especially with the drive to reduce our carbon footprint.

However i think the first steps to reaching a conclusion on this is if an engineer could comment on whether such an efficiency improvement in burning gasoline is possible/likely with the addition of HHO in the process.

Personally i approach this as with most things with sceptical curiosity.

longhorned

The second thing i would point out, is that comparing the safety argument of this process with traditional hydrogen cars is not relevant as they are not at all comparable.

The safety concern with traditional hydrogen cars is storing the hydrogen, not burning it.

with this process the amount of HHO they claim to produce is tiny, and used as soon as it is produced, so there is no build up of the gas to become dangerous.

And if you are worried about the gas leaking out, again the quantities are tiny. Remember even in traditional hydrogen cars, like in some of the BMW prototypes, they are not perfectly sealed. I believe BMW estimate the tank will empty itself is unused after a couple of months.

dbusicchia

You should check out the hydranox5000 for around $300 you get the whole kit. It was exposed by Fox, tested by a police dept. and they swear by it. They also said that vehicles with a performance chip only get a power increase not a fuel economy increase

longhorned

Searching around on the web, i found this supposed explanation of why the system works. I am not an engineer, and so make no claims as to whether this is accurate or not, but i throw it up here for discussion.

quote "
Recently I took part in the highway test of a vehicle driven twice over the same 200-kilometre course, on cruise control, at the same speed, once with the system off and once with it on. A temperature sensor from an accurate pyrometer kit had been inserted directly into the exhaust manifold, to eliminate thermal distortion from the catalytic converter. On average, the exhaust manifold temperature was 65°F lower during the second trip when the Hydrogen Generating System was switched on. The fuel consumption with the unit off was 5.13253 km/li. and 7.2481 km/li. with it on, giving a mileage increase of 41.2% and a fuel savings attributable to the unit of 29.18%


From the forgoing, the near absence of carbon monoxide and unburnt hydrocarbons confirms a very complete and much faster burn. Cooler exhaust temperatures show that more work is taken out during the power stroke. More torque from less fuel at the same R.P.M. verifies that higher pressure from a faster burn, acting through a longer effective power stroke, produces more torque and thus more work from less fuel. The considerable reduction in nitrous oxides (NOx} was a surprise. I had assumed that the extreme temperatures from such a rapid intense burn would produce more NO.,. Time plus high temperature are both essential for nitrous oxides to form. As the extreme burn temperatures are of such short duration and temperature through the remainder of the power stroke and the entire exhaust stroke, will, on average, be much cooler. With this in mind, it is not so surprising that less NOx is produced when the HGS is operating.

Assume a fuel-air mix is so lean as to normally take the entire power stroke (180°) to complete combustion. Educated estimates suggest the presence of nascent hydrogen and oxygen decreases the burn time of the entire mix by a factor of ten (10). If a spark advance of 4° is assumed, the burn would be complete at about 14° past top dead centre. Such a burn will be both rapid and intense. The piston would have moved less than 2% of its stroke by the end of the burn, allowing over 98% of its travel to extract work. The lower exhaust manifold temperatures observed when the Hydrogen Generating System was in use can be viewed as evidence for this occurrence.

Power consumed by this model of the electrolysis cell is about 100 watts. If an alternator efficiency of 60% is assumed, then 0.2233 horsepower will produce enough wattage. Even on a compact car, a unit would use less than ¼ % of its engine’s output, or about what is used by the headlights. The energy regained from burning the hydrogen in the engine is so small that virtually all of the power to the electrolyser must be considered lost. That loss should not, however, exceed V4%, so that any increase in the engine’s thermal efficiency more than ¼ %, is a real gain.

An engineering classmate suggested a grass fire as a useful analogy to understand combustion within an engine. The flame front of a grass fire is distinct and its speed depends in part on the closeness of the individual blades. If grass is first sprayed with a small amount of gasoline to initiate combustion, then all blades will ignite almost in unison. In much the same way, small amounts of nascent oxygen and hydrogen present in the fuel-air mix will cause a chain reaction that ignites all the primary fuel molecules simultaneously. Faster more complete burns are the keys to improving efficiency in internal combustion engines. Power gained from increased thermal efficiency, less the power to the electrolysis unit, is the measure of real gain or loss. It follows from the foregoing paragraph that even a modest gain in thermal efficiency will be greater than the power used by an electrolysis unit. The net result should therefore be positive. Thus onboard electrolysis systems supplying hydrogen and oxygen to internal combustion engines, fuelled by diesel, gasoline or propane, should substantially increase efficiencies.

While the auto industry searches for the perfect means of eliminating harmful emissions, consideration should be given to what these systems can do now, since the HGS considers reduction of harmful emissions even as the engine ages. Almost all unburned hydrocarbons, CO and NO,, are eliminated. Reducing hydrocarbons and CO causes a slight rise in the percentage of CO2 in the exhaust, but as less fuel is used, the actual quantity of CO2 produced is reduced by roughly the same ratio as the savings in fuel. In brief, noxious gas is almost eliminated and greenhouse gas is decreased in proportion to the reduction in fuel consumption. Nothing I have learned so far has lessened my belief that the benefits of using electrolysis units to supply hydrogen to most types of internal combustion engines are both real and considerable.

Reprinted with the permission of George Vosper, P. Eng. June 1998

end quote.

madmax

Oh sure, more banter, more non proof.

Yea, someone who isnt working for them or selling their product, like a longstanding member here who's silly enough to buy the snake oil that always sells when pump prices are high, 'test' this so-called magical jam jar hydrogen power.

1985WS6transam

Longhorned do you work for them? it is a little strange that your only 3 posts are in this thread... and you are defending them more then anyone.

madmax

Kind of my point. These people with no posts here are jumping in saying its the greatest thing since sliced bread... well, ok. So why arent any of the manufacturers using this magic elixir? Usually the reason has this green paper stuff involved...

I'm sure I can increase my mileage 1000x by installing split fire plugs, wires, a tornado, an electric supercharger, HHO conversion, fuel molecule aligner, fuel catalyst, and the million other things I forgot about. Funny that the people that would profit the most from that (claiming super high MPG's and avoiding federal fines and scrutiny) arent doing it.

dbusicchia

The manufacturers aren't doing it because they do not know the long term effects of these experimental fuel economy "upgrades" wether they work or not, car manufacturers keep their EPA ratings fairly close to be competitive while spending the least amount of time and energy (money) on R&D. Another reason is to be able to charge a premium when they do release their miracle vehicle hence the very large premiums paid to purchase a hybrid which will take at least 5 years to recoupe the extra expense by MPG alone. You may accuse me of working for these companies that claim their product is the "best thing since sliced bread" but you can find out for your self, I work at Country Chevrolet in Warrenton, VA, I am a sales consultant, my tag is my name. By the way the chevy volt will be capable of doing at least 60 miles on electricity alone with either a small internal combustion engine or hydrogen power plant to recharge it when traveling longer distances. Imagine the premium for that!

longhorned

hehe no, i dont work for them. Of course you have no way of knowing that.

I am actually a house builder, who is looking for a way to save fuel on a boat. when you have a boat that takes a 1000 galons of diesel; fuel economy becomes a big issue.

First time on this forum, because i am not really a car guy, sorry. Like to drive them, but no idea what goes on under the hood, and in truth not that interested.

I simply jumped in because it felt like A) this was one of the few topics discussing them, and B) because i felt the conversation had gone off topic dealing with 100% hydrogen powered cars, which is not what these products are about.

I have since had a chat to another builder friend of mine, who races cars as a hobby, and he is looking into this now, so we may try and build a test. Of course even if i did, and it worked, it would not be proof, as i have no credibility here.

I Honestly have no idea if this is just a scam or not. logic would suggest it is, but who knows.

In hunting around on the web, one of the best financed companies seems to be hydrorunner, and on their website provide a test report from Automotive testing and development services based in california. Hydrorunner seems to be owned by a service garage called check engine, this may be their website, but not 100% sure http://www.gocheckengine.com/ , based in florida. Now i am from the UK, so this is not exactly my back yard, but if anyone is from florida, and know these guys, or california and know this test company, perhaps you could do some research and see if these guys are bona-fida. they also post their management team, so again does anyone know of any of these guys http://www.hydrorunner.com/management-team.html

link to the test report here, if I can link here. http://www.hydrorunner.com/data/atds.pdf

these hydrorunner guys are real expensive though.

Bottom line all i am saying is rather than just sounding off and calling it snake oil (which it may well be) all i am asking you to do some leg work and get to a real conclusion. If its a scam, then lets close these guys down simple as that.

anyway let the debate continue.

longhorned