Power AdderGetting a Supercharger or Turbocharger? Thinking about using Nitrous? All forced induction and N2O topics discussed here.
Welcome to ThirdGen.org!
Welcome to ThirdGen.org.
You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join the ThirdGen.org community today!
It's an under-the-hood hydrogen tank that increases gas mileage. In the newsletter there's a thing about someone getting 99mpg with this system on a 10+ year old Saturn. All you do is fill a tank with water everytime you fill up with gas. The entire system is only $750.
I'd really like to see someone install one of these systems on a thirdgen.
"Our typical hydrogen generator will produce 1.5 to 2 liters of alternative fuel gas (hydrogen and oxygen mixed) per minute using twelve volts and 20-30 amperes."
Since this concept violates the first law of thermodynamics and this apparatus has never been demonstrated to work or reproduced, it was met with much skepticism and was later found to be a hoax. The purpose of the hoax was likely to attract gullible investors, selling them licensing rights for a "revolutionary" technology. The inventor, Mr. Stanley Meyer (died March 21, 1998), was later successfully sued by some of these disgruntled investors, whom he had sold "dealerships", and convicted for "gross and egregious fraud".
Seems that those pesky conservations of energy laws strike again. There is no free lunch.
To convert energy from mechanical, to electrical, to chemical, back to mechanical, you are always going to lose out.
The only free lunch when you want power is NUKE power! It's is by far the cheapest and most efficient way to make power in the universe! Those pesky tree huggers will never let us drive around with nuke power
Seems that those pesky conservations of energy laws strike again. There is no free lunch.
To convert energy from mechanical, to electrical, to chemical, back to mechanical, you are always going to lose out.
You're talking about something different. The thing Meyer claimed to have invented was a perpetual motion device via seperating hydrogen and oxygen in water. This thing makes no such claims. You're still going to run out of gas.
You're going to use chemical energy in gas to produce mechanical energy to turn the alternator to produce electrical energy to convert water into hydrogen and oxygen. Then, you're going to burn the hydrogen by combining it with oxygen so that you don't have to burn gasoline, which you already had to burn to begin with.
the process of spereating the hydrogen and oxygen is about right for the power needed... and it can increase fuel milelage a little... but your engine still has to burn fuel along with it... Not to mention Hydrogen is extremely explosive.. (i remember my old physics labs......) good thought but still not practical... because all you would be doing if you built up an excess of hydrogen in a tank, would be a small hydrogen bomb rolling around...
Ok, I looked at it closer, no it is not what Meyer claimed.
My quote about the energy conversion is still right though. The ammount of energy needed to convert the energy, is going to me more than the ammount of energy produced.
Ok, I looked at it closer, no it is not what Meyer claimed.
My quote about the energy conversion is still right though. The ammount of energy needed to convert the energy, is going to me more than the ammount of energy produced.
Wrong again. Energy cant appear or disappear. You mean the ammount of energy in will be greater than the usable energy out. :P
I dont know why all of you are having such a hard time with this concept, all you need it the T-38 Space modulator to make this kit complete. I am running one of his kits and am getting 157mpg while running mid 10's, and can build this same concept and sell it for 599.95. All you have to do is send me your cash and I will be glad to build you a unit and send it right away.....LOL.
Meh, I found this on one of the other forums I hang out on. I'm sure it's completely true, except they don't say how much energy it takes to convert the water to a fuel source.
"the electrolyzer rapidly converts water into 55 standard cubic feet (scf) of HHO gas at 35 pounds per square inch (psi) via the use of 5 Kwh, resulting in the remarkable efficiency of 55/5,000 = 0.001 scf/W, namely, an efficiency that is at least of the order of ten times the corresponding efficiency of conventional water evaporation"
Yup, Santelli is a hack, and obviously ALL 5 labs are "in on it" in their test results.
"On June 30, 2003, Adsorption Research Laboratory of Dublin, Ohio, measured the specific weight of the HHO gas and released a signed statement on the resulting value of 12.3 grams/mole. The same laboratory repeated the measurement on a different sample of the gas and confirmed the result."
"On July 22, 2003, the PdMA Corporation in Tampa, Florida, conducted InfraRed (IR) scans reported in Figures 2, 3 and 4 via the use of a Perkin-Elmer IR scanner model 1600 with fixed point/single beam."
"An experimental confirmation of the latter bond was provided on August 1, 2003, by the Southwest Research Institute of Texas, that conducted mass spectrographic measurements on one sample of ordinary diesel as used for the above flash point measurements"
"Further mass spectrographic measurements on the HHO gas were done on
September 10, 2003, at SunLabs, of the University of Tampa, Florida, via the use of a very recent GC-MS Clarus 500 by Perkin Elmer, one of the most sensitive instruments currently available to detect hydrogen."
"Additional analyses on the chemical composition of the HHO gas were done by Air Toxic LTD of Folsom, California, via the scans reproduced in Figs. 7, 8 and 9. These scans confirmed that H2 and O2 are the primary constituents of the HHO gas"
But I agree in that I'd like to see more tests and research on this.
Fancy names mean nothing. I could call myself the British Columbia Institute of Advanced Physical Studies if I want, but it doesn't mean I'm not just another crackpot building perpetual motion machines in the basement.
Yup. Obviously universities hire inept people to run their research departments because they don't have access to "real smart" people. There have been many crackpots in the past 100 years. Many of the technological advances we enjoy today were "impossible" until someone (the crackpots) figured out a way to do it. Einstein was considered a crackpot.
Radio, the telepone, electric lights, television, heavier-than-air aircraft, breaking the speed of sound, nuclear power, spacecraft ans space travel, hydrogen fuel, the IC chip, mag-lev trains etc. These were all "impossible" and the inventors of these were called crackpots in their day by closed minded people.
Am I skeptical at all? Yes, but I'm not going to automatically dismiss it out of hand as readily as you. I'd like to see more on this subject, and continuing research and development with this process. Once the process is fully understood, it may very well be a case of "it's so obvious, why didn't we think of this sooner?"
It's a good thing for everyone in this section that some crackpot figured out a way to make turbos, superchargers and nitrous work. I'm sure everyone told them that the power loss from a turbo causing a restriction in the exhaust would be greater than the power output derived from it, that superchargers suck more engine power than they make, and nitrous would melt or explode an engine apart.
Currently all of these hydrogen adding systems are scams.
But what they claimed would be true if the product actually worked. You would see 4, 5, 6 times the gas mileage you do know.
You need a dry carbeurator and some other stuff, I'm not knowledgable about the mechanical aspect of these systems.
----------
BTW all cars(actually trucks for that matter) that use hydrogen that I have seen have like a trunk(or bed) full of hydrogen gas tanks. It doesn't seem to be practical just yet.
Last edited by superGMman; 06-01-2006 at 07:03 PM.
Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Am I skeptical at all? Yes, but I'm not going to automatically dismiss it out of hand as readily as you. I'd like to see more on this subject, and continuing research and development with this process. Once the process is fully understood, it may very well be a case of "it's so obvious, why didn't we think of this sooner?"
I'm not dismissing it out of hand. I'm dismissing it based on my experience and education. Every "explanation" I've seen, including that paper, is nothing more than pseudo-scientific garbage.
I am not gonna argue, but here is some things I have seen...
Most people claim that it takes a large amount of high voltage electrical energy to seperate oxy/hydro. While yes it does take a specific amount, high voltage does not equal high AMPERAGE.
Case in point, the automotive coil pack. Which has been used with great success in these types of experiments.
While it does create a very large amount of voltage, it needs and uses very little amperage.
The easiest system that I have seen used is like this.
They use electrical (normal house power) to build an amount of hydrogen.
This hydrogen is then burned very similary to a coal fired steam generator.
Once the generator starts making power the regulator "weens" off the power company line becoming self sustaining.
Basically you have your own steam generator power station.
The easiest system that I have seen used is like this.
They use electrical (normal house power) to build an amount of hydrogen.
This hydrogen is then burned very similary to a coal fired steam generator.
Once the generator starts making power the regulator "weens" off the power company line becoming self sustaining.
Basically you have your own steam generator power station.
Sure, that will work, right until you run out of stored hydrogen, but not much longer.
It's not possible to generate more energy than you consume. Ever.
Fancy names mean nothing. I could call myself the British Columbia Institute of Advanced Physical Studies if I want, but it doesn't mean I'm not just another crackpot building perpetual motion machines in the basement.
For a sec I thought you were taking a shot at BCIT..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony B
Radio, the telepone, electric lights, television, heavier-than-air aircraft, breaking the speed of sound, nuclear power, spacecraft ans space travel, hydrogen fuel, the IC chip, mag-lev trains etc. These were all "impossible" and the inventors of these were called crackpots in their day by closed minded people.
Well, yeah, but none of those involved breaking the law of conservation of energy.
Check this guy out. Denny klein has a new approach that isn't scaring the oil companies. He's applied it to welding equipment. I'm watching what this guy does.
I watch Mythbusters, everyone should be on the lookout for the gas milleage myth rerun.
Consumer reports did an article on it. It might have been Car and Driver, actually. In any case, my favorite was the one that you clip to your spark plug wires with 'capacitor blocks' that were supposed to promote cross firing. The thing melted and started an engine fire. Further, after they examined the 'capacitor blocks' they found no actual capacitors. I think I found it online somewhere, but i cant find it now.
I will say one thing about fuel savers, on 70s engines Water Vapor Injectors actually increased fuel mileage when used in conjunction with a couple of changes.
A.) Switch vacuum advance from manifold to ported
B.) Leaned out mixture at low-loads
C.)Supplied water vapor mix when the engine was at part throttle, greatly aiding in keeping the engine clean
My grandfather was a partner in a company that made them in about 1973. Typical gains were 10-15% with a corresponding emissions reduction.
I will say one thing about fuel savers, on 70s engines Water Vapor Injectors actually increased fuel mileage when used in conjunction with a couple of changes.
A.) Switch vacuum advance from manifold to ported
B.) Leaned out mixture at low-loads
C.)Supplied water vapor mix when the engine was at part throttle, greatly aiding in keeping the engine clean
My grandfather was a partner in a company that made them in about 1973. Typical gains were 10-15% with a corresponding emissions reduction.
I could see that working, back before computerized controls.
On mythbusters they didn't put electrolyte in the tank and wondered why it wasn't producing anything. They also removed the fuel line and blocked off the top of the carburator. Meaning they were actually trying to run the car off of hydrogen. The fact that the engine was even running off the fuel left in the engine means that it wasn't sealed up very well either so there wasn't much point to blocking off the intake.
They probably went out of their way to find the worst setup on the internet to represent all of them.
This $750 dollar setup is also a scam, It's a metal pipe with rubber caps hose clamed onto it! the most expensive thing there is the cheap ammeter.
I actually made something similar myself. In order for it to produce a decent amount of gasses, you need more amperage (you can adjust the amperage flow using different ratios of electrolyte to water) than I felt i should have for a constant draw application. The wires in that 750 dollar kit are way undersized. especially since you have to run over 10 feet of wiring from the battery to the switch, through an ammeter and to the terminals on the device. I don't see a high amp soleniod included or wire heavy enough to hold up to sustained 20-30 amps if you wanted to run it as intended. Even at a safer 10amps there's probably 15 feet of wiring there and I'd want something a little heavier duty for 750 bucks.
So does it actually work? I wouldn't be suprised if it actually did help a little, but if this product wasn't so cheap to make I wouldn't have even bothered.
If I ever get it installed into something, I'll remember to tell you what it does.
If all else fails, you could use this device to (very-verrry slowly) make deuterium and start building your own nucler powered f-body.
--If you're reading this. Please don't kill me, NSA! It was just a joke.
Last edited by Pontiaddict; 06-08-2006 at 03:45 AM.
Reason: Fear of death
