Popular Mechanics to debunk the "run your car on water" myth
by Jeremy Korzeniewski on Jul 8th 2008 at 12:54PM 
A quick Google search is all that is required to find hundreds of stories of people who claim to have increased their fuel mileage by installing a hydrogen generator which extracts hydrogen and oxygen from water and funnels the gas into the engine. Some of the claims are pretty wild, and the Japanese company Genepax has again lit a fire under the topic of running a car on water. While the Genepax car uses a conventional fuel cell, most of the "kits" available on the Internet introduce a bit of gas into the engine which is then combusted along with the liquid gasoline.
It is, of course, natural to feel a desire to buy into the hype promised by these systems. The truth, though, is that large fuel economy gains are highly unlikely. Popular Mechanics has decided to build themselves one of these systems for testing. The mag intends to install the finished product in an automobile and report back. We're keenly interested in their findings, though we're pretty sure we already know what will happen. Stay tuned.
[Source Popular Mechanics]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
brian hague 1:50PM (7/08/2008)
The readers comments on the PM page show how uneducated the populous has become. I don't think Mike Allen is even going about this the right way. He would need two identical cars. one as a control and one as an experiment. he would also need to have identical amounts of fuel over multiple tanks.
As for his hypothesis that it won't work, he's taking an educated guess and trying to prove it. That's a scientist for you (even if he's not doing it right). If he had an educated guess the other way and got the "it doesn't work" result, then everyone would say it was a flawed test. On the other hand if he didn't think it would work, and suddenly he finds an increase (which he won't) then everyone would be on the bandwagon.
Reply
Woodenbee 1:49PM (7/08/2008)
a young women asked me about this yesterday, I hadnt heard of it but told her it was probably not legit. She was asking because she was stuck with a jeep cherokee, getting 9 mpg and was hoping this $120 kit would help her, thats why these type of scams are so offensive they prey on the young and the poor and its really disgusting, anyone involved with these kind of trash science gagdets should be whipped.
Reply
axiom 3:42PM (7/08/2008)
If being "involved" means building your own conversion system and modding it to your car, I guess that includes me.
I'd like to see you even try to whip me.
sarcall 10:17AM (7/16/2008)
The Brown's Gas (H-H-O) generated will not show a mileage improvement UNLESS a device (an EFIE "effee") is used to "fool" the UPSTREAM OXYGEN SENSOR. If no electrical offset is used on the oxygen sensor, the sensor will "see" a leaner burn and tell the computer to "richen" the fuel mix with more gasoline. Part of the reason for this is that the oxygen in the Brown's gas will accelerate the gasoline burning process, resulting in a more "complete" combustion of gasoline. See videos from zerofossilfuel.
Future4u 10:31AM (7/20/2008)
Before you call these technologies scams you should do some homework . Brown;'s gas does indeed work . It's just that there are
many systems that really don't go far enough . Why ? If there is a 10% or more improvement in fuel economy the on board computer will go into default and inject additional fuel , thus countering any gains .
The " no tampering " laws makes it illegal to bypass or modify the emission control system . Dutchman Enterprises has invented a mini-computer that teaches the factory computer to accept their modification kit . This results in the maintaining of their gains . They have experienced a 96% improvement in fuel economy on the several thousand kits already installed, thus are able to " guarantee " a 50% improvement or your money back . I have yet to read where any other system guarantees performance .
That's only phase #1 . Phase #2 will be released on 08/31 which is a replacement catalytic converter that converts the 80% of wasted energy into usable energy . The only exhaust is water . They will be able to promise 100 MPG on any SUV , V-8 engine or light truck . Testing for CARB approval is in progress .
Go to : http://www.minimizefuelprice.com and view the videos
Chris M 5:44PM (7/20/2008)
Sarcall: The oxygen sensor is located in the exhaust, not the intake. Since the "browns gas" displaces some of the intake air, the result would be less oxygen (and more steam) in the exhaust, and the O2 sensor would trigger the computer to open the throttle and/or reduce the amount of fuel injected. Less fuel injected would mean better fuel economy, but would also mean reduced performance.
Seems to me that it would be easier and cheaper to just go lightly on the accelerator.
Truman 3:59PM (7/24/2008)
I'm going to step out on a limb here and assume you've never tried installing one of these systems yourself or seen it with your own eyes and that you're basing your opinion on what you've heard or your own homemade reasoning. Sorta like how urban myths get spread.
Pls don't come back say 'I don't need proof' and proceed to state how you *think* it violates physics laws. We don't want a science lesson, we just want to hear about your own experience. Also, don't use the argument 'If it was real, wouldn't GM already be using them in their cars?' That one really give me hot.
Charles 6:15PM (7/26/2008)
If she's only getting 9 mpg out of a Cherokee, there is something horribly wrong with the Jeep. I have two straight six, automatic, 4wd, lifted, both sitting on 31" tires. The 1987 (not a typo) pulls a solid 16 -18 mpg mixed driving. the 1994 work jeep loaded with 1200 -1500 pounds of tools turns 15 to 16 mpg running 70 to 75 mph on the interstate. 9 mpg is reserved for heavy trucks or vans grossing over 7k pounds. Time to check driving habits or vehicle maintenance.
Serge 6:49PM (7/28/2008)
Charles, I will second that opinion of "something terribly wrong with that Jeep". It could be something simple to fix, like fouled spark plugs or a dead oxygen sensor.
I have an 89 XJ (with Renix like your 87) on 31 inch offroad tires with full size spare, bunch of emergency tools, 3 passengers and their gear logging similar mileage like yours. Before lifting, I was getting 20 mpg on highway.
On the other hand, Cherokees have awful aerodynamic properties and gearing (at least the older ones) making driving over 65 miles a very fuel-inefficient (and noisy) affair.
HHOFuel.net 4:30PM (8/06/2008)
I am an expert in water hybrid conversion kits, and have done extensive study building my own units with enough hydrogen from water to run a torch. I have many videos on youtube to prove this method, and the technology is simple.
We aren't preying on anyone, and I'm not a scammer or anything of the sort. I'm simply someone who is seriously trying to help people save money on fuel, and the technology is definitely 100% legitimate and real.
Please do some research before you misdirect people into spending THOUSANDS more in fuel costs than they need to. You can see my website and videos at HHOFuel.net for proof.
Save driving.
Petrozero 2:11PM (7/08/2008)
I've got an open mind on this and I certainly hope there is potential for a breakthrough. Until I've proved or disproved it myself, I'll reserve judgement.
Here's a site where several folks are reporting pretty astounding results.
http://www.fuel-saver.org/Forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=15
Before anyone comments about mythbusters already debunking this, the mythbusters test did not include (a) a catalyst and (b) an O2 sensor regulator. As you might tell from the numerous posts on the link above, both are essential for positive results.
Reply
Chris M 4:00AM (7/09/2008)
The problem with that "fuelsaver" forum is that you can't really verify the claims made there. How many of those posts are from people trying to sell these "fuel savers" or plans? How many are shills or "sock puppets" promoting it for the sellers? How many are from people so caught up in the hype that they've deceived themselves? How many are exaggerating their results just to get a little respect?
One of the posters was using 70% alcohol in his "electrolyte mix", so I suspect most if not all of his fuel economy improvements came from the alcohol fumes.
That is where PM comes in. They will run unbiased tests, carefully organized to eliminate self-deception and carefully measured. Of course, if the results show no real improvement, or worse, a slight decline in fuel economy, those "true believers" will be up in arms, and will accuse PM of trying to sqelch this for the oil companies. Ooops, looks like "axium" is already making conspiracy accusations against PM, even before the tests are run!
axiom 7:22PM (7/10/2008)
"How many are shills or "sock puppets" promoting it for the sellers?"
One could ask the same about you. Are you a shill or sock puppet going around blogs trying to depress talk about hydrogen systems and promote hit-pieces put out by corporate media? Who knows. Thats why you stick to your guns and only reach a conclusion when you're the one thats researched it.
Chris M 10:35PM (7/10/2008)
Very good skeptical question, Axiom, there is hope for you yet!
A "shill" is someone that pretends to be a bystander, but actually works for the scam artist by promoting and hyping the "product" to the audience. Since I haven't been promoting any products in particular, I can't be a shill. No, ny motivation is a devotion to the truth and an intense dislike of scam artists and frauds.
A "sock puppet" is an alter ego constructed to be a "yes man" and bolster a weak argument. Still doesn't apply.
Nobody is stopping you from doing your own research, if you have the time and the inclination, go for it. As for me, I don't have time or money to waste testing such dubious claims.
The PM tests are for those who can't or don't want to "do their own research", that is one function of journalism, and I'm glad they are doing it.
Luke 3:30PM (7/08/2008)
Those of you with an open mind," please send me your money for my perpetual motion machine, which breaks all the laws of thermodynamics a also is useful for time travel. In addition, it will have the ability to raise important historical figures from the dead" and be able to remove calories from any food without affecting the taste in any way.
Reply
rj 2:14PM (7/26/2008)
sign me up - I got some ice cream that needs eatin
IbeEducated 12:11AM (8/23/2008)
hahaha i like you man
axiom 3:37PM (7/08/2008)
I have nothing but contempt for PM. They've become the gatekeepers of corporate-america status quo. Have a controversial theory? Enter PM with a selectively edited hit piece. Have a new innovation for an old technology? Enter Popular Mechanics. I don't need a shoddy magazine to tell me whats real and whats fake, I prefer to do the actual research myself and find out.
I know people who have (cheaply) built and tried the water4gas conversion systems and increased their milage by around 60%. I will be doing the same for my car, and then showing my entire extended family how to do theirs.
Reply
Chris M 4:17AM (7/09/2008)
In other words, you are eager to have everyone try it and test it out - unless there is a possibility that they might not come up with your "officially approved humongous mileage increase" results. It's become almost a religion to you, how dare anyone question the holy fuel saver! Doing an actual scientific double blind test would be sacrilige! Heretics!
Of course, anyone not getting dazzling results are either told they are not doing it just the right way (there are endless excuses for failure to perform) or are accused of being part of an evil oil company conspiracy.
axiom 7:10PM (7/10/2008)
"In other words, you are eager to have everyone try it and test it out - unless there is a possibility that they might not come up with your "officially approved humongous mileage increase" results."
eh.
I do not expect an objective test by PM, and most definitely do not need their approval before learning and trying it out for myself. Whether you or anyone else also does or doesn't, doesn't affect me regardless. That was the point of my post, which apparently you couldn't respond to so you went off on this lame sarcastic rant.