Comments on: The Run Your Car On Water Scam

By: If You Can’t Run Your Car On Water Then How About Sex Instead?

If You Can’t Run Your Car On Water Then How About Sex Instead? — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:22:35 +0000

[...] The Run Your Car On Water ScamWhat Exactly Is Odometer Fraud?How DDOS Attacks Are Being Used To Hold A Company Hostage10 Reasons Why Global Warming Is A Good ThingHoax Or Not? Red Hot Chilli Grenades3 Types Of People Fall For Internet Scams – Are You One Of Them?You Dirty Rat!The Two-Striped Telamonia Dimidiata Spider – The Toilet Killer!The South American Blush Spider – The New Florida Toilet Killer!How Can I Lock My Wireless Network’s Front Door [...]

By: John Mackowski

John Mackowski — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 01:40:43 +0000

To JC below, there is a very good reason that you have never heard of a damaged water/gas hybrid. Because even the people who are trying to sell the conversion kits do not have an actual working model to show anyone.

By: JC

JC — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 00:34:32 +0000

The Laws of Physics cannot be denied. For those who know physics, and chemistry, they SHOULD know that using water for fuel is very real. There are cars out there that are running off of water right now. Even more there are water/gas hybrids that are running and getting amazing results. There are Univeristy’s and individuals with government grants that are making amazing prototypes. Yes Hydrogen burns hotter than gas. The gas produced by electrolysis of water is HHO gas or “Brown’s Gas”. Do your research and you will find that this is a very efficient gas that, when added to fuel, will make the fuel burn a little hotter (which means more horsepower) more efficient (better gas mileage) and cleaner. I will say use at your own risk though. The one good point I actually saw on this post stated that your car was made exclusively to burn gasoline. Any modifications to your vehicle could cause adverse affect. However, I have yet to see one case of a damaged water/gas hybrid.

By: John Mackowski

John Mackowski — Fri, 01 May 2009 17:33:34 +0000

There is a simple way to explain why running your car on water does not work well. The internal combustion engine is only about 33% efficient. So for every 100 units of energy that goes into converting the water to HHO gas, you can’t expect to get more than 33 units back by burning it in your engine. And that is under absolutly perfect conditions.

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 22:53:47 +0000

that guy was right about the bullet idea. You don’t have to shoot a bullet to make a bullet. There are different kinds of energy out there. Potential energy, for instance. There is a great deal of potential energy in H2, and if released when burned, it could easily entirely replace fossil fuels. Two type of engines that already exist that I suspect are ready to run on h2 gas are the natural gas powered engine, and pressurized gas model airplane engines. I am going to try to fill a tank with brown’s gas by using electrolysis which will be powered by a solar cell as well as a generator in the engine. First I need to prove that a 4 stroke glow plug engine can run on brown’s gas, and then I need to prove that I can create more brown’s gas in a day than I use. (The system would create hho even when the engine is not running.)

By: Geoff Sandham

Geoff Sandham — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 21:28:29 +0000

I would suggest this actually “works” by raising the burn temperature of the fuel mix – thus improving the combusion of the carbon in the fuel (as you know in efficient combusion is a failed release of energy). This is why lpg burns more efficiently – this is the principle lpg is actually added to diesel fuel. Sounds like it could work with hydrogen and petrol. I expect its success rate very much depends on the engine. Less efficient larger steel engines may be OK small high tech aluminium ones are probable going to suffer alot.

Couldn’t find any “real” information regarding adding hydrogen anywhere but would be interested to know. This speculation is based on basic chemistry and what I know about lpg which is well documented.

By: Lee

Lee — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:35:37 +0000

Email spam will never stop just so long as people actually buy what is being peddled.

What amazes me is the number of people who are prepared to hand money to strangers who invade their inboxes!

By: Romie

Romie — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:24:13 +0000

I have read a few articles on this now, amazed that it manages to keep going. Of course, email spam keeps going even though there are so many people out there exposing the truth, so I guess I should be surprised. It will be good when this actually does work for real!

By: Lee

Lee — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 10:51:49 +0000

Hi DMD

I would never tell anyone that they are full of crap.

I think I’m right, based upon my understanding of physics. However, I’m not perfect so I’ll re-read your comment and then put in a bit more research to see if I have made a mistake or not.

By: DMD

DMD — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 03:03:59 +0000

The physics explanation in this article doesn’t make sense. The hydrogen is being ADDED to the combustion. Who cares how much energy it took to create it? The results aren’t based on the energy given back from the hydrogen alone. Again, it’s being ADDED to the process. It’s like holding a bullet and saying the only amount of energy that can be released from this is equal or less than the amount of energy it took to “create” it. When you ADD the components together, you get the result.

If it didn’t work, at least a little bit, then why do they explain the added heat stress on the engine? The theory is sound, and the results are there. Some people have “tried” this on beat up POS cars that barely ran to begin with, and the wonder why it didn’t work.

Take little bit of electricity from the battery, about the same as a couple of charging cell phones or cd players, create some hydrogen, (which you could do with a 9 volt battery and a glass of water….”wow, I wonder what those bubbles are?”)

Mix that hydrogen in with THE OTHER gases in the combustion, and make that combustion cleaner.

Cleaner equals more efficient….

Results vary, but some done on late 90’s Ford V6s show 45-55% increases in MPG. Results from work done on vehicles with pre-computer engine systems are better. That’s why there is so much BS about this, because the car companies don’t know what to do with this tech yet….”Who killed the electric car?” anybody?

Wake up and kill your TV, cause were just cattle waiting to be fed. Do a little bit of 4th grade science for yourself. I’m not saying that you’ll get the “AMAZING RESULTS” that they promise, but you might add 20-30%. Wouldn’t you want to add 5 or 6 MPG to your vehicle with some crap from the hardware store?

Or maybe I’m full of crap…think for yourself…..