Quick up date, looks like a have the car:
1967 Reliant Rebel Estate 700cc curb weight around 600kg
Needs work but that’s just dandy
Is not the one in this photo but one like it.

See link below for basic & general data.
http://carspector.com/car/reliant/006055/

Hello Phil.

Mmmm, as an Electro-Mechanical engineer and Mad Scientist to boot!
Your idea has merit. I agree that you need to put more energy in to get just a little out. Thats basic conservation of energy and the basis of Einstiens theory on Relativity.
BUT, Einstien even admitted his theory was wrong and Quantum phyics has been long known as only 70% correct.
But i do not want to start an argument on this!

So why am i answering?

Well, me and a friend, 25 years ago designed a water powered car and proved the design. We Just never got round to building it.
Also, water powered vehicles have been around for some 250 years or so.
What on earth am i talking about i hear you ask?

Well, the vehicle we designed , or to be more precise, redesigned was........
A Transit van with conventional petrol engine converted to steam driven with a boiler in the back cargo area.
And steam vehicles are technically water driven. And of course you could use an electrical heater........

So Phil, my advice is this. Don't let te doubters put you off.
If Marconi had, we wouldn't have Radios and i wouldn't be a Radio Amateur.
Columbos wouldn't have set sail and discovered places new.
Heck, Adam would have taken one look at Eve and run the other way. And we wouldn't be having this conversation .

Besides, you can buy an Hydron fuel cell no bigger than a suitcase, which produces enough energy to power a small car....

Keep going Phil, all the best Rose.

It doesn't matter how you look at a glass of water, you can't stick a couple of electrodes in it an create cold fusion!. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent around the world trying to do just that as a result of Fleischmann and Pons mistaken claims 20 years ago, with no success. Unfortunately people are still being conned out of their money with the promise of limitless free energy.

Greg

Which merely converts one form of energy into another in accordance with the laws of physics, it doesn't create energy from nowhere...

Greg

It looks like the vehicle has one wheel too many.
The "Laws of physics" are manmade & therefore imperfect.

Thanks to all that have commented im picking the car up on Saturday will post photos of work as I go along if ok with the FOPS\admin\moderators going to put the car on the road and do some runs just to test the MPG BHP and emissions than I will be performing same runs and tests to gather info then onto full conversion then performing same runs and tests again.

That way we can see if this is all nonsense or not,
So just from the start my predictions are:

Test1:
Car will perform as one would expect on the first test as car will not be modified and will be running on petrol.

Test 2:
Car running on petrol with added hydrogen/oxygen derived from water without any electronic control system will have lower emissions more MPG and about the same BHP.

Test 3:
Car running hydrogen derived from water with my electronic control system will have almost zero emissions in comparison to results above tests, MPG not applicable BHP will increase by a small margin this will be from the fact the engine will be running cleaner.

The only problem I for see is restarting on water based hydrogen but this is something Im working on by the development of a drying tank for the hydrogen to pass through.

@organeer: yes it’s out the same factory as the 3 wheel robin van, Trotters Independent Traders (only fools and horses) quite fitting I think for this project.
i would have loved to had one like this

But her-indoors told me that she would never drive it and if I was to bring one home she will back this over it.

as she does drive it I know she would.

Well Phil you certainly have started a very interesting discussion on the Forum with your post.
I hope you do succeed with your experiment to find a source of power that will propel a vehicle cheaper than the conventional way.
Reading through your posts I dont think you have claimed that your idea generates something for nothing but that it may provide a cheaper power than the conventional fossil fuel used at present ,the supply of which is running out fast.
Keep the Shed warm and comfortable and best of luck from me.
George.

You know Phil, i just thought of something.
You can't just pull up at a petrol station and fill her up.
No-one as far as i know serves water at a petrol station, unless you count the weedy water hose for topping up the washer bottle.

On top of that, if the Goverment find out you are fueling a car on water, just think how much we will all be charged for a glass

As they say " The tax-man cometh!"

All the best Rose.

That’s the big problem, how will the tax man be able to tax things like this:
1. Mileage from MOT to MOT.
2. Mileage from MOT to MOT.
3. Mileage from MOT to MOT.

As it stands and the moment with HM Revenue & Customs, it’s not taxable, however this may change according to any new legislation.

Yes a bit of a head spinner.

Rose: I know you are joking about price of water in stations.
But just to give people some idea how little water is required to run a combustion engine, 1 litre of water as enough energy to run lets say a 100cc engine for hundreds of hours.
The big problem is the energy required to split the water by conventional methods one would probably need 150cc engine to run a generator just to produce sufficient power to do the job.

Like I say I’m not going to be using conventional methods.

Update car is now back home it’s in quite good shape to say it was last on the road in 1985.
Chassis is almost mint on quick inspection car is completely original comes with a regimented in-depth history right down to fuel paid for over the years.

I have to say that this car as been looked after like it was a child even all the time its been off the road it’s a credit to the former keeper. I could just get it running put new tyres on go through the brakes and its fit for the MOT. Just needs a lot of cosmetic work.

Anyone considering becoming involved in a 'water powered car' scheme would do well to read this first:
http://www.aardvark.co.nz/hho.shtml

The following section in particular bears a remarkable similarity to the subject of this thread:
http://www.aardvark.co.nz/stanley_meyer.shtml

Greg

Yes I’ve seen this one again by conventional electronics so yes it’s correct and excepted.

Trying to perform this task by the conventional way you will always get les out than you put in so it will fail full stop we all know this, so thanks Greg for pointing out this fools path.

I will explain a bit more I arrogantly got involved in HHO just to prove someone wrong that HHO is pointless no point going there and that was over 15 years ago.

I was so convinced by my schooling that this can’t work that I completely believed it and set out to prove this someone wrong and stop his rantings once and for all.

I set out a motor bike with his guidance and gave it my best shot. I was wrong and had to concede the gold wing that I used from Sutton in Ashfield to Loughborough every day preformed like it never had before quicker off the mark better response and a significant fuel performance, after that I started a argument on pollution that was coming out the bike so went in to that just to try and redeem my self, again I just dug a big hole. That’s why I never challenge anyone in this field now as I have been proven an idiot to many times with all this energy research and went into trying behind closed doors.

I am a confirmed disbeliever in free energy if you look hard around the net you will find my rantings all over it, ripping peoples work to bits with all the stats demonstrations diagrams.

I no there’s something in this HHO and im going to do my best to find it, if I fall on the journey I will learn not to take that path again, lets face it there is as many people saying it works and proving it to some extent as there is say it don’t and pointing out what they have seen on the net or been drilled in to there minds, I have a open mind in any concept in this field, so there’s only one way to find out and that’s to do the job your/my self that way one gets all the answers, this way I will have all the stats to go on the defence of the conventional way of doing things.

I look at both sides of a coin before spending.

Stanley Meyer's, second link is based on a pulsewidth modulator based on ne555 timers as a oscillator not what im working on, that system was used on the bike but that’s what all the stats and conventional way of doing things bang on about.

Maybe we will have to go back in time and resort to the method of obtaining water that was used in this picture from 1955. When Petrol was about 12 pence a gallon.

This is a fascinating thread and I wish Phil well in his endeavours because without the scary eccentrics new branches of science would not have appeared over the centuries.

However, that is not to say I really believe in water as a fuel. But I must take issue with Greg Middleton over the logic of his initial argument, viz:

"You are putting in 12A at 2V which is 24 Watts or Joules/second, in 1 minute you are putting in 24x60 = 1440 J of energy.
You say you are getting out 6l of hydrogen per minute which weighs about 0.089g/l if not compressed i.e 6x0.089 = 0.53g.
The heat of combustion of hydrogen is 141900J/g so you are producing 75776 J of energy.
So you are getting out 52x more than you are putting in...""

In fact the 24 Watts of energy is being used simply to unlock and release the latent energy which suposedly exists atomically in water. It is not of itelf being modified into hydrogen energy, so sadly Greg's logic is flawed.

But the argument then remains whether water does indeed contain latent energy, as for instance oil or petrol does.
So by the same token you cannot argue that the energy of the spark at the sparking plug is transformed into the energy that propels the car!

When I was studying Physics at school I put forward my goldfish theory.
Sufficient goldfish in a bowl, living off the oxygen in the water, would release the hydrogen which could be used as a fuel.

How about that Phil? If you produce a goldfish powered car I shall demand royalty payments!!

Bob Essex
http://www.bobessex.co.uk

You are mistaken Bob, the energy I calculated was that which would be released if the amount of Hydrogen Phil claimed to be producing was combusted, thus demonstrating that Phil's was claiming his device could output far more energy than was input to it.



This demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding Bob, the oxygen the fish consume is dissolved in the water, once the fish consume all the dissolved oxygen they suffocate because they can not separate the oxygen than is compounded with hydrogen to form the water itself.

Greg