Run your car on water??????

[Bronk]

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.

Thought I said that?
ohh yea I did .

Water pump going to still spin at the same speed.
However, heat robs power an efficiency. Most of the engines power is robbed by heat and friction. A reduction in heat should reduce power loss, thus raising efficiency. 

[CAP1]

Thought I said that?
ohh yea I did .

that wasn't you. it was your evil twin brother living in a parallel universe saying that as our two universes momentarily merged

[Angus]

it's not majic.

it's removing a portion of one fuel, and substituting it with another which is created "on demand" be an accessory running off of the engine. i does nothing more than supplement the vehicles fuel system. that's it.

 i don't understand how so many people in here don't understand this.


 i'm also thinking that once hornet posts his tests here, you're all going to find fault with that too.

 like i said earlier....those that have them installed must be imagining that extra money in their pockets.

Running off of the engine? You mean excess electricity?

[RTHolmes]

I can only surmise that the people that don't get it, well just don't get it. I'm getting the impression that they do not have the technical knowledge of how an internal combustion engine and all the associated equipment operates and interacts with each other. Kinda reminds me of some people I know around here that don't even know how to change the oil in their cars, or that they even need too.

well the sceptics seem to have a pretty good understanding of the laws of thermodynamics (and i suspect some have degree-level maths too.)

doesn't it strike you as odd that after a promising research paper from JPL in 1975, not much else has happened for over 25 years in this field? can't remember seeing any major car/truck manufacturer selling hydroxy-enhanced engines or vehicles either.

fuel economy may not have been a big factor for purchases of eg. sports cars, but even a 2% reduction in fuel costs is very persuasive to a big fleet operator. recent legislation in Europe (and probably elsewhere) which taxes hydrocarbon emissions is a pretty good incentive for efficiency, upcoming legislation will set obligatory emmissions levels for manufacturers. there's plenty of cunning things going on in engine development at the moment, still no mention of hydroxy that ive heard of.

if its so simple that you can knock up a working example in a garden shed with some engineering expertise, why doesn't my car/bus/train/ship/etc already have them fitted?

<-- remains sceptical (but looking forward to dyno results)

[CAP1]

Running off of the engine? You mean excess electricity?

well, yea........i misworded it.....

[CAP1]

well the sceptics seem to have a pretty good understanding of the laws of thermodynamics (and i suspect some have degree-level maths too.)

doesn't it strike you as odd that after a promising research paper from JPL in 1975, not much else has happened for over 25 years in this field? can't remember seeing any major car/truck manufacturer selling hydroxy-enhanced engines or vehicles either.

fuel economy may not have been a big factor for purchases of eg. sports cars, but even a 2% reduction in fuel costs is very persuasive to a big fleet operator. recent legislation in Europe (and probably elsewhere) which taxes hydrocarbon emissions is a pretty good incentive for efficiency, upcoming legislation will set obligatory emmissions levels for manufacturers. there's plenty of cunning things going on in engine development at the moment, still no mention of hydroxy that ive heard of.

if its so simple that you can knock up a working example in a garden shed with some engineering expertise, why doesn't my car/bus/train/ship/etc already have them fitted?

<-- remains sceptical (but looking forward to dyno results)

no mention of hydroxy would probably be due to the fact that bmw, honda and saturn are looking at powering cars fully off of fuel cells and hydrogen.

 no it's not strange that nothing has happened with this stuff since 75, because too many people aren't willing to experiment, and test things.

 a lot of the sceptics in here do seem very smart.

 isn't it funny though, that engineers, and ""smart"" people said man would never fly, and a pair of bicycle mechanics put an airplane in the air?

[RTHolmes]

well I judge on results so those bike mechanics were outstandingly smart engineers imo. I enjoy their results for (too many) hours every week

as a solution for increasing the efficiency of engines generally, we already have better solutions, and have for a while.

don't get me wrong, I'm 100% certain it will work for a small proportion of more inefficient engine designs, and pretty much the only way to find out is to build it and try it. given the parts and consumables are cheap and easily available the only hurdle is building it. if you can do it, as an engineer I'm happy as Larry that you give it a go and await the results with interest

[Hornet33]

The only drawback to these things is that you HAVE to maintain them everyday. You HAVE to make sure the water level and electrolite levels are correct and you HAVE to do that ALL the time.

You and I both know that 99.9995% of the people on this planet do NOT want to drive a car that they have to maintain that much. Everyone wants to jump in and go and they only want to have to put gas in it once every couple of weeks. Most people don't even keep up with their oil changes on anything that resembles a schedual, so why would the auto makers install a system that requires that much maintenance? They wouldn't and they haven't.

The gear heads and back yard mechanics have been the ones working with these systems and showing results, but again these are people that don't mind the extra five minutes of checking the system out before hopping in their cars and driving.

My ex wife wants me to build one for her van. I told her no, because she can't even remember to check the oil (she blew the engine in my old Suburban, and the engine in her Bonneville by running them both out of oil), and I'm not building and installing something that if neglected, can blow up, cause a fire, or do other damage to her van, and unfortantly she is pretty normal in that regard as compared to most people that own cars.

That's why only the shade tree mechanics are playing with these things. The general public will never see them until they can be made idiot proof and we're still a long way from that goal. Plus no matter how full proof you make a system someone will find a better idiot to break the damn thing and then sue because you didn't take into account that "special" brand of idiot.

[RTHolmes]

yeah no kidding on the oil checking. the only reason my current car doesnt have a set of cams, springs, chip, exhaust and ram intake is because I had to spend the only cash I had at the time getting the head sorted after the previous "careful owner" must have ran it dry. they threw in a port polish for free so it wasnt all bad 

[Maverick]

Cap,

You do realize that a fuel cell is not used to provide browns gas for an internal combustion engine don't you??? 

The BMW hydrogen car is also not running from hydrogen from a bubbler producing 2 liters per minute of mixed gases. It's running off of LIQUID hydrogen that has to be kept in a liquid state in the car before being used as fuel. It will be interesting to see what they have to do to keep it liquid under normal conditions such as every day driving and sitting for days.

[CAP1]

Cap,

You do realize that a fuel cell is not used to provide browns gas for an internal combustion engine don't you??? 

The BMW hydrogen car is also not running from hydrogen from a bubbler producing 2 liters per minute of mixed gases. It's running off of LIQUID hydrogen that has to be kept in a liquid state in the car before being used as fuel. It will be interesting to see what they have to do to keep it liquid under normal conditions such as every day driving and sitting for days.

yes, i do......they're miles beyond what we're doing.

[vorticon]

Water pump going to still spin at the same speed.
However, heat robs power an efficiency. Most of the engines power is robbed by heat and friction. A reduction in heat should reduce power loss, thus raising efficiency. 

right. knew about the second part, wasn't sure if the water pump was a static load on the engine...and you could still quite likely run a smaller pump and  maintain a safe operating temperature.

[Bronk]

right. knew about the second part, wasn't sure if the water pump was a static load on the engine...and you could still quite likely run a smaller pump and  maintain a safe operating temperature.

While you could in theory run a smaller pump. Why would you? You'd be back to more heat and losing power and efficiency.

[vorticon]

While you could in theory run a smaller pump. Why would you? You'd be back to more heat and losing power and efficiency.

depends.

in say, a 5 ton truck , will being able to run a coolant system thats (pretend number) 75% as heavy as the existing system have a greater effect than what running that much colder will on its own?

Would the HHO even have that great of an effect.

[LYNX]

yes, i do......they're miles beyond what we're doing.

There not interested in this stuff because there's no taxation in it.  Presently the UK government are developing the hydrogen infrastructure for the year 2050.  Producing hydrogen from power plants    They already have the fuel pump for Joe Public to fill up from.  Storage is just about sorted but transfer of hydrogen from the power plant to the pump is taking time. 

Only interested in Tax.

As for free energy or over unity it's amazing how inventors are full of BS.  They either go missing or die and no one can replicate the devise.

Amazing how Ford bought something like 4 or 5 high milage carburetor patents and just shelved them