General discussion


What is it that I saw? IS it true?

By denis2eth ·
Is there any possibility to drive a car with water Like being claimed here? http://bit.ly/8uOh1i

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Neil what can I say

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to Yes, but

Infernal Combustions Engines are a lot of things but Efficient isn't one of them.


Collapse -

Actually Neil the Fuel Injected Engines

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to The science is plausible

Will determine what is going on by analyzing the exhaust gasses and modify the amount of Fuel that is injected.

The higher the Oxygen or Hydrogen content in the Inlet Manifold the less Fuel will be required as the Oxygen supports combustion much better than what we know as Air.

Personally here I think most of the improvement comes from adding Oxygen the the inlet Manifold rather than any marked improvement from adding Hydrogen as a Additional fuel.

The down side with stuff like this is that it drastically increases the potential for Fire under the Bonnet and if it was to work as advertised you would need a considerably larger supply of Water to break down with the Electrolysis method being used here. Also if you used plain Tap Water the additional Minerals/Trace Elements and so on in it would build up on the Plates rendering them far less efficient than they where when new. So you would need to use Demineralized Water which is a lot more expensive than Petrol at the moment. Or incorporate some way to effectively clean the plates.

You could get a Performance Increase by just using Water Injection into any conventional Engine without any additional Danger being created under the bonnet.

The Aero Industry has used Water Injection for years now in Aircraft Engines without a issue. The only possible problem with adding water injection to cars is that with the additional need for another liquid container in the car the problems associated with Surge will be increased so the Water Tanks will need to be heavily baffled which will make then rather expensive.


Collapse -

True or not

by boxfiddler Moderator In reply to What is it that I saw? IS ...

there's only so much potable water on this planet. We humans can go without food longer than we can go without water.

Fueling my vehicle with that which is primary necessity to my life is pretty damned stupid if you ask me.


Collapse -

But Boxy according to adds like that one

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to True or not

The byproduct of combustion is water.

So you are not actually using any water as it is reclaimable after it is burnt.

Not even the Stanley Steamers had a efficient way of recovering used water that allowed them a decent range so they where effectively of no use for anything longer than a City/Town Commute.


Collapse -

then you'd better not waste water

by Dr Dij In reply to True or not

showering or pooping :)

Collapse -

Mythbusters tested some of these devices

by JamesRL In reply to What is it that I saw? IS ...

They built one from the manual, set up a test rig and saw no improvement in fuel economy at all.


Collapse -

And then they

by Tig2 In reply to Mythbusters tested some o ...

Covered a car in clay that they then dimpled like a golf ball. That DID improve fuel economy.

I love Mythbusters!

Collapse -

that website...

by NexS In reply to What is it that I saw? IS ...

Seems a bit dodgy to me... Reminds me of those ads that say "Give me all your bank credentials and we'll deposit $10,000 into your account each month!"

Though, the technology does exist, but I could imagine it being frightfully expensive...

Collapse -

looks like

by .Martin. In reply to What is it that I saw? IS ...

one of those stupid products they advertise on cable TV (you PAY for cable TV, yet the adds are longer and MORE ANNOYING! WHY?).

I, honestly, would not trust it.

Collapse -

Bit of investigation leads to...

by The 'G-Man.' In reply to What is it that I saw? IS ...

Related Discussions

Related Forums