Natural Gas is the future and half the price of gas when you can find it.

 

My Mum who lives in the UK just told me natural gas just got a 35% price increase. Everyone is pissed! The normal greedy ones are trying to cashin again.

 

still not as expensive as petroleum though, or it might be over there because we have so much of it over here.

http://www.chk.com/video/video.aspx?id=5&type=1

 

As of now I have a 2001 F150 Bi fuel reg cab long bed 7700. I have to do a transmission on it before selling it. I sometimes put a car dolly behind it and then a second small CNG car. Then sell them as a pair, most go to Utah. I don't have any cars as of now, but I do have about eight various size CNG tanks. Some are aluminum, some steel, one is all fiberglass lightweight and huge. Expirations range from 2013 to 2015.
I can be reached at ksilibovsky@hotmail.com if anyone is interested.
Thanks
lowflyingbird

 

with regards to an LPG kit, I would be totally nervous about installing a unit in my vehicle especially if I try the hho system...
In canada anyway, any rebates and installations have to be proven and inspected by an authorized LPG/NG tech , signed sealed with an inspection and expiry tag on the vehicle... before any filling station will fill.
one word of caution... if your installing using a down draft or side draft package where the throttle body is used, be aware that the intake will be saturated with an lpg/oxy mix and any hickup and I mean ANY hickup can cause your intake to blow ... which has happened to my truck 3 times. caused by a misfire that could have been caused by anything....
In the fuel injection type, the intake is fed directly above the intake valve in the intake manifold and the valves themselves are triggered just prior to ignition... leaving any misfire as just a hickup and not a boom.

 

well i have a bi-fuel f150 and love it for one thing the price it cost to fill it up luckly i bought mine when they were dirt cheap

 

I know this is an old posting, but It seems the amount of current required to produce the hydrogen will cause more load on the alternator, causing the engine to burn more gas. Will you be able to overcome this?

 

On the tests I have read....yes. A high-output alternator was required. The test used an Escort with a very low-power 4 cylinder. For the control test, the car got about 30 mpg. With the system "activated", but without the hydrogen actually going into the engine.....the extra load on the alternator was enough to cause a loss of about 3mpg. But with the hydrogen system fully operational, the car picked up about 7mpg over baseline.

So, the hydrogen provided a gross increase of 10 mpg. But 3mpg was lost to the alternator......for a net increase of 7mpg.

But don't expect an extra 7mpg out of your truck......

This test means nothing for a full size truck. First, the extra load on the alternator wouldn't make any noticeable difference in MPG. And second.....could the system produce enough hydrogen to keep up with the demand of the larger engine? If all things were equal......the system used in the Escort would only provide a 1 or 2 mpg increase when used in a truck that got 10mpg to begin with.

Escort 10mpg gross gain = 33% increase in fuel economy
F-150 uses 3 times as much fuel in same time period.
F-150 potential mpg increase = 11% gross (alternator load not a factor)
11% mpg increase in 10mpg truck = 1mpg

Now this is all hypothetical. I could be totally wrong...I'm just going by the numbers here. But I think it's a sound theory based on the tests that I've personally read. Maybe someone has some better info on a test actually performed on a HEAVY truck with a high-horsepower V-8.......and not a little econo-box.

One thing you have to keep in mind is that increases in MPG should be thought of in percentages. For example, if you take a Yaris that gets 50mpg and find someway to increase the mileage to 60mpg.....for a gain of 10mpg......that's a 20% increase.

Now....if you tried to do the same thing to your 10mpg truck expecting a 10mpg increase, FORGET IT. That would mean a 100% increase in fuel economy!! You gotta go by the percentage. If all things were equal, and the same thing increased your economy by 20%......that adds up to a whopping 2mpg!! But really, it's the same thing......it's 20% no matter how you look at it.

So, back to the hydrogen. I guess the first question is.......is there a system that can produce enough hydrogen to keep up with the demands of a full size truck......without exceeding the capacity of a vehicle's electrical system?? Going back to the Escort comparison.......I would guess NO. The alternator used on the Escort was under enough load that it actually decreased the fuel economy by 10%. The amount of drag required to lower an F-150's mpg by 10% would be tremendous. I don't see a conventional electrical system being able to handle that sort of load.

Now, I personally witnessed someone making a hydrogen system for an old, old Dodge Dakota. He bought the truck for like $200 just to experiment with. He says the system he uses doesn't require a high output alternator. And claims to have put a system in someone's Nissan that is getting 60mpg. Now I trust the guy....and don't think he'd have any reason to lie.......but the 60mpg claim seems a little much.

This making any sense ny1t?

 

if you work with hydrogen on demand, you don't need compresssed bottles and the amount of current needed to cause the electro-seperation would only be about 3/4amp per collector.. if you use 3 collectors, we are talking a bit over 2 amps which is less current than the clutch coil of the air/con unit.

 

Are you saying Raso Enterprises' customer relations bites or Technocarb's?

It sounds like you are referring to Raso Enterprises and I honestly do not recall getting an inquiry from you. If it was Technocarb, they normally direct inquiries to their dealers. Being in Utah, Technocarb would not have directed you to a Canadian dealer. I always recommend DIYers to work with a local installation shop to ensure that the installation meets NFPA 58.

As for the installed cost of the kits, there is generally about 20-24 hours of labor involved (see the SVIS Impala conversion). In addition to the underhood components you reference, you still need to buy an ASME tank, fuel lines from the tank, and some miscellaneous parts.

Regarding the HHO systems:
http://www.aardvark.co.nz/hho.shtml

 

If you can produce a liter of HHO per minute with less that 12 amps then you are a genius, or you are using frequency oscillation as patented by Stanley Myer and several others. Additionally the amount of amperage drawn is directly related to the number of plates and the amount of electrolyte used in the system.
As pointed out in previous posts, while the system holds promise, until the hydrogen can be released more efficiently, we are better off converting to CNG.
Here is a site I recommend all of you take a glance at if you, like myself are "tired of sending $700 billion dollars a year to people that really don't like us" to quote a certain political figure.

http://www.cngnow.com/EN-US/Pages/default.aspx

Check out the link to the home refueling device. Pretty cool!

 

Hey Malexander, So you're saying that it would require more than 2 amps to produce enough HHO for 6000lb truck with a high-output V-8?

Like I said....I've never seen any of these supposedly "low amp" kits. But based of the results of tests that have been proven to actually work.........I couldn't see how it would in any way be practical for a full-size truck.

So what's the drawback with Propane? I figured it would have an advantage over CNG in automotive applications.

 

I am on my 3rd vehicle now on propaine, was thinking to cng but the tank is extra heavy and very high pressure unlike LPG... LPG gives you less get up and go than gasoline and cng, but if you go direct fuel injection like I did, then there is not that much of a loss.
Hydrogen on the other hand is still in the infant stages as far as efficient production of gas to be used.. but it won't be long...( on demand gas)... and the amount of current used is directly proportionat to the the speed its produced and electrolite and size of the conversion chamber and number of them. The vehicles alternator can put out 15 amps easily and yes the HP used to produce it will be a bit but nothing drastic.

 

You would need upwards of 10 amps to produce enough volume to offest your fuel consumption, but keep in mind it takes more horsepower (i.e. more fuel) to create the additional amperage. Additionally your oxygen content will increase from the HHO being produced and this will most likely cause the PCE to richen your mix (add more fuel to the mix) again off setting any gains from the HHO. In order to make it really work you would need to reprogram you A/F tables and in the event you do and the system fails, you would then be running dangerously lean and risk sever damage to the motor.
The only issue I can see with propane is availability on the road. The conversion could hinder your driving range in regards to refueling stations an what not.

 

I wouldn't mind having one of those, actually.
I'm excitedly waiting all the changes in technology and availability of vehicles in the near future!!!

I have a 93 4-ltr Aerostar.I have noticed winter economy is really bad, none of the newer fuel injection engines draw heat

off of the intake, I use water to fuel a car as a supplement to gasoline. In fact, very little water is needed,only one quart of water provides over 1800 gallons of HHO gas which can literally last for months and significantly increase your car fuel efficiently, improve emissions quality, and save money. you can found the way through

this site http://carwaterguide.blogspot.com

i really recommend it to everybody, it's a nice ebook where you can find the instructions on how to do it! take a look.