Will you be able to run your car on water.

[The Buddha]

OK so who has bought the BS kits on internet/fleabay ...
Does it work ?
Does it corrode the damn electrodes and what not and make a mess, and do nothing else.
OK will it even work.

OK water is an excellent hp and efficiency booster. Injecting the right quantity to the chamber will take the heat from the burning mix, turn into steal and create pressure and hence power. It actually will make more power with a lean mix cos lean mixes run hotter, and cool the hot motor too thereby negating the adverse effects of the extra heat. So why doesn't every car maker do it. Yes, it will be so corrosive to everything ... and the level of purity required ... water is great, calcium is not, neither is salt, or anything else in water will be completely huge enough to make you forget the extra 10 mpg you get when yours whole motor and everything around it turns into rust.

Now a Hydrogen powered car injects H2 into the manifold or so is the premise, and with H2 burning in oxygen in the air, producing heat in the reaction, and hence steam and pressure etc etc, it will exhaust pure water+traces of whatever is used as a lubricant. OK still freaking BS unless you address the corrosion issues, but atleast the purity issue is addressed.

Now electrolytically splitting water injecting Hydrogen into the motor from that and making steam = total BS. Why ... breaking water is gonna take power, and lots of it, then H2 had to be trapped and fed into the manifold and BTW, faster the motor is running and the hotter its running (as in 1 hour into a drive as opposed to 5 mins ... ) the more H2 it can support. The H2 once its there in the right quantity will do what it does in a Hydrogen car ... even though gasoline is also burning, the 2 can run side by side, the extra heat from the gas burning will heat the steam more, make more power, be relatively inert and let you lean it out, and feed in less air as well and still get all the power you need to get it going. However, water into hydrogen = uses so much electricity ... it will need a huuuuuuuge ass battery with full charge and even so will deplete it in short order. Oh it also will turn your electrodes even if its stainless steel into mush, cos all electrolysis consumes electrodes.

Quaint idea sold with lots of pseudo tech crap, but worthless.
Cool.
Buddha.

[jserio]

this is of course assuming that the engine is desinged as a "normal" combustion type. i've no doubts with the technology the way it is that it's possible to run a car on water or the like. but not without some serious changes in the way engines are built/designed.

[theUBS]

Yes, it will be so corrosive to everything ... and the level of purity required ... water is great, calcium is not, neither is salt, or anything else in water will be completely huge enough to make you forget the extra 10 mpg you get when yours whole motor and everything around it turns into rust.

I think you just install an inline Brita.  Some users have reported better results using the PuR systems though. 

[The Buddha]

Yes, it will be so corrosive to everything ... and the level of purity required ... water is great, calcium is not, neither is salt, or anything else in water will be completely huge enough to make you forget the extra 10 mpg you get when yours whole motor and everything around it turns into rust.

I think you just install an inline Brita.  Some users have reported better results using the PuR systems though. 

Whole new meaning to the term PuR ing like a kitten.
Cool.
Buddha.

[jserio]

now that was funny. 

[aaronjosephward]

water injection?
http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/waterinjection.html

[PuddleJumper]

I didn't "buy" into it, but I've known how to crack water into Hydrogen and Oxygen since 9th grade science class.

When some guys at work started talking about it, I did some online searches and saw what people were doing.

I didn't think it would work, but decided the only way to know for sure was to do it.

So, I made a small unit and put it on my '06 ford Ranger with a 2.3L 4 cyl.

This is my commute vehicle and my to date avg. is 26.5 MPG. I always drive the same route and use cruise control. So I figured it would give me a good enough way to see if there was anything to it.

Anyway, to the nitty gritty....

It only takes 1.24 volts to start breaking the water apart. Sounds good so far?
anything over that and you don't really increase the volume of the 2 gases very much.
What you do get is hot water. At 12 volts, you are actually boiling water and making steam. I think some people confuse the steam with high volume production of H2 and O

You can change the amperage draw by increasing or decreasing the amount of electrolyte in the water. ( I used baking soda).
As the unit heats up, the amperage will go up also.

the unit I made was a 12 volt at less than 7 amps at full temp. So, I was making a little bit of steam also.
I tapped into the line from the EGR valve to the intake manifold to get this stuff into the engine.

So, You can make this stuff in your car with more than enough electrical power to do it.
Remember that more electricity equals hotter water, not more H2 and O.

The problem is that the volume of the 2 gases is very low. Some people claim around 1.5 L per minute. Personally, I think .5L is more accurate.
The Snake Oil salesmen would have you believe that if you buy their special system, they will show you the magical electric frequency that will boost the gas production. OK whatever.

OK, I know want to know the results.

1st test I saw an increase from my normal 26.5 MPG to 31.2 MPG. Hmmmmm interesting.
2nd test dropped to 21.5 MPG. OKaaay? confusing.
3rd test still at 21.66 MPG. Hmmm. Not the way it's supposed to go. 

I took everything off and reset my ECU to get the mileage back to normal.

I'm not going to try to explain what happened, I have an idea but I want to see what you guys come up with first.

Another thing, the people that are pushing this "technology" say you have to trick the ECU to accept this new "gas". I'm not going to start cutting wires on my trucks
computer. I don't think it's as simple as a few resistors in the wires to change the signal to the ECU. I could be wrong though. I'm not a car computer whiz.

Anyway, That's my story. 

BeSafe.
PJ

[DoD#i]

And if you stick a magnet to the water line - whoo hooo!






                    
                                  
                            
                         
                                      
                            
                  

Conservation of energy - it's not just a good idea, it's the law.

[mikedrees]

my momma said a fool  & his money are soon parted (try saying that with a Forrest Gump impression)

[The Buddha]

I think the water cell on the net is a 3 in parallel or 6 in parallel item. Maybe use an old battery case and have 6 cells ...
Anyway, you bypassed the EGR valve. That itself is a big mileage gain device. Plus you recirculate the steam it can help more too ...
I dunno, it can work in theory, but reality is ... yea H2 into motor, takes up air, makes power and heat and makes steam, which will be faster than the combustion process, and that steam can take up heat from combustion and make more power and not mess up anything. However, the ECU may think of humidity has gone up and richen the mix. hence the wire cutting dealio. Cut off the humidity sensor, and the MAF maybe ... but you want the ecu to think there is more air, so you amplify that circuit ... basically you are sorta likely to start blowing up sheite cos you've confused the crap out of the ECU. Niiiice. Then buy a Prius, and that is where the gas $ savings come in.
Cool.
Buddha.

[theUBS]

Then buy a Prius, and that is where the gas $ savings come in.

I agree with Walter...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qP-tyvBGla4

[PuddleJumper]

After the little test I did, I'm thinking that what might help some ( and this is a really big might. ) is the water vapor that is put out as a product of this whole process.

the water vapor might act as a poor mans water injection system and give a bit of boost in efficiency.

The gain I saw at the first test could be:

1  I screwed up on calculating my MPG.

2  It helped for a bit till the ECU adjusted for the change in conditions and dumped more   
    fuel to compensate for an artificial lean condition.

Anyway, for a couple of bucks and a few bits and pieces I had laying around, I satisfied myself that I like the 26.5 MPG I already get out of my Ranger 4 banger.

And If I feel like saving more gas, I have my 52 MPG gs500.

So here's a question I have.

I know that water injection is used in turbo and super charged applications. I also know that it is used for anti detonation purposes.

However, something I've read about is that in WW II airplane pilots could fly low to the water and lean out their engines more than they could at altitude, allowing them to go a bit further on the same amount of fuel.

The theory was that the increased water vapor just above the surface of the water
would help to keep overheating under control on a very lean setting.

If a person could put just the right amount of moisture in the intake air, would it be possible to see a mileage gain without causing any damage to the engine due to excess water?

Just a thought.

BeSafe
PJ

[PuddleJumper]

Oh, I forgot to mention that when I tapped into the EGR line I used a T to do it.

That way I kept the EGR in the loop.

BeSafe
PJ

[GeeP]

Power your car with this contraption:



No need for gas!

[DoD#i]

However, something I've read about is that in WW II airplane pilots could fly low to the water and lean out their engines more than they could at altitude, allowing them to go a bit further on the same amount of fuel.

The theory was that the increased water vapor just above the surface of the water
would help to keep overheating under control on a very lean setting.

If a person could put just the right amount of moisture in the intake air, would it be possible to see a mileage gain without causing any damage to the engine due to excess water?

Ground effect probably had a good deal more to do with it than water vapor. When a plane (or bird) is within one wingspan of the ground, it takes less power to fly.

You can certainly play around with various ways to get waterr into the charge, and if you live in a dry climate it may make a beneficial difference. Back in the 1970's gas crisis, there were several DIY schemes involving a bottle of water, a vacuum line to the top of the sealed bottle, an air line from the outside to the bottom of the bottle, and an aquarium air stone at the end of that line. It does constitute a vacuum leak, but it is a fairly small one.

[PuddleJumper]

I remember those things.

I might give it a try on my truck, I already have everything I need to do it.

If my hunch is right, the benefit that people claim to get is coming from the water vapor and not the magic pixie gas. 

It would probably do more good for our over lean gs's with out having to rejet.

BeSafe
PJ

[Revere2]

If you are EVER able to get your vehicle .......ANY engine.........to "run on water" (or anything that is cheap to the masses), there will be an attempt to "buy you out" so that it's a "Corporate Idea". You could get a paltry sum of a few mils in order for "them to get trillions". Refused? You will be terminated. Yeah, really. Believe it.

[PuddleJumper]

Ha ha!

I'm not smart enough to make anything run on water.
I'm just going to see what extra water vapor will do in my engine.

As for the big car and oil companies, I think the smaller companies that are
actually looking at electric vehicles now will eventually show them up.

BeSafe
PJ

[Revere2]

I love to see young minds thinking. If it weren't for Nicky Tesla we'd all be in the stone age insofar as electricity,motors and so much much more. Edison, in all his brilliance (remember 90% persperation 10% inspiration) wouldn't have made a pimple on Tesla's buttocks.
Tesla was one of the few people on earth that could tell Einstien he was screwed up on some of his calculations, mean it, debate it and have few detractors. You have to remember that Telsa worked for Edison and was screwed out of a large amount of money (50K back then) after designing motors that Edison wanted to be. You can't forget his work for George Westinghouse and Tesla's dream of harnessing the power of Niagra (sp?) Falls(which he DID). He.........HE is the father of electricity. Thomas Edison was a trial and error freak. And truly he had to. He was truly a dunce compared to Tesla. And he had an army of men working for him while he took credit for any.
But since you are in the thinking mode. I'd like for you to read.........wait a minute.....let me go to the bookshelf and find it......
it is far out and just as crazy as what you propose..........ok......I have it in my hands..........The Sea of Energy in Which Earth Floats
by Dr. Henry Moray. Read it. See what you think. You might enjoy reading it. I like far out.

[The Buddha]

Well revere2 is sorta making a point but he's sorta bashed the point to bits.

Edison invented electricity. He also invented the light bulb. However he invented DC and a light bulb that uses DC. The light bulb patent was for the whole screw in method fitting and the housing instead of the electricity or the tungsten itself. You cant patent that, its a wire ... WTF.
Only to power anything with DC you need a huge fat cable. Check the cable from the battery on the bike. A cable to power your house will have to be the side of your fist. You also lose to heat etc etc so much that every 2 miles you have to have a booster installed. Edison did it first and made a lot of $$$.

Tesla invented AC, and a light buld that uses AC ... same crap different housing. Then he went to work for edison, and fought with edison and went to work for westinghouse and eventually ended up tangled up legally in many lawsuits by edison and westinghouse went belly up.

JP morgan started funding the tesla coil and the first transatlantic radio transmission caused him to pull funding for that ... tesla coil was much more than just radio waves to europe. It was for cable less power transmission as well as transmitting everything like the internet etc ...

And most famously Marconi's patent for the radio was withdrawn from marconi in 1943 and awarded to tesla. Fat lot of good it did, it was already expired several decades ago.

Now revere2 - you sure it was tesla arguing with einstein - and not fermi
Anyway, fermi is another of those un recognized inventors who was shadowed by another great.

Anyway. Patent laws are not written to hand any advantage to the inventor. Unless that changes, we will always have good technology stuck in oblivion, and bad technology in the hands of heavily marketed companies.

Think Filament wound CF that britten holds, or Omega frame that Parker holds (BTW he shaved 20 lbs off a GSXR with an Omega evidently) ... and how none of it has ended up on the street ... and blame the lawyers, the advertising people, the accountants and the general pencil pushing hyper conservative BS the large companies dole out.

I think patents have to be handed out for 100's of years. 17 years is too short. Patent law enforcements also have to be very strict and you use someone else product you definetly need to pay royalties to them.

Cool.
Buddha.