But the alternator pulley is always spinning; just the regulator won't let more electricity go the the fully charged battery, right. Since it's always spinning, wouldn't that be where the HHO kits get their so called free energy from? Not really free, just already there and untapped.
-
TDR Magazine subscribers receive more than the magazine! You also gain additional forum privileges!
Details here: TDR Privileges
Subscribe to TDR Magazine here: https://www.tdr-online.com/
Hydrogen Generator for trucks
- Thread starter EricBu12
- Start Date
Attention: TDR Forum Junkies To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.
Thanks, TDR Staff
T
TMax
Guest
Yes my point exactly. We could go on and on but truthfully, I'd love to see some real world results before I pass judgement either way. If I am wrong then so be it and I can man up and take it. I have some friends that have seen the mileage gains in their buddy's HHO system so I do believe them... . why would they fabricate a story when they have no financial incentive to do so? I'm just looking for more corraboration before spending money myself.
The alternator pulley IS always spinning - but the actual power involved in spinning it depends upon the power it is generating at any specific point in time - LOW power draw, less effort to spin the pulley - HIGH amp draw - such as lights and grid heaters - and that pulley gets far harder to spin.
SO, the question is, WILL the HP draw of the alternator at full output be LESS, or MORE than the potential volume of Hydrogen gas generated and fed into the engine and the power or mileage GAIN it supplies?
The guy I pointed to earlier, powers his car TOTALLY fueled by Hydrogen generation - no conventional fuel at all - in fact, he's converted his GAS tank into a WATER tank to supply the Hydrogen generator!
Besides that, he really doesn't seem to have anything to SELL or profit from - so why lie?
BUT, what he hasn't shown or described, is WHAT car is he using for that - and what is the available sustained cruising speed and range for it?
Hopefully, Eric will eventually clear up at least SOME of those issues for the rest of us! :-laf
SO, the question is, WILL the HP draw of the alternator at full output be LESS, or MORE than the potential volume of Hydrogen gas generated and fed into the engine and the power or mileage GAIN it supplies?
The guy I pointed to earlier, powers his car TOTALLY fueled by Hydrogen generation - no conventional fuel at all - in fact, he's converted his GAS tank into a WATER tank to supply the Hydrogen generator!
Besides that, he really doesn't seem to have anything to SELL or profit from - so why lie?
BUT, what he hasn't shown or described, is WHAT car is he using for that - and what is the available sustained cruising speed and range for it?
Hopefully, Eric will eventually clear up at least SOME of those issues for the rest of us! :-laf
D
DPellegrin
Guest
Gary-K7GLD,
I'm having a little problem with the "perpetual motion machine" you are describing in you post #23. What you describe seems to be that the vehicle runs on water is quit simply not possible. There is not enough electrical power on that car to make enough hydrogen to make the horsepower needed to operate a full size passenger car. Be mindful that you are saying that not only is there enough electrical energy produced from the water to make the hydrogen; but also there is some left over to propel the car as well.
You need to take a closer look, just ain't so!!
Sadi Carnot (2nd law of thermodynamics) must be spinning in his grave!
Regards,
I'm having a little problem with the "perpetual motion machine" you are describing in you post #23. What you describe seems to be that the vehicle runs on water is quit simply not possible. There is not enough electrical power on that car to make enough hydrogen to make the horsepower needed to operate a full size passenger car. Be mindful that you are saying that not only is there enough electrical energy produced from the water to make the hydrogen; but also there is some left over to propel the car as well.
You need to take a closer look, just ain't so!!
Sadi Carnot (2nd law of thermodynamics) must be spinning in his grave!
Regards,
Don't gripe to me - I didn't originate that web page, or description - but it sure would seem strange, that a guy with NOTHING to gain, would go to all that trouble just to promote a lie...
But, as we know, some folks go to great extremes to create false impressions and mislead others - and usually, they DO have something to sell...
1000 yrs ago we KNEW the Earth was flat,
Less than 100 yrs ago we were still using an abacus to do math, dont assume that technology has stopped. This is NOT a claim of "perpetual motion" as the vehicle DOES burn fuel. Many auto manufacturers have/are making prototype hydrogen cars. This would be a waste of time if the physics were impossible. The only difference is HOW the hydrogen is produced and stored for the engine. If a low current draw device "cracks" enough water to power an engine what law is broken? Maybe it is the "holy grail" of energy production but there seems to be alot of people at least trying to do it. I, for one, would welcome REAL data on the subject.
Look here
Water-fuelled car - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Key is that water has one of the strongest elementary bonds, it simply takes MORE energy to brake it down that you can get from the elements. As far as people SAYING that they are getting better mileage means NOTHING, If they don't have a record of fuel mileage before ANY tests are done, AND nothing else has changed it is ONLY SPECULATION! I remember when "cow magnets" taped to you fuel line would get you 50% better mileage. PROVED to be untrue, just people wanted to believe that it would work so they THOUGHT that they were getting better mileage, or, some would change there driving style so that they did get better mileage during there tests. I know that I can get 2mpg better on a tank if I drive slower (BTW I have EVERY tank of fuel figured on my truck w/65,000mi). There are SO many variables that it would be hard to say that X is why I'm getting Y mileage. My last of fuel is up 50% than the last tank, does that mean that I made a new discovery??? Or is it just because the tank before that I was towing out 5th wheel in the mountains? Again if it was this simple, big LAGITAMENT companies would be selling these things, not some guy out of his garage, and the automakers would be ALL OVER IT!!!!
Water-fuelled car - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Key is that water has one of the strongest elementary bonds, it simply takes MORE energy to brake it down that you can get from the elements. As far as people SAYING that they are getting better mileage means NOTHING, If they don't have a record of fuel mileage before ANY tests are done, AND nothing else has changed it is ONLY SPECULATION! I remember when "cow magnets" taped to you fuel line would get you 50% better mileage. PROVED to be untrue, just people wanted to believe that it would work so they THOUGHT that they were getting better mileage, or, some would change there driving style so that they did get better mileage during there tests. I know that I can get 2mpg better on a tank if I drive slower (BTW I have EVERY tank of fuel figured on my truck w/65,000mi). There are SO many variables that it would be hard to say that X is why I'm getting Y mileage. My last of fuel is up 50% than the last tank, does that mean that I made a new discovery??? Or is it just because the tank before that I was towing out 5th wheel in the mountains? Again if it was this simple, big LAGITAMENT companies would be selling these things, not some guy out of his garage, and the automakers would be ALL OVER IT!!!!
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's a study by NREL, using CNG Cummins Engines and a heck of a lot more Hw2 than these kits provide. http://www.nrel.gov/vehiclesandfuels/ngvtf/pdfs/38707.pdf
NREL Found, as the study states, that the busses used MORE fuel than before, but not enough to matter. They conclude that Hydrogen has little effect on mileage. Read the study for yourself. The executive study summarizes it nicely.
Now, these guys were using an on-board supply of H2, and not loading the alternator to make it.
For those of you that have tried it with favorable results... I'm not accusing anyone of not telling the truth. Every single person from the TDR that I've met has been an honorable guy... . but this just doesn't make good sense, and 3rd party studies support that fact.
Someone please how me a 3rd party study that says otherwise. I can't find one.
Joe
NREL Found, as the study states, that the busses used MORE fuel than before, but not enough to matter. They conclude that Hydrogen has little effect on mileage. Read the study for yourself. The executive study summarizes it nicely.
Now, these guys were using an on-board supply of H2, and not loading the alternator to make it.
For those of you that have tried it with favorable results... I'm not accusing anyone of not telling the truth. Every single person from the TDR that I've met has been an honorable guy... . but this just doesn't make good sense, and 3rd party studies support that fact.
Someone please how me a 3rd party study that says otherwise. I can't find one.
Joe
Wellllllllllllllllllll..... ThThThThThThat’s all folks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I did at least ASK, back on page one of this thread, if this was too good to be true
But, it DOES sure looks like I was a knucklehed for even HOPING that it might be true.
Sorry about that DPellegrini --laf
And I didn’t even think to check Wikipedeaia, like BobV has so effectively done. That his reference link also hyperlinked to an article on the Crowley Engine Patent made it even better. Oo.
Eric, I guess that if your apparatus doesn’t work as advertised, you probably won’t be alone--at the very least I imagine youll be able to be join as a litigant in a class action suit. #@$%!
See you guys around in another thread, :-{}:-laf
Clark
ps--I promise I won't ever use this many smiley thingies in a post again!
Last edited by a moderator:
SHUCKS - I'm as skeptical of this as the next guy - if I wasn't, I'd already have one on my vehicles! :-laf
BUT, lots of big name inventors - unknown at the time (Edison and Bell weren't ALWAYS a household names - and in Da Vinci's time, everyone KNEW man couldn't FLY!) did the "impossible", made giant strides in technology - and benefited us all. And yes, they were also called dreamers and fools...
Yeah - THIS Hydrogen generator bit may well fall on it's face - but calling or referring to fellow TDR members as gullible fools (as is being done in other related threads) is hardly proper - after all, THESE guys are actually sticking their necks out, spending their $$$, and risking ridicule for their efforts.
What have YOU actively done to ease fuel costs lately, hmmmmmm?:-laf
BUT, lots of big name inventors - unknown at the time (Edison and Bell weren't ALWAYS a household names - and in Da Vinci's time, everyone KNEW man couldn't FLY!) did the "impossible", made giant strides in technology - and benefited us all. And yes, they were also called dreamers and fools...
Yeah - THIS Hydrogen generator bit may well fall on it's face - but calling or referring to fellow TDR members as gullible fools (as is being done in other related threads) is hardly proper - after all, THESE guys are actually sticking their necks out, spending their $$$, and risking ridicule for their efforts.
What have YOU actively done to ease fuel costs lately, hmmmmmm?
:-laf
D
DPellegrin
Guest
Gary-K7GLD,
Please know that my comments are offered with the utmost respect. In fact, I see this forum as a free exchange of ideas. That does not mean we always agree. Who knows, we may learn something from each other!
Regards,
Please know that my comments are offered with the utmost respect. In fact, I see this forum as a free exchange of ideas. That does not mean we always agree. Who knows, we may learn something from each other!
Regards,
hey guys, haven't been on in a bit... on vacation... was hoping to have the kit on before this but to no availl. .
I do accurate Fuel and hand calculations. . my speedo is accurate due to the Superlift Speedo corrector.
I do drive conservatively with a 6 speed so the hydrogen will have the best chance to work. I usually get about 17-19 mpg solo. I had a bad headwind in Nevada and got 8-10 mpg towing and then in California, got upwards of 12 mpg in the rolling hills.
I will do one tank of normal operation and do Hand calculations for the mileage. then I will install the system and do another tank and post the results.
I will also do the same with my wifes car which is a Ford Escape with a V-6 Auto.
My thinking on the hydrogen is that yes it does take a little energy to run the kit but I believe it will produce more energy than it will require to run it. . If it only takes 10 to 15 amps to run, The cummins won't be too affected by that.
I will do detailed reports on this to prove or disprove it.
I do accurate Fuel and hand calculations. . my speedo is accurate due to the Superlift Speedo corrector.
I do drive conservatively with a 6 speed so the hydrogen will have the best chance to work. I usually get about 17-19 mpg solo. I had a bad headwind in Nevada and got 8-10 mpg towing and then in California, got upwards of 12 mpg in the rolling hills.
I will do one tank of normal operation and do Hand calculations for the mileage. then I will install the system and do another tank and post the results.
I will also do the same with my wifes car which is a Ford Escape with a V-6 Auto.
My thinking on the hydrogen is that yes it does take a little energy to run the kit but I believe it will produce more energy than it will require to run it. . If it only takes 10 to 15 amps to run, The cummins won't be too affected by that.
I will do detailed reports on this to prove or disprove it.
Eric,
If you stop and think about it, you know that this is impossible. If we could convert one kind of energy to another, and gain energy along the way, our power problems would be solved.
Joe
With all due respect - over the years, and with several actual involved and lengthy tests I have done for my own information to prove or disprove popularly held THEORIES - the greatest opposition and vocal abuse came NOT from others who themselves did any testing of their own - but rather, those who steadfastly and stubbornly insisted on clinging to old wives tales and similar "we've always been taught, and believed that - so it MUST be true... " lines of "scientific" reasoning.
The "flat earth" syndrome... :-laf
Having "been there, done that", regardless of what Eric comes up with here on a positive note - his results will, among critics who have already made up their minds, and NEVER tried what they criticise - be tossed aside as "not properly run", "due to changes in testing methods, wind direction, or phase of the moon"...
Eric, I'm interested in your test, and look forward to results - just be aware that among some, your results - if positive - will NEVER be accepted among armchair critics and experts - after all, we KNOW it's "impossible"...
:-lafJoe Bio Diesel and others.
If you stop and think about it, you know that this is impossible. If we could convert one kind of energy to another, and gain energy along the way, our power problems would be solved.
You said that right????
Then tell me the advantages of bio diesel because you are taking A FOOD PRODUCT (engery and protein) and converting to an oil then to a fuel and then burning it thats a two fold waste not even thinking about the waste of a food product thats a whole other issue.
Bio Diesel form virgin oil and corn based ethanol are the biggest lies the oil companys and the govt have told us, Will that and Global warming. this is from 1975 ????? Newsweek on the cooling world so if we are back to the 1940 level the real problem is from the 1880's that was before petrol right?
If you take a food product and make a fuel product from it then thats a waste if you take a waste product and make some thing usable from it then thats called recycling.
We as americans let this happen to us I for one will try any thing that sounds like it would work AND TO ME THIS SOUNDS RIGHT
Ericbu12
Dont let any of them get to you try it I am sure it will work.
Keep up the good work.
cj hall
If you stop and think about it, you know that this is impossible. If we could convert one kind of energy to another, and gain energy along the way, our power problems would be solved.
You said that right????
Then tell me the advantages of bio diesel because you are taking A FOOD PRODUCT (engery and protein) and converting to an oil then to a fuel and then burning it thats a two fold waste not even thinking about the waste of a food product thats a whole other issue.
Bio Diesel form virgin oil and corn based ethanol are the biggest lies the oil companys and the govt have told us, Will that and Global warming. this is from 1975 ????? Newsweek on the cooling world so if we are back to the 1940 level the real problem is from the 1880's that was before petrol right?
If you take a food product and make a fuel product from it then thats a waste if you take a waste product and make some thing usable from it then thats called recycling.
We as americans let this happen to us I for one will try any thing that sounds like it would work AND TO ME THIS SOUNDS RIGHT
Ericbu12
Dont let any of them get to you try it I am sure it will work.
Keep up the good work.
cj hall
Last edited:
CJ,
You are 100% right about using Ethanol and virgin oil to make Bio. It has a negative energy balance, and without government subsidies could not be done at a reasonable cost. Using corn to make Ethanol is a perfect example of what's wrong with our Government today. While we are smack in the middle of an energy price spike, our political leader figure out a way to make it even worse... . but this is fodder for another forum.
If you were questioning my screen name, I make mine from waste grease, that would normally be landfilled. It costs me in the neighborhood of 65 cents/gallon, and keepd the dump a nicer place. That's economics I can live with.
Gary,
You and others are mistaking Theories with Laws. There is an awfuil lot that we don't know about electricity, like which direction electrons flow. That's why we have Conventional and Electron Theories. However, Ohms Law (E=I X R) cannot be argued. That's why it's a Law.
The Law of Conservation of Energy states that energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only change forms. Many years ago, when Scientists thought the world was flat, it was obviously not a Law, but a Theory that they were suggesting. Laws must be proven, Theories don't have to be.
As I posted in another thread, there has been only one third party test of Low Pressure Hydrogen Induction, and it came back with negative results... and that was without loading the alternator to make it.
There are guys out there that put magnets on their fuel lines, or lumps of metal in the fuel tank (Fitch) and claim power and mileage enhancements. If we tried them all we wouldn't have room in the garage for the car.
Joe
PS:Sometimes these debates get personal because the message gets misconstrued. . and becuase we're not all buddies. I'm not trying to be overly critical with folks that I don't know, just expressing an opinion. If my posts are annoying you, put a smile on your face and re-read it!
You are 100% right about using Ethanol and virgin oil to make Bio. It has a negative energy balance, and without government subsidies could not be done at a reasonable cost. Using corn to make Ethanol is a perfect example of what's wrong with our Government today. While we are smack in the middle of an energy price spike, our political leader figure out a way to make it even worse... . but this is fodder for another forum.
If you were questioning my screen name, I make mine from waste grease, that would normally be landfilled. It costs me in the neighborhood of 65 cents/gallon, and keepd the dump a nicer place. That's economics I can live with.
Gary,
You and others are mistaking Theories with Laws. There is an awfuil lot that we don't know about electricity, like which direction electrons flow. That's why we have Conventional and Electron Theories. However, Ohms Law (E=I X R) cannot be argued. That's why it's a Law.
The Law of Conservation of Energy states that energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only change forms. Many years ago, when Scientists thought the world was flat, it was obviously not a Law, but a Theory that they were suggesting. Laws must be proven, Theories don't have to be.
As I posted in another thread, there has been only one third party test of Low Pressure Hydrogen Induction, and it came back with negative results... and that was without loading the alternator to make it.
There are guys out there that put magnets on their fuel lines, or lumps of metal in the fuel tank (Fitch) and claim power and mileage enhancements. If we tried them all we wouldn't have room in the garage for the car.
Joe
PS:Sometimes these debates get personal because the message gets misconstrued. . and becuase we're not all buddies. I'm not trying to be overly critical with folks that I don't know, just expressing an opinion. If my posts are annoying you, put a smile on your face and re-read it!
AS "laws" go, some years back, a fella proposed to light the night by running electricity thru a short piece of horse hair - at that point in time, lots of folks hadn't even heard of electricity in commercial terms - let alone light bulbs.
At that point, many laughed - but now, Edison is considered an inventive genius for perfecting a long life light bulb that was easily mass produced...
Hydrogen generation might possibly eventually fall into the same category - crudely done and perhaps innefficient to produce with current technology - but NONE of us know what improved future developments might break the efficiency barrier - and make it worth use on a wide scale - just as carbonizing that horsehair and placing it in a vacuum made Edison's "foolish" theory work - AND eventually, thru further improvements in materials and methods, light up the world...
Thank God, Edison ignored those critics who "knew better", and the world is now a better place because of his determination...
A favorite quote of Edison:
At that point, many laughed - but now, Edison is considered an inventive genius for perfecting a long life light bulb that was easily mass produced...
Hydrogen generation might possibly eventually fall into the same category - crudely done and perhaps innefficient to produce with current technology - but NONE of us know what improved future developments might break the efficiency barrier - and make it worth use on a wide scale - just as carbonizing that horsehair and placing it in a vacuum made Edison's "foolish" theory work - AND eventually, thru further improvements in materials and methods, light up the world...
Thank God, Edison ignored those critics who "knew better", and the world is now a better place because of his determination...
A favorite quote of Edison:
Last edited:
Issue 128 – Digital Version
Digital Magazines
FREE!
TDR Test Drive - Digital Edition
Renew
Subscribe
Gift Subscriptions
Back Issues
Subscription Status
Address Change Form
Buyer's Guides
Ram Diagnostic Trouble Codes
The Perfect Collection
The Perfect Collection Vol. II
TSB Updates
Dodge/Cummins Historical Overview
Cameron Collection
What Makes Us Tick?
Product Showcase
Advertising
Turbo Diesel Register
Issue 128 – Digital Version
Digital Magazines
FREE!
TDR Test Drive - Digital Edition
Renew
Subscribe
Gift Subscriptions
Back Issues
Subscription Status
Address Change Form
Buyer's Guides
Ram Diagnostic Trouble Codes
The Perfect Collection
The Perfect Collection Vol. II
TSB Updates
Dodge/Cummins Historical Overview
Cameron Collection
What Makes Us Tick?
Product Showcase
Advertising
