Hydro Assist Fuel Cell

[Guest Tammy]

With the price of gas, has anybody ever looked into putting one of these in the Reatta? ~Tammy

[Jim NotreDame IN]

do you have a link to click on? i'm not sure what you're talking about exactly. thanks

[Guest TommyH]

None of that stuff works. Engery cannot be made, only transfreed from one form to another. You cannot make more energy than you put in. Have't you seen those episodes of MythBusters? They went very indepth about that stuff.

[Guest Tammy]

OK! You can go to www.hafctechnology.com for lots of information. Need more information, you can call Dave Kosak (608)768-1776 he is in Reedsburg, Wi. Or you can email KOSAKCS@RUCLS.NET attention Sandy. There is a mechanic in Reedsburg as well who can install this. But as you will read, I'm betting most of you will be able to install this yourself.

How this came about to me, I read a letter to the editor in my paper about the HAFC. A person I know of, increased her mileage from 15-18 to 57. Which is huge in my book.

I do not know Dave Kosak personally, just that he has been in business as a Chimney and stove specialist for many years and is a honest, hard worker. And is a dealer for this HAFC.

Tommy, I'm guessing that TV show hasn't tried this system. This works, and there's many around my area to prove this.~Tammy

[Jim NotreDame IN]

sounds like a cool idea... obviously the equipment draws a current that puts strain on the engine, but perhaps the hydrogen created makes up for that. i know with diesel vehicles that run on vegetable oil, mileage is decreased a bit, but the oil is cheaper than diesel fuel, so you get the cost benefit from such a system.

i'm curious what the system costs, and if they send you a kit, or make you pay for installation.

[Guest Tammy]

It is my understanding that they would send this to you. If you would need help with install, there are trained mechanic's out there. One in Reedsburg that I know of. As far as price, I did not ask. Reading the information, it would appear to depend on what system you get. Which would depend on what car/engine you have. I would want to ask that question to Dave Kosak himself. I am not sure if a person could get a better deal/rate/price etc...than the last/next person. If there was a interest within this forum maybe we could get a better price.

What I read in the paper, she owns a 2000 Venture and is not mechanically inclined and could afford the $1500. So I am guessing she paid someone to install it which would have cost her more money. But I am thinking, much like going to a used car lot....here I go again ...one person might get one price and another person a different price?

This does interest me. As I am keeping my eyes open for a newer vehicle, prehaps a crew cab truck. This HAFC would help the gas mileage. ~Tammy

[dnt]

Tammy, we elect YOU to have one installed and report the results back to us. ;-)

[Howard]

Tammy, while I don't want to sound like a downer, but I have to agree with Tommy. There is an old axiom, if its too good to be true, it most likely is not true. If such a device worked, people would be standing in line to get the product. I reviewed the website, and many of the mileage figures stated as to the "before ratings" are not correct either. With that said, if you should have the device installed and it turns out that the product works as advertised, I will offer my most humble apology and beg your pardon and your forgiveness. If it does not work, I will simply whisper, I told you so. Let us know what you decided to do. Hey, if the thing works, I would get one too, assuming it does not cost more the a few months worth of gas.

[jonlabree]

Did anyone watch the video?

[D-a-n-i-e-l]

Tammy and everyone else even thinking about this,

I wish more than anything I could condone this or many other "gas saving" products on the market. BUT, the fact remains this is not the solution to gas mileage. Here are the fact on why this will not work the way they would like you to believe.

1) It takes more energy to seperate water (H2O) into hydrogen (H) and Oxygen (O) than can be produced by recombinding them back into water. (The proccess of combution of Hydrogen and Oxygen make once again water)

2) As stated earlier you can neither create or destroy energy, just change its form. PERIOD! I am sorry but electrolysis of water is not the answer.

Now if you are really interested in saving gas/fuel and helping out with the use of oil the only valid option right now is bio-decil and E-85 fuels. Now the Reatta could be modified to use E-85, even with the supercharger, but these are still not the answer. Even if we put all of our corn, soy, and other produce to produce these two fuels it would not cover more than 3% of our nations fuel consumption.

Hydrogen powered cars are a wonderful idea, but the fact remains that our current answer of mass producing hydrogen is to burn natral gas. Yes this is much cleaner, but we would still be dependent on fossil fuel.

Last thing. Electric cars, This is the most likely answer to our nation's/world's fuel issues. With the invent of 20%+ effetiant solar cells the average person could drive 5-10 miles per day (parking outside) with no outside fuel source. But we would all still need a reliable long distance vehicle.

Once again, I am sorry to burst anyone's bubble but most energy is not free.

Also remember that there were people selling bihydrogenoxide for like $10 per gallon and made well over a million dollars. This is just an other name for water

[D-a-n-i-e-l]

One other thing, adding a hydrogen combution to your gas engine would produce a large amount of water that would take away from the lubercation properties of the fuel, and likely get into your oil. Not to mention the difrence in combution properties. Most deffinately producing knocking or too much pressure, one or the other (I can not remember the combustion properties of Hydrogen vs gas).

[Ronnie]

Isn't it odd that there are NO reviews of this gadget, that I can find anyway, on the Internet?

If the thing worked three things would be happening.

1. It would be all that would be talked about on CNN for week.

2. Big oil companies would be trying to buy the patent to it so we would never see it.

3. It would be the biggest selling feature on cars since the electric starter was introduced.

[Guest EDBS0]

Found on the www

"The energy efficiency of water electrolysis varies widely. Some report 50–70%[1], while the theoretical maximum efficiency of the electrolysis of water is between 80–94%.[2] These values refer only to the efficiency of converting electrical energy into hydrogen's chemical energy. The energy lost in generating the electricity is not included. For instance, when considering a power plant that converts the heat of nuclear reactions into hydrogen via electrolysis, the total efficiency may be closer to 25–45%"

Now if you could use a 9,800 square foot solar cell for "free" electricity it might work.

One liter of hydrogen weighs 0.09 g; one liter of oxygen weighs 1.47 g. It means that it is possible to produce 111.11/0.09=1234.44 liters of hydrogen and 888.89/1.47=604.69 liters of oxygen from one liter of water.

[Guest ekvh]

I read the article. The idea that the hafc computer they sell you could teach your car's computer to learn to use the additional source of o2 and H as a supplement to gas is believable, but the catch...................covalizer??? snake oil. hocus pocus. It's another additive that will likely be cost prohibitive.

[KDirk]

Well,

Being from Missouri (AKA the "show me state") I have to rank this right up with the Vornado (remember that one, of infomercials past?) and other such "innovations" of questionable origin and functionality.

This one is a little bit different in that it is presented as scientifically complicated enough that it sounds good to people without detailed understanding of what is going on. It also does the psychological attention grab by seizing on two of the magic green buzzwords du jour: Hydrogen and Fuel Cell. This automatically makes it great, right?

Uh, yeah, that's what I thought.

Really just a new spin on the old line:

If you can't impress them with your intelligence, baffle them with your bull....

Ok, now that I'm done being a wise guy, I just have to say sorry, I don't see this doing any good at all. Except to the bottom line of the company making and marketing it.

BTW, $1500 is 461.5 gallons of regular (89 octane) at current average price of $3.25/gal. This amount of gas would fill a Reatta 25.6 times over. Figuring a once weekly fillup if it's a daily driver, this is half a years worth of gas.

For me, I could probably get almost 10-12 months out of this amount of gas in my Reatta. It is my second car and I might need to fill it every two weeks. Even after two weeks of periodic use, I'd probably have a third of a tank left.

Just some thoughts.

KDirk

[Jim NotreDame IN]

i found plans to build these hydrogen generators at waterpoweredcar.com they are pretty simple devices. supposedly there was a man named stanley meyer that developed a way to make cars run entirely on water electrolysis like this, and was offered tons and tons of money to sit on his invention and then allegedly was "killed" for his invention.

there's a lot of info on the web about him and others that have tried to achieve this feat, a lot of conspiracy theory's too. but if you wanted to try and build one of these hydrogen generators, the plans on that page should have you shopping at home depot in no time.

lemme know what you think.

[Ronnie]

I don't think I want to take a chance on being "killed" for building one of them. Just kidding. Go for it and let us know how it works.

[KDirk]

Anyone remember the short lived spin off of the X-Files, The Lone Gunmen? There was an episode in which they discovered a water powered car buried in an old barn somewhere, at the end of the episode they got it running and drove it around the barn yard.

Not that this is really pertinent to the discussion, I just happened to remember it.

The bigger issue with the existence of and conspiracy around the suppression of such technology is that it just doesn't hold water, pun intended. Think about it, we know in an instant (well, in the 6 seconds a TV satellite takes to relay a signal) what color Brittney Spears panties are (are aren't...), and we are supposed to believe something as world-changing as a REAL way out of the oil crunch could be kept secret. I just can't buy that.

We, as a society, have spent decades and billions of dollars on cancer research, which has yielded better treatments for some types but still no outright cures. My point in saying this is that despite untold hard work we still don't have what we are looking for. The transition off of gas will be much the same.

The need to eliminate dependence on fossil fuels is at least as big an issue as cancer, actually bigger as it effects every single person alive today. Much work is being done now, but it will be a very long time before real progress is made.

Something as big as a technology that would eliminate the need for fossil fuels and quite literally change everything as we now know it, could not be suppressed. Not now, in the 21st century when there is so much scrutiny and communication. Besides, we all know people can't keep stupid simple little secrets, why wouldn't they blab something this big?

Further, even if there were such a technology it would have to be practical on the same cost and availability scale as what we now have with oil. Ethanol clearly isn't going to be it. Neither will hydrogen, barring some miracle breakthrough in being able to make hydrogen cheaply.

Electric cars that don't generate their own power on board will not be the answer as they will need to "plug in" to recharge. This simply displaces the need for burning fossil fuel to a power plant somewhere.

I am watching with some interest the compressed air powered car now being made in France. This may prove to have some potential but the air has to be made by a compressor powered by what? We keep coming back to the same problem. It will take some Einsteinian-level mind to come along and shatter science as we all know it to fix this problem. I just don't see any other solution.

KDirk

[Ronnie]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The bigger issue with the existence of and conspiracy around the suppression of such technology is that it just doesn't hold water, pun intended. Think about it, we know in an instant (well, in the 6 seconds a TV satellite takes to relay a signal) what color Brittney Spears panties are (are aren't...), and we are supposed to believe something as world-changing as a REAL way out of the oil crunch could be kept secret. I just can't buy that. </div></div>

I agree completely!

[jonlabree]

You have a lot of faith in the oil companys.

[Guest Tammy]

hummmmmm...I might have to invite Mr Kosak to the forum. I'll admit this is all over my head, yet they are giving you a 100% guarantee of at least a 50% or better mileage.

This has been a HOT topic in the local paper for some time. Some say electric cars is the way to go, others swear by this HAFC.

Being that I don't even have my Reatta out of winter storage yet, still so deep in snow, but it is melting And I am getting ready to open my own store, I have NO extra time what so ever. But I am not ready to just push this "out of mind"

I am one who has always done everything myself. "If theres a will theres a way" and often need to have a "open mind" until I am proven wrong about something. Guess we won't know the answer to this HAFC until someone has tried it. I don't have that kind of cash right now,it's going into the store. My name is still~Tammy

[Ronnie]

As in the famous words of Forrest Gump: "That's all I have to say about that."

[Guest Tammy]

I did get to talk to Dave Kozak today. Yes this system is out there and yes it works. People are just to something like this and would rather just say, NO IT AIN'T GONNA WORK! If I was standing next to a pink elephant, you would say what elephant? If you had your own pink elephant, you'd believe too.

For someone who puts on a lot of miles, this is for you. If your grandma going to church and the store for a loaf of bread, maybe not.

The kits are 2-4 weeks out right now. $1075.00 $25 S/H If you pay MO or CASH or even CHECK to Dave, he gives a $35 discount. Install in Reedsburg is around $500, but it can be done yourself, but you need to tune it right. You can go to www.installersupport.info for the manual. I know you guys LOVE your manual's

Instead of thinking for reason's why it won't work, how about thinking for reason's why it does work? OPEN MINDS

It will extend the life of your engine, so no car dealer/gas company wants to hear/see that.

I wish I could do it now, and then I would close my store and drive to Flint and show everybody.

Even the local police dept. is looking into this.

Dave has come to meeting's etc to talk on this if there is enough people attending. Phone tele conferences too.

"thats all I have to say about that"~Tammy

[Guest DTerry]

Sorry. Smells like sheep dip to me. Wills and ways notwithstanding, energy requirements are energy requirements; and you just can't overcome physical limitations...otherwise we'd have perpetual motion machines and wouldn't need fuel of any kind.

[KDirk]

Ok, some final thoughts from me on this topic.

I would be delighted to have this thing proven to work as advertised. It would be the best thing I'd likely hear or see this year if it does what it claims. Maybe the best thing this decade. I am am saying this seriously, no sarcasm at all. If it did what it claims, I'd buy it and be happy to be told "I told you so".

Heck, if it did work, the gov't should cancel our $600 rebate checks and give every vehicle driving American one of these for free. Would do a whole lot more for the economy than the handout will. And it would give us something useful to manufacture here in the US as an added benefit. Heck, the US automakers could buy it and hold the rest of the world hostage to get their hands on the technology. That would sure shake things up.

I am a perennial skeptic by nature, but with good cause. We have seen all manner of ideas to improve gas mileage on cars in the last 40 years. Other than weight/size reductions, fewer cylinders and the transition to computer controlled fuel injection from carbueration, nothing has made any notable difference.

Some say the auto industry is holding out on improving mileage capability. Why? Right now, if GM/Ford/Chrysler who are suffering poor new vehicle sales (again) could introduce a car that got 45 average combined city/hwy MPG on regular gas with no gee-whiz hybrid fuel cell hamster in a wheel doodad goofiness, they could whip the pants off every single import made and be back on top of their game for the first time in almost 4 decades.

The thing could probably even be butt ugly and have no cup holder and it would still outsell all possible production because people are spooked about gas prices and would welcome a car that would give them some relief.

Sales of such a car would make the manufacturer far more than the cost of R&D many times over. Thus, there is no disincentive to making a more fuel efficient engine, and thus it should be in production as we speak if it were technically feasible. That it isn't in production proves that it can't be done either at all or at least without some serious sacrifice in cost, reliability or other unknown factor that the car buying public simply would not accept.

The internal combustion engine has been around for a century. There are countless people who are experts in its design and functioning. It is not some far fetched, out there concept that requires a scientific mind on the order of Newton, DaVinci or Einstein to understand.

That out of all the public at large who can tear down and rebuild and engine, who understand it's theory of operation and can modify it to improve performance, not one single person has stepped forward to say "I have a better way that will double the fuel economy" and then be able to prove it beyond any doubt should tell us all something. The technology isn't suppressed, it just isn't there to begin with.

Bottom line, asking an engine maker to create an exponential improvement in performance from the same basically 100 year old design running on the same fuel is like asking a guy who builds fighter jets to build a flying saucer with anti-gravity propulsion and time warp capabilites. We just aren't there yet.

With the current red-herring side shows of ethanol and fuel cells, it will likely be a long time before we ever do have a good solution. It is frustrating, disappointing and costly that we are being led down the what is increasingly sure to be the wrong path, but this is the nature of big business and the natural human aversion to making any really hard changes. Everybody wants the easiest, least painful solution to a given problem. Regrettably, these types of solutions are mediocre stop-gaps at best and complete scams at worst.

I guess I've beaten this argument to death now. 'Nuff said.

KDirk

[Reatta45]

KDirk,

Now you have done it… You and a few others have applied common sense to this. These things don’t follow common sense, they only sell with testimonials. That is why you will never see anything like evidence/documentation that it will do what most think it claims to do.

As fuel prices increase you will see more amazing but unsubstantiated devices and methods to get spectacular results… all with testimonials to convince… KennyV

[D-a-n-i-e-l]

Last time.

It takes more energy to seperate water (H2O) into hydrogen (H) and Oxygen (O) than can be produced by recombinding them back into water. (The proccess of combution of Hydrogen and Oxygen make once again water)

Also were are you getting the power to seperate the water? Battery and alternator? What charges them? The engine driven by the FUEL? No mater what the fuel is you have losses and can not put out as much energy as you put in.

Basically to even have a chance of working your car running on hydrogen would have to get cooler as it runs. NOT warmer, so when he can produce cold fire I would buy it.

Also, Tamy if your guy is for real or wants to have a chance to prove he and his science fair project are for real. Have him contact me. If he can show me it works I will buy 20 on the spot. (That is one for each person in my detatchment)

Have him start with disproving most of these laws of thermal dynamics

http://www.emc.maricopa.edu/faculty/farabee/BIOBK/BioBookEner1.html

Tammy I know it sounds good but please do not buy into it. I would love if it were true or even possible.

[Guest ekvh]

What we need is more wind-turbine-towers to generate the electricity to make the hydrogen. We could put a well by each turbine and then just haul the H and O2 around to where it's needed. Then it's nice and portable. Now hear me out, if we got enough wind towers going on the face of the earth, we could make the earth begin to slow down and then start to move backwards around the sun and we'd get younger and prettier looking too.

[Guest Mc_Reatta]

Here are some sites for more background information on this idea.

http://www.fuel-efficient-vehicles.org/FEV-hydrogen-generator-build-one.php

http://www.hytechapps.com/company/press

http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=US2004074781&F=0

There have been more than enough demonstrations to show that the concept will work. Dennis Klein did get a patent for the using a “hydrogen generator for uses in a vehicle fuel system”. The idea was not meant to be a “perpetual motion machine” where you create all the energy you need to power a vehicle, but it will use the electricity from the car’s charging system to turn water into an even more efficient fuel than gasoline. (NASA doesn't launch the shuttle into space using gasoline, they use liquid hydrogen and oxygen.) This extra fuel source is then burned by the engine along with the gasoline to propel the car, creating a significant increase in the miles per gallon of gasoline burned. Not all of the electrical current available from the alternator is needed by the car so there is some available to run this generator that would be available at a small loss of efficiency of performance unless you have most of all the electronics in the vehicle turned on at the same time.

Interestingly, the generator was first devised to make fuel for metal welding and cutting applications. Klein’s creation of a more efficient cell for electrolyzing water into hydrogen and oxygen is what make this a practical invention.

There are plans on these sites for someone to build one of these up rather easily and give it a try if they have the time and inclination, and hopfully report back with pictures.

Mike McDonald

Patrick AFB, FL

[jonlabree]

Another hoax???

http://thermo1.com/index.htm

[Guest Tammy]

Well, no sense beating a dead horse.

But, I just don't know what to say when these are on cars over here and they keep them on because they work. And when they are 100% guaranteed to improve your milage at least 5o%, or YOUR MONEY BACK. I will have to tell the people who have them, that they don't work.

[Guest EDBS0]

Well I have been reading and reading and there just might be something here.

Instead of looking for reasons why this won't work how about looking for reasons why it might work!

[Jim NotreDame IN]

what nobody is willing to acknowledge here is that you have to put water into the system, just like you have to put gasoline in your tank. it is consumed. the energy is not being created from "nowhere", it is rendered from the water that you feed it. it is not a balanced equation, the water is consumed and that is where the extra power comes from.

hydrogen, in this case, is the result of an electrolysis process, that is normally cost restricting vs the gain. but it is feasible that if you have an "unlimited" supply of free water, you can run an engine cheaper after the losses of onboard electrolysis than you could running an engine on $3.30/gal petroleum.

hydrogen is a more powerful fuel than gasoline is chemically, because it has seven open electron spaces that it will try to fill in a chemical reaction, and gas is a stable/balanced hydrocarbon molecule that only has a reaction because we burn it.

anyway, the claim of many of these hydrogen booster resources is that there is a specific frequency or wave pattern that resonates with a water molecule and splits it more efficiently than just standard dc electrolysis.

looking into it further, i've found that more websites out there are dedicated to sharing free information and spreading the word about this technology than they are to selling it. lots of people out there would like to see the pollution and resource depletion halted, and save some money in the process.

i personally think that the government makes too much money in taxes on oil to come up with an alternative that isn't controlled and taxed equally. i know i wouldn't take showers anymore if water had a .50c per gallon tax on it.

oil is a multi-billion dollar business, so i almost believe some of these stories about people being paid or threatened into silence about their inventions. i'd spend a few billion to keep somebody from taking my other 200.

there's my rant... lemme have it

[KDirk]

Jim,

I hate to revisit this topic again, because I thought I had said everything I could but...

You raise a valid point on the water consumption. This is actually another pitfall of this idea as I see it, since we are already seeing political fights over water supply. Anyone catch the story a few weeks back about Georgia trying to claim their state border with Tennessee was mis-surveyed back in the 1800's?

Now they want the border moved North (to where they claim it should have been save for a surveyor with mis-calibrated equipment) which would put a chunk of the Tennessee river inside Georgia, and Viola, they just "solved" their water shortage. Never bothered them in 200 years that they apparently got shorted some swampy real estate until the constituency got upset about running out of water.

Why is this relevant? Well, many places that would benefit most from hydrogen powered/assisted cars are places that are very large cities with long commutes, large numbers of vehicles, huge population, high gas prices and - incidentally - chronic water shortages. Atlanta, or anyplace in southern California, just for example.

People in these places can't water their lawns or wash their cars many times by gov't decree, and now we are going to fuel their cars with water? Brilliant! Which is more important to you: the ability to sustain life by drinking water, or making sure you can drive the 50 miles from your [parched] suburban paradise to go to work? Think hard now.

I do agree with your assertion that there is an inherent government/corporate interest in protecting the Oil business, up to a point. Too much money is made, and there is too much to lose for entrenched interests to simply wave the white flag.

Then again, if this hydrogen generator is truly effective - which is scientifically possible - and can be built by anyone with requisite electrical and mechanical knowledge, then why aren't we seeing a large number of people rolling their own? If it works and nobody is doing it then there are only two other explanations; either we [as a society] are too stupid, or too lazy to do something that would be a huge benefit. Maybe this is it, a plain lack of initiative.

The same thing could be said of bio-diesel. This has been around for years, and is proven to work albeit only on diesel engines, and yet it has not become terribly popular. Anyone know why? It seems like a winning proposition to me yet very few people have taken the effort to run their diesel vehicles on it. There has to be some reason, even if it is just the sheer unwillingness to put out the effort to make the change.

Heck, I don't know. I try to apply logic to an argument, and things like this defy logic. If anybody has the answer, you are more enlightened than I am.

KDirk

[Guest imported_JohnW]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KDirk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Jim,

Then again, if this hydrogen generator is truly effective - which is scientifically possible - and can be built by anyone with requisite electrical and mechanical knowledge, then why aren't we seeing a large number of people rolling their own? If it works and nobody is doing it then there are only two other explanations; either we [as a society] are too stupid, or too lazy to do something that would be a huge benefit. Maybe this is it, a plain lack of initiative.

KDirk </div></div>

I'm in total agreement. Can anyone possibly believe that the people in China or India would not be using these cure all devices if they truely work?

[D-a-n-i-e-l]

PSST... JIM

The reason biofuels are not the answer is; even if we put all of our resoures into them it would only make up around 3% of our fuel consumption as a nation. Brazil does use Bio fuels for almost all there fuel, but they have less people and less vehicles per person. Brazil also has a much higher production of ag products per person. Thus making it possible for them to be almost indepentent of fossil fuel.

And as for water providing the energy, this is what everyone is missing, you put electricity into the water to seperate the molicules. Yhe amount of energy it takes to seperate the water is MORE than what is released in the combustion of the hydrogen.

And if these are running around were you are Tammy, find one and see if they will let you monitor a tank of gas. if the car is really getting such great fuel economy, I would see no reason why they would not want to let you see it for yourself.

[Guest Tammy]

OK, next time I see her van in town here, I will run out and stop her dead in her tracks and I'll have a look at her system. I know that she has gotten better than 57 miles per gallon, but that is her avg. As with anything this depends on how you drive too. If your nonstop on the interstate, you will get better than just stopping around town. If you have a reg carb on a older model car, this will NOT work. I would be better off to view the insurance agent's car, but he is on the road all the time, he gets better milage. And if I was to put one on, I'd put it on my full size van, unless I get the newer truck, then it would go there. Since I don't drive my Reatta much, and with opening my store, looks like I'll drive it even less. So there is no sense of me trying it out on that.

But when I get Taxes back ( have to get them done 1st ) then I hope to be able to try this out. And if it does what others have had it do...what was it D_A_N_I_E_L has said..."I'll BUY 20 OF THEM!"

Why would these people keep this on their car if they weren't getting the promised 50% better milage. I'd want my money back, wouldn't you?

[Guest Squire Tom]

i hope the product wasnt advertised on a late night infomercial or purchased from the " as seen on tv " rack at kmart.

thermodynamics laws say you are going to lose to the sum total of energy required , unless you are using solar energy ( which for the time being is free ). you always lose energy in a process. you have to supply energy to make something happen and as in anything there is no 100% efficient process.

smokey yunick was probably one of the greatest innovators in combustion technology ,invented the adiabatic engine . it was better than internal combustion and was actually used by gm. however it was cheaper to keep doing what they were doing , as the consumer paid the gasoline bill.

except in the case of Jack Daniels

[Guest Tammy]

Well, today I got a phone call from one lady who has this on her van. She has gotten 100% better mileage. She tells me this system was in the News Week mag about 2 months ago. I have not looked it up.

She said her van is still going through the clean up stage. Because your engnie runs cleaner etc..your getting rid of all that built up carbon etc... so her water is a little cloudy yet. Her van was in for the free flush today. Her milage will probably still improve. She has gotten up to 78 mpg.She has had no problems and is very very happy with this.

When I asked her more detailed questions, she wasn't exactly sure of the answers. (You guys got into heavy detailed stuff)She did her best to answer my questions.

She said Dave goes through everything with you, and will tell you if your car will work or not. I know a reg carb, will not work. Dave did say my full size Chevy van would be perfect, as is those Ford trucks with the v10 engine. Those guys are really happy with the system.

She said she may be in town tomorrow and I could look at it if I wanted to.

I do believe her, however I don't believe she is the best person to talk to about all this. Dave could answer everything better.

[Ronnie]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> ... so her water is a little cloudy yet. Her van was in for the free flush today.</div></div> Pardon me but I'm very confused about this device. What water is getting cloudy? And about the "free flush", is your car required to have a toilet installed before the device will work properly? Maybe Dave will know...