Welcome to the all new Geo Metro Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are features you can't use and images you can't see. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: Join our community! |
| Water Powered car; Anyone heard of this? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 13 2011, 09:26 PM (3,047 Views) | |
| Spock | Aug 13 2011, 09:26 PM Post #1 |
|
Live Long and Prosper.
![]()
|
I just got through watching a movie called 'Gashole' This movie is a conspiracy theorist's wet dream. As a general rule of thumb, I ignore most conspiracy theories because in my opinion they are mostly fantasy with a little fact sprinkled in for flavor. This movie, however, had me interested. It goes into the origins of Big Oil and how VERY high MPG cars have been around for a while but the technology is being swept under the rug to keep the big oil companies' pockets lined with green. I think it's pretty obvious that big oil is corrupt as hell and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that they were responsible for the deaths of anyone who invented something that could easily replace or refine the gasoline ICE. The two things that REALLY caught my eye about all this were 1) an invention by a guy named Tom Ogle back in 1977. I am not sure I can explain it adequately so if anyone want's to chime in and correct me, please do. But I think the basics are that he heated and vaporized the gasoline before it got to the carburetor and was able to pull off 100 mpg in an old Ford Galaxie. Anyone heard about this? Anyone have any input? and 2) I found this on youtube. It's a guy that basically is seperating the Hydrogen out of water to run his motor. I think we've all heard similar stories but I am wondering how valid something like this really is? Anyone have any info? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZOsOB3z3IE&feature=related I found this too. This is called the GEET Reactor and from what I can tell it is very similar to the Ogle devise. Seems like BS to me but I figured I'd throw it up here and let you fine folks throw out your 2 cents. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMNCebzgCgg So, I'm no alternative fuel expert but I'd really like to know what you folks' opinion/experiences are with some of this stuff. I think it's safe to say that we are all interested in high MPGs so if there is a better technology on the horizon, or perhaps under the rug somewhere, its worthy of a bit of discussion on here, right? Edited by Spock, Aug 13 2011, 10:38 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Woodie | Aug 14 2011, 07:15 AM Post #2 |
![]()
|
Your first thought was 100% correct. The gas companies do have a vested interest in keeping their product demand from plummeting, but just like the theories that claim the Jews, Catholic Church, Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderberg Group, Jason Group, Aquarius Group, are actually running everything behind the scenes, the simple explanation is that every one of those "organizations" is pushing and pulling against every other one. If any of these magic devices actually worked in practical, long term application, somebody would come out with a car that used it and destroy all the other car companies. Even if you believe that the car companies and the oil companies are in collusion, somebody like the Chinese Government would form a car company that made a 100 mpg car and do serious damage to our entire economic system. Using electricity to separate the Hydrogen from water and use if for fuel is completely valid and works beautifully. Unfortunately it takes five times the energy in electricity than the Hydrogen can recreate when burned. Using fuel cells to do the same separation is more efficient in operation, but the construction of the fuel cell itself is prohibitively expensive. Like designing a $100K car that gets incredible gas mileage. Since you'll typically spend about $10K on fuel over the life of a car, buying a $20K car that gets poor mileage makes more sense. There are lots of things you can do which will increase your mileage under certain conditions and for short periods of time. They usually have the most effect on older cars with less sophisticated fuel injections systems, or cars that are in far from optimal condition. In other words, they're compensating for weaknesses that could just as easily be addressed by just buying a new car. The manufacturers are required by the Feds to have everything work perfectly for at least 80K miles, that's something that none of these backyard inventors are addressing. Plus, you have to consider what the buying public is willing to put up with. The vast majority of people are not going to mix Acetone or moth balls into their gas, nor keep up with the maintenance of an under hood HHO generator (which again, just helps the inefficient combustion of older engines). Heating the fuel on its way to the injector and heating the air coming into the throttle body make for better combustion too, but not when it's extremely hot outside. Coming up with a system that switches on and off according to need becomes complicated and unreliable over the long haul. Back in the carburetor days there was something called a "heat riser" which had the engine breathe in hot air from a sheet metal box around the exhaust manifold and a thermo device opened and closed the fresh air supply in order to modulate this incoming temperature. What they did best was rust shut in one position or the other, never worked more than five years. Became unnecessary with the arrival of the most basic fuel injection, heating the throttle body with engine coolant and changing the mixture according to temperature did the same job almost as well, with outstanding reliability. Notice how the TBI Metros have a fuel heater between the throttle body and the intake manifold, a heating element actually in the flow path of the incoming fuel/air charge. Notice how this system and EGR both disappeared when the four cylinder was brought up to modern day specs in '98. Better fuel injection with four injectors, better airflow with four valves per cylinder, and better computer control made them redundant. The biggest problem we have now is government meddling and the car manufacturers kowtowing to the average consumer who wants to drive down the street in his LazyBoy. The feature creep and constant weight increase in the automobile industry is stunning. The Chevy Cruze Eco which is now being touted as the best gas mileage car available weighs 3,008 pounds! That's almost double what the early Metros weigh! The Aveo weighs 900 lbs more than a Metro. If all the government safety mandates had stayed the same, cars like the Metro would still be around, and would be getting 60 mpg by now. There's your conspiracy. |
![]() |
|
| KY Metro | Aug 14 2011, 08:25 AM Post #3 |
|
Member
![]()
|
Here's an easy calculation to make, and you can decide whether somebody is getting 100mpg out of a vehicle or not. First, what vehicle are they using? A Ford Galaxie weighs about two tons (4300lbs) and Cd is estimated at 0.58, CdA est. 15.63 sq ft. Putting this info in on Ecomodder's calculator, I get: Stock mileage: @55MPH engine 17% efficient, auto tranny 70% efficient = 10mpg Theoretical limit: @55MPH engine 100% efficient, tranny 100% efficient = 85mpg No way did somebody get 100 mpg out of a Ford Galaxie. There's not enough energy in a gallon of gasoline to move the car 100 miles. |
![]() |
|
| t3ragtop | Aug 14 2011, 09:17 AM Post #4 |
|
Turbo3 and Twincam Tweaker
![]()
|
just to throw this out, i worked with a guy at battelle memorial institute (the world's largest contract r&d labs) in the early to mid 1980s with a guy named stan meyers. he quit battelle over intellectual property rights and went on to develop a fuel cell that allowed his test platform, a vw dune buggy, to run on water. i was at his house on several occasions and i can attest to the fact that his ice really did run on water. he had applied for and was granted over 40 patents on his process and was at a point where he was going into production with his design. he accepted an offer to meet with prospective partners to fund large scale manufacture of his $1500 fuel cell. they met at a local restaraunt. before the end of the meeting, stan was dead, poisoned. when his wife returned home, all of his work - papers, prototypes, dune buggy, everything, was gone. they killed him and stole all his work. now there's a conspiracy for you. i'm not talking out of my ass, either. i knew the man and witnessed his project work. the local news in columbus ohio covered the whole thing until they were told to shut up and the police swept it all under the carpet. big oil will never, NEVER, relax their grip on our wallets and water power, free energy, solar, etc. will never be a reality until the energy companies figure out a way to make us pay for it. and, if anybody gets in their way, they will most surely kill them. Edited by t3ragtop, Aug 14 2011, 09:17 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Spock | Aug 14 2011, 09:22 AM Post #5 |
|
Live Long and Prosper.
![]()
|
Excellent points, guys! I should clarify a bit that I don't really think there is any grand conspiracy between big oil and 'Mr. average joe inventor'. I do think it's possible that there may be some validity to some of these concepts. Probably not, but worthy of a discussion I thought. After all, we've discussed more ridiculous things in the Lounge, right? Lets please forget I said anything about conspiracy theories or big oil or government involvement etc. Focusing on and discussing those things could get into a political discussion real quick, which is just gonna get everyone all pissed off and get the thread locked down. I really just threw that in there as a little background so it would be understood where I was coming from with all this and what sparked these thoughts in my head. For the record though, I think this, just like 99.99999999% of all conspiracy theories I have ever heard, are pure BS. Instead, please lets focus this thread on wacky inventions that claim big MPG. I just figured it'd be interesting to take a quick look at some of them and see what's pure BS and what has some technological validity. Feel free to throw out something you've heard or read about that claims big MPG like that Tornado thing that you put in the intake snorkel that claims a big MPG gain. Stuff like that is probably BS but interesting to kick around. EDIT: t3Ragtop, I'm not saying I don't believe you. You clearly have first hand knowledge. I'm just saying that I don't put any stock into 'conspiracy theories' and I'd rather not have this thread go in that direction. Edited by Spock, Aug 14 2011, 10:29 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Potter | Aug 14 2011, 09:45 AM Post #6 |
|
Col. Potter
![]()
|
Actualy the guy i bought my Swift GTi had an S-10 that ran on H2O |
![]() |
|
| term122 | Aug 14 2011, 01:23 PM Post #7 |
|
Bant
![]()
|
|
![]() |
|
| Way | Aug 14 2011, 05:02 PM Post #8 |
![]()
|
I'm not an expert on this stuff by any means but I have to admit the HHO concept would really be great if it worked. Hydrogen storage is one of the biggest obstacles IIRC so instantaneous generation would be a simple workaround. I would however be more excited to see research using seawater instead of freshwater though for the same reason I don't like seeing ethanol being forced on us: we can't afford to be using food crops / sources in this manner. The last thing we need is to find another use for fresh water. Enough people have trouble getting access to food & water as it is. |
![]() |
|
| mjspiess | Aug 14 2011, 05:29 PM Post #9 |
![]()
|
I saw a documentary a few years ago on "cars of the future" or something of that nature & it talked about a car that ran on compressed air. This particular model had an alternator of some sort & would automatically compress more air as the tank got low. It also had a feature where as it cruised down the road, somehow it harvested the air & compressed that as well to continue to propell it down the road. I couldn't find any info on it. It was clearly a prototype in the show with no known name brand attached to it. Here is some info on the Tata version: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressed_air_car I think that would be a pretty cool way to propel a car down the road. Zero emissions & absolutely no dependance on foreign oil or growing food for fuel or using water to drive, rather than drink. Air for fuel...imagine that. |
![]() |
|
| t3ragtop | Aug 14 2011, 05:40 PM Post #10 |
|
Turbo3 and Twincam Tweaker
![]()
|
the french father and son who developed the air powered city car concept really had a great idea. it used an accumulator that re-used the air pressure from one cylinder in the opposing cylinder. the thing about that concept was that the cars were all ultra light composite construction - city cars and not designed for any highway travel. that would never fly in the usa. people never really got the message about smaller, lighter cars and still demand suvs, v8 engines, and cars that roar up the road. |
![]() |
|
| KY Metro | Aug 14 2011, 05:59 PM Post #11 |
|
Member
![]()
|
What energy source do you use to compress the air? Same for compressing air on the fly... You need a power source. Here's the 8 energy sources we have to play around with, as "average joe" inventors: Ready-to-go fuels: ~ Petroleum ~ Natural gas/Propane ~ Electricity from the grid ~ Coal Primary energy sources: ~ Biomass, wood ~ Sunlight ~ Hydro power ~ Wind power Pretty much everything else is a form of energy storage, requiring one of these primary sources. That goes for hydrogen, compressed air, battery electricity, etc. You cannot continually extract power from these sources, energy input is required. The closer you get to a primary source, the more practical and cost-effective it is. Using wind to power a sailboat. Using sunlight to grow food. Using wood to heat your house. And so forth. For cars, we need a very energy dense fuel. Gasoline fits the bill nicely. Propane works too, also wood. The other sources need to be stored somehow, usually in the form of a battery, which is still not very energy dense. IIRC, the most up-to-date electrics can only carry the energy equivalent of one gallon of gas. |
![]() |
|
| LeoGeo | Aug 14 2011, 06:54 PM Post #12 |
![]()
|
on second though, my post seriously lacked verifiable sources
Edited by LeoGeo, Aug 14 2011, 10:27 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| term122 | Aug 14 2011, 11:05 PM Post #13 |
|
Bant
![]()
|
It's pretty retarded to make cars run on compressed air or hydrogen since there's a loss in energy to create the fuel. That's the kind of solution that appeals to extremely ignorant people who don't even understand the basics of energy. There's no miracle solution. |
![]() |
|
| Potter | Aug 14 2011, 11:23 PM Post #14 |
|
Col. Potter
![]()
|
Has anyone ever noticed how much energy goes into createing gas? Its the refinement process takes a good bit of energy as well. Honestly I think we're screwed no matter how we aproach it. The cleanest and most reliable source of energy will be the sun untill it engulfs the earth. So with that said I belive we need to focus on sun and air because as long as we are living we won't run out of that stuff. |
![]() |
|
| Coche Blanco | Aug 14 2011, 11:31 PM Post #15 |
|
Troll Certified
![]()
|
Electric is the future. I believe that 100%. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Geo Metro Lounge · Next Topic » |


Welcome to the all new Geo Metro Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.








3:34 AM Jul 11