[terry hunter]

Has anyone knowledgable commented on the possibility of making huge fuel gains from this "minor" modification?

It is supposed to work for diesel as well. Would anyone be game to fit one before their warranty runs out?

http://www.water4gas.com/


Terry H

[Dazzler]

They seem a bit coy on the price.. I won't be risking it...

[LuciferDarklord]

I've seen this stuff before, and I think its a hoax.  Basically it uses electrolysis to split water into hydrogen and oxygen.  The amount of energy required to split the water is far greater than what can be recovered from re-combining it (burning it).  So - the extra power your alternator supplies to split the water is not recovered from burning the hydrogen.  It breaks the Laws of Physics, and unless they have Scotty from Star Trek on their design team, I think its a hoax.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy

[terry hunter]

It appears to have been around for a while and a customer of mine has fitted one to his older volvo and swears by it both fuel saving and power.

Luciferdarklord Could you explain how the alternator is using more power and thus more fuel by sending extra electricity to the battery to power this electrolysis thingy?
How would it make any more difference than say fitting a set of more powerful light bulbs or other accessory?

Terry H

[LuciferDarklord]

Whatever electrical energy the car is using, the alternator has to supply it or the battery will eventually run flat.  Think of it as a dam with a bore topping it up.  The alternator is a device, like a generator - that converts rotary mechanical energy into electrical energy.  As there is no machine in this universe that is 100% efficient (see link above on conservation of energy) whatever amount of energy coming out of the alternator is made using more mechanical energy supplied to it. 

So at any one point of time, if the magical water to fuel device is sucking say 200W, the alternator is 85% efficient, then the engine is supplying around 235W - which means you are using more fuel.  To chemically break the bonds in water to split it into hydrogen and oxygen is also very inefficient, so at each stage you lose energy.  Its a hoax.  The only remote possibility i can see is that the hydrogen acts as some sort of catalyst - but this has not been substantiated.  If this device was for real, they would have submitted it to some lab and had them prove that the overall efficiency of the system is improved by the device - which they obviously havent - and they have had plenty of time. 

There are thousands of engineers and chemists working on improving the efficiency of engines worldwide every day.  When some rudimentary device comes out with unsubstantiated claims like this its almost guaranteed to be a hoax unless proven otherwise.

[terry hunter]

OK,

This is really becoming fascinating. Read the posts on this site following.. especially the work being done by Anton Verway.

While the cheap poorly made systems may not work well (or at all), there seems to be growing strong evidence that it can and should work, as it is not about using the hydrogen for fuel at all, but about 'fuel burning  efficiency".

http://www.4x4community.co.za/forum/showthread.php?t=14021&page=3

There should be better systems on the way.

Terry H.

[LuciferDarklord]

Interesting reading - looks like quite a few guys hold the same reservations I do about the system.  I'll keep on the sceptic side of the fence until I see actual, scientific proof that their is some sort of catalytic reaction happening which makes the engine run more efficiently.  On a positive note, water injection does in fact work in changing the 'apparent' octane rating of a fuel with turbocharged engines (petrol).  With water injection you can run more boost and more ignition advance before detonation occurs, and there appears to be more happening in the combustion chamber than just purely the cooling affect of the water vapourising.  To be honest, its not going to be too hard to make a good argument that the water for fuel thingy works, and what worries me is they have been around for quite some time and there is not one shred of evidence that they do anything at all.  At least someone could have two cars exactly the same with two drivers and two routes, swap drivers, swap the device, repeat the test 10 times and there should be a statistical difference - but my heart seems to think that wont be the case or it would have been shown positive already.  In this case no news is bad news I think...