water for power?
- Thread starter gbodystuff
- Start date
Hey guys, I started this thread to see if anybody had tried this...not what everybodys opinion is. First, getting the actual cell built is pretty expensive, and at this time, I am going to just buy a cell designed by Bob Boyce and this will run about 1K, then as for the electronics, I'll be using Megasquirt to run this on my TPI setup. There is a member on the waterfuelcell.org site who has repeatedly doubled his fuel economy on his 99 Cougar from 18 mpg to 33-39 by using a "covalizer" added to his gasoline-this is nothing more than acetone and xylene...he uses 1 cup of each and adds that to his tank-he's been running that for three years now-no check engine issues and no mechanical problems yet. From my work, this mixture serves to break down the covalent bonds in the carbon based gasoline and that in turm creates a faster, cleaner burning mixture. It's unclear exactly how the factory OBD11 interprets this data...that's what I want to find out. If it's as simple as the voltage reference from the o2 sensor going up indicating a rich mixture, then that's one thing...but in some of the water fuel classes I viewed, it was explained that all OBDII ECM's only allow for about a 15% increase in fuel economy before it considers the airstream too far outsdie of parameters and flashes the check engine and defaults to a pre-programmed fuel table. So I guess whoever wants to see the videos and supporting documents I have on a lot of this stuff, shoot me an email and I will be happy to forward them to you to view and decide. None of this stuff is as simple as do this and that and you'll get this and that. This does involve some trial/error. Since there are engines running in closed loop with zero emissions using a water fuel cell, i would indeed like to see arguements that hydroxy gas won't work. Dutchman enterprises has converted virtually every kind of engine to run on hydroxy gas (and yes, I've see them) and in closed loop so yes I would like to see an arguement that these can't exist. :-k
I'm gonna add some links here for some of you to see...the one from Boyce has a hour and a half video that is sure to wake up your curiosity about hydroxy gas-forget what peolpe say about it, pay real attention to the people who experiment with it-that's my advice.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Bob_Boyce_Electrolyzer_Plans
http://pesn.com/2007/09/29/9500450_BobBoyce_Electrolizer_Plans/
http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Carburetors/McBurney/press_release031117.htm
I'm gonna add some links here for some of you to see...the one from Boyce has a hour and a half video that is sure to wake up your curiosity about hydroxy gas-forget what peolpe say about it, pay real attention to the people who experiment with it-that's my advice.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Bob_Boyce_Electrolyzer_Plans
http://pesn.com/2007/09/29/9500450_BobBoyce_Electrolizer_Plans/
http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Carburetors/McBurney/press_release031117.htm
This thread is still here?
Something must be wrong with that cougar to start with. The 99 v6 auto cougar my ex-wife had, never got worse then 25 mpg even when running very poorly around the city. Once we got it fixed, on the interstate, it would routinely get well over 30 mpg. Oh by the way, we were never gentle on her car.
The 4 cyl cougars I have driven got roughly the same mileage.
Something must be wrong with that cougar to start with. The 99 v6 auto cougar my ex-wife had, never got worse then 25 mpg even when running very poorly around the city. Once we got it fixed, on the interstate, it would routinely get well over 30 mpg. Oh by the way, we were never gentle on her car.
The 4 cyl cougars I have driven got roughly the same mileage.
Nope, EPA estimates are accurate...look here:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/1999_Mercury_Cougar.shtml
2.5L V6/5-speed shows 17 and 26 mpg respectively.
Well, I planned to use this "covalizer" once I got some real good HHO production but it worth a try in the meantime. My wife's 99 Caravan should be a good guinea pig for this easy experiment. I'm curious as to what the A/F ratio will be while doing this....the fuel molecules covalent bonds will be broken down to the smallest possible chains so in effect you are going to be getting a vastly improved burn rate in terms of combustion...if the ECM sees this as a rich condition, it should lean the fuel out....what the limit is it what I want to find out. Here is where an O2 optimizer would come in handy or, using a stand alone ECM to taylor the fuel curve to accept really lean limits. It matters not how lean you run, this whole system is a function of pretreating the fuel to get the highest possible burn rate from it, then further lean it out by introducing a concentrated amount of hydrogen gas....that is the end goal. If you actually believe we currently get 100% efficiency from our existing method of combustion, then I guess dis-regard the whole thing. But, if you like most people have by-product sludge crap that gets re-directed into the intake via the PCV then you must realize the system is far from efficient and higher mileage results are possible but you have to look at things from a completely different angle. At any rate, a gallon of acetone is about $20 and Xylene I have to check on....but it is not expensive. It is curious to note that back in the 1930's after the 100 mpg Pogue carburator came out and was verified by the Ford Motor Division, that lead was added to gasoline (or petrol, as it was callled then)...adding lead for what reason? Well, isn't it odd that lead moreso than any other substance blocks any ability to break down the covalent bonds of the fuel molecules through vaporization. Interesting, huh? Why else would the oil companies add lead? "Upper cylinder lubrication"? Helps maintains valve seats? Come on....I've ran unleaded gas on older, late 60's engines that would have required leaded fuel and there was never any problems-I chalk it up to an automotive myth. Pogue used a different process for breaking bonds but his results were groundbreaking. Fast forward to the 70's and the era of unleaded gas due to it being a carcinogen. We are back to the issue of breaking the fuels covalent bonds but now we have fuel injection to really dial it in. Imo we have come full with it and as long as people ignore it for whatever reason, big oil will be happy. I'm off on a tangent again....okay, I'm done-we'll how this covalizer works in the short term.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/1999_Mercury_Cougar.shtml
2.5L V6/5-speed shows 17 and 26 mpg respectively.
Well, I planned to use this "covalizer" once I got some real good HHO production but it worth a try in the meantime. My wife's 99 Caravan should be a good guinea pig for this easy experiment. I'm curious as to what the A/F ratio will be while doing this....the fuel molecules covalent bonds will be broken down to the smallest possible chains so in effect you are going to be getting a vastly improved burn rate in terms of combustion...if the ECM sees this as a rich condition, it should lean the fuel out....what the limit is it what I want to find out. Here is where an O2 optimizer would come in handy or, using a stand alone ECM to taylor the fuel curve to accept really lean limits. It matters not how lean you run, this whole system is a function of pretreating the fuel to get the highest possible burn rate from it, then further lean it out by introducing a concentrated amount of hydrogen gas....that is the end goal. If you actually believe we currently get 100% efficiency from our existing method of combustion, then I guess dis-regard the whole thing. But, if you like most people have by-product sludge crap that gets re-directed into the intake via the PCV then you must realize the system is far from efficient and higher mileage results are possible but you have to look at things from a completely different angle. At any rate, a gallon of acetone is about $20 and Xylene I have to check on....but it is not expensive. It is curious to note that back in the 1930's after the 100 mpg Pogue carburator came out and was verified by the Ford Motor Division, that lead was added to gasoline (or petrol, as it was callled then)...adding lead for what reason? Well, isn't it odd that lead moreso than any other substance blocks any ability to break down the covalent bonds of the fuel molecules through vaporization. Interesting, huh? Why else would the oil companies add lead? "Upper cylinder lubrication"? Helps maintains valve seats? Come on....I've ran unleaded gas on older, late 60's engines that would have required leaded fuel and there was never any problems-I chalk it up to an automotive myth. Pogue used a different process for breaking bonds but his results were groundbreaking. Fast forward to the 70's and the era of unleaded gas due to it being a carcinogen. We are back to the issue of breaking the fuels covalent bonds but now we have fuel injection to really dial it in. Imo we have come full with it and as long as people ignore it for whatever reason, big oil will be happy. I'm off on a tangent again....okay, I'm done-we'll how this covalizer works in the short term.
I bet one day we will get a post of something like "I DID IT!" and then never hear from him again, and then there will be a news story about a guy who mysteriously died after inventing an 800hp car that gets 80mpg and all his design plans were stolen.
LOL...I really just want to see it happen...clearly others have and others are trying to replicate systems. I'm still in the "having fun" stage with it. Now, if things get real interesting, well I guess one would have to be careful about how to go about promoting it. One thing is certain, you can't try to look at this from a "point a gun to the head of big oil and demand a lot of money" in exchange for the rights, after all oil companies already own most of the hydrogen patents...the ones they don't are the ones that prior inventers have released to the public domain so that nobody can claim rights to them. This way, the technology gets out and isn't supressed. Basically until somebody does it, nobody will draw attention to it, but the day they do...? It's just a matter of dotting the right i's and crosing the rights t's to get it all right. It's the infrastructure that is the big hurdle. Say water power is a viable alternative. How would you actually incorporate that into a person's daily life? Imo the easiest thing to do is offer HHO on-demand kits and at the same time open gas stations that inject a covalizer agent into the unleaded (and non-Ethanol based!) gasoline to aid in carbon fracturing of the molecules. Easy, huh? Speaking of Ethanol, is has already been proven that it costs way too much to use because of the manufacturing cost to extract it for us ein fuel but the government continues to set aside tons of money in subsidies to offset that cost...now even E85 is trying to spread and breakneck speeds. Rememeber when I mentioned how lead was added to gas and for what reason? Well, it inhibited vaporization based molecule fracturing in a carburator....now, Ethanol is an evaporative agent which like alcohol, serves to also inhibit the gasolines ability to be broken down chemically. Running any Ethanol bleand gas negates the benefit of covalizing the fuel molecules. I know, let's say it's good for the environment and get the government to help out with the costs and hopefully this whole water fuel thing will never get off the ground. How ironic the whoel thing is when you investigate the whys. Conspiracy is all about keeping a secret through dis-information. Break down the dis-information and you begin to see what is being hidden from you.
Okay, today I mixed my own "covalizer" and added it to a full tank of gas. I had about 1/4 of a tank of Ethanol blend in it so that is a variable that won't happen nest time I fill up. Ethanol has a corn based alcohol which serves to inhibit the breaking down of the fuel molecule to a certain extent but so far, I am seeing some results from adding the mixture. I filled up the wife's 1999 Caravan with regular old 87 octane gas and added 12 oz. of covalizer mixed 1:1 (6 oz. each). Previously the van had 230 miles on the trip counter with the 91 Ethanol blended gas and it took 3/4 of a tank to get that mileage number here in the city. I drove it all around today (city driving) and so far I put 120 miles on it and I have used just under 1/4 of a tank of gasoline. That's almost 5 gallons of gas to go 120 miles or 21 mpg in the city vs. EPA estimate of 18. We'll see how much improvement there is after the Ethonal blend is out and I increase the covalizer mixture to 16 oz. The idle was drastically smoother and the injectors seem to fire less frequently, @ idle anyway. And no check engine light either....so then mileage at least in the beginning seems to have gone from 15.3 mpg to just over 21 mpg. About a 45% increase? We'll see how well this holds out.
Well, it's been a couple of weeks and after running one tankful of gas and the covalizing mix, I only got 21 miles more to the tankful ultimately. It was strange how the awesome mileage went from very high to average than below average...after analyzing the results, i realize that the Methonal mixture I am running at the same time is adding too much oxygen to the combustion mixture which it appears is causing the ECM to add more fuel via the signal from the O2 sensor. I'll have to dis-connect the methonal injection and run the covalizing mixture again. I just read a thread about the developments of a mysterious cancer from which famed hydroxy specialist Bob Boyce is suffering from and is feared to be slowing dying from-this stuff is almost too unbelievable to be true but please read this link and see what you think.
http://pesn.com/2009/11/28/9501591_Bob_Boyce_cancer_by_Verichip/
http://pesn.com/2009/11/28/9501591_Bob_Boyce_cancer_by_Verichip/
Similar threads
