: Can you run your car with water?



thewireman*
03-04-08, 09:46 AM
I'm just curious if something like this works? Has anybody tried it? Heres one of the link to get the plans.

http://www.runyourcarwithwater.com/?hop=jethro3737

Theres many of them out there. Google it.

Submariner409
03-04-08, 10:10 AM
WOW !!! This has been around, in one form or another, since I was a kid !! (Get your wallet, right now, and see how much lighter these guys can make it.) Snake oil, just like the 100 mpg carburetor which surfaces every 6 years, and the Tornado Turbolator which stirs up the air molecules entering your engine (yeah, right.....)

foos
03-04-08, 11:21 AM
From a physics standpoint there is no reason why this can't work.. I could see something like using electricity generated by the alternator to separate the hydrogen/oxygen bonds in the water creating gas and pumping that into the intake along with the regular fuel which would increase your 'mileage' because it won't use as much gasoline. In theory it's possible however the energy used to separate the molecular bonds in the water requires a significant amount which could burn out your car's generator and who knows if it can provide enough at an efficient rate to make up for the electrical generation.
I saw a better one which recycled unused fuel that the converter normally burns up and sends that back in and on top of that it heats up the fuel to a higher temperature which causes it to atomize to a fuller extent which generates a better combustion. This is the process they use in military jet aircraft and there's no reason why it can't work on a vehicle although again it's a matter of how well they do it and how reliable and durable it is.

foos
03-04-08, 11:22 AM
Then again from a physics standpoint there is no reason why quantum transport can't work either :) I.E. Star Trek beam me up! But do we have that yet????? :)

C&C
03-04-08, 11:35 AM
The hydrogen bond, in water, is one of the strongest there is. It takes a whole lot of energy to break this bond; that's why this would never produce enough hyrogen to burn.

Submariner409
03-04-08, 12:23 PM
Nuclear submarines, which can stay submerged indefinitely (food and morale being the limiters), use 2 or 3 oxygen generators to replenish that used by the crew. Sea water is dissociated in multiple high pressure electrolytic cells, the resulting gases scrubbed, the oxygen pressurized and stored in high pressure flasks and bled into the boat at a rate determined by analysis, and the hydrogen is bled back into sea water overboard discharges, no bubbles. Very touchy process, because hydrogen and oxygen in the presence of an ignition source are extremely explosive. And it all requires a hellish amount of electricity. The Auxiliary Machinery Spaces always smell like ozone from the electrical discharge, and the O2 generators require a constant watch.

Not practical, in any way, in a car. Simple with a 95 Megawatt reactor.

dkozloski
03-04-08, 01:52 PM
From a physics standpoint there is no reason why this can't work.. I could see something like using electricity generated by the alternator to separate the hydrogen/oxygen bonds in the water creating gas and pumping that into the intake along with the regular fuel which would increase your 'mileage' because it won't use as much gasoline. In theory it's possible however the energy used to separate the molecular bonds in the water requires a significant amount which could burn out your car's generator and who knows if it can provide enough at an efficient rate to make up for the electrical generation.
I saw a better one which recycled unused fuel that the converter normally burns up and sends that back in and on top of that it heats up the fuel to a higher temperature which causes it to atomize to a fuller extent which generates a better combustion. This is the process they use in military jet aircraft and there's no reason why it can't work on a vehicle although again it's a matter of how well they do it and how reliable and durable it is.
There is no such process used in military jet aircraft. The only feature a military jet would have that would even remotely resemble what you describe is an after burner which is one of the most hellishly inefficient and energy wasteful devices ever invented.

This whole line of thought is an insult to the intelligence of anybody that passed junior high general science.

foos
03-04-08, 02:11 PM
Hehe.. I think it's good thought.. Just stupid to try and sell something that won't work yet.. It probably will work eventually but we have to get to the point where it's a lot more efficient than it is.
Yes they circulate the fuel around the wings and around the perimeter of some military aircraft to cool the wing and it also heats up the fuel which atomizes it better. It's scary to think of jetfuel circulating around the edge of the aircraft you are flying.. Ahh but such fun!

Submariner409
03-04-08, 02:50 PM
:hide: Oh, my. Would you care to divulge which "military aircraft" actually circulate JP4/5 through hundreds of feet of piping? (dkoz, don't play your trump card yet......)

Shaggy
03-04-08, 03:43 PM
Water injection has been around for decades to cool the combustion chamber so you can use higher compression without knock. They usually use a water/methanol mixture though. That isnt what this website is selling, I know, but don't slam the water too much.

Shaggy
03-04-08, 03:44 PM
Oh, yeah. I forgot.
http://www.runyourcarwithwater.com/?hop=jethro3737
Hahahahahahaha.

krimson_cardnal
03-04-08, 03:53 PM
I liked Rachel.... K_C

Ranger
03-04-08, 06:19 PM
I'm just curious if something like this works? Has anybody tried it? Heres one of the link to get the plans.

http://www.runyourcarwithwater.com/?hop=jethro3737

Theres many of them out there. Google it.
Common sense would dictate that if this simple conversion worked, GM be putting it in their cars and people would be standing in line to buy them. Remember, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. People that spend money on this stuff just prove that P.T Barnum was right.

Edahall
03-06-08, 02:32 PM
There's also a big safety issue. They are generating hydrogen which essentially is what powerful bombs are composed of.

Submariner409
03-06-08, 04:12 PM
Totally unrelated different principles. The HINDENBURG burned because hydrogen, as a gas, is extremely flammable. The hydrogen bomb uses the extra neutrons for a bigger fission bang. (Sort of, but I'm not a bomb maker.....:sneaky:)

JC316
03-07-08, 03:53 AM
I have studied this pretty heavily in the past few months. It works to a degree, you can build a hydrogen generator that can seperate the bonds, but you just cant produce enough of it to do anything. I would like to try it, but from what I have seen, you just cant get enough to make a difference.

Submariner409
03-07-08, 11:12 AM
For the time and money involved in a dead-end project like that you would be better off carrying a flask of compressed H2 in the trunk, with something like a NO switch, but you would have to be extremely careful of flow rates and fuel enrichment. PLUS, H2 requires extra O to burn the required richer mixture under compression, so you're back to square 1.

NHRATA01
03-07-08, 02:04 PM
Totally unrelated different principles. The HINDENBURG burned because hydrogen, as a gas, is extremely flammable. The hydrogen bomb uses the extra neutrons for a bigger fission bang. (Sort of, but I'm not a bomb maker.....:sneaky:)

Actually Hydrogen bombs aka thermonuclear bombs are fusion bombs, they use a fission reaction to create the energy and pressure needed to fuse hydrogen atoms, and the result is a reaction similar to what happens in the sun.

Sorry to go off tangent!

JC316
03-07-08, 02:22 PM
For the time and money involved in a dead-end project like that you would be better off carrying a flask of compressed H2 in the trunk, with something like a NO switch, but you would have to be extremely careful of flow rates and fuel enrichment. PLUS, H2 requires extra O to burn the required richer mixture under compression, so you're back to square 1.

Thats why they have you generate HHO, or Browns gas. It has that extra O. I have seen prototypes on youtube that show it on a saturn and if you clamp the line coming in, the engine speed slows, however it doesn't mean that it's actually doing anything.

Submariner409
03-07-08, 04:25 PM
Too bad that no automobile manufacturer on earth knows of this energy breakthrough. Nuf ced.

urbanski
03-07-08, 06:17 PM
wow this is shockingly ridiculous*










*as are all the similar weekly bullshit threads

dkozloski
03-07-08, 06:37 PM
Thats why they have you generate HHO, or Browns gas. It has that extra O. I have seen prototypes on youtube that show it on a saturn and if you clamp the line coming in, the engine speed slows, however it doesn't mean that it's actually doing anything.
That's because it's running on Browny gas(methane) that's coming out of his ass.

Submariner409
03-07-08, 08:51 PM
Sometimes the gullibility of the American public is only exceeded by their abysmal lack of common sense.

I'm waiting for the incorporation OK for my new company "Python Produced Power Production", a company which will manufacture expensive alternatives to fossil fuel (aka : Snake Oil, and, when we go public, will trade as SNOt).

dkozloski
03-07-08, 09:42 PM
As the American school system goes down the crapper there are fewer and fewer people that have any understanding of the sciences. Even the most blatant of obvious swindles operates successfully in such a climate. Lord help us.

ewill3rd
03-08-08, 06:59 AM
Part of the problem is that some of these snake oil salesmen can be pretty convincing.
Add that to internet use, you can say pretty much anything you want and almost convince a large portion of the population that it is true by using clever language.

"Caveat Emptor" is all I can say.
Don't believe everything you read.


Sure there is hydrogen in water, that is what fuel cell technology is based on, however it requires more than a ball jar and some wires from the battery to extract it from water.