New Stan Meyer replication

[Jeff Pearson]

I have seen one Meyer patent where he uses JUST water. 2 WFCs...one making gas....the other making and burning gas, then the 2 outputs are mixed. I think he was replacing natural gas in that patent.....he is still mixing non combustible gasses with the HHO.

[jonabel1971]

Website not credible.

Yeah, well, I went to his website. It is 1 page, with no links. It mentions "The True Technology of Stan Meyer". www.air4gas.com. These two guys showed up and are trying to sell tech using Stan's name. This is not WFC technology. Moderators, please keep these liars/scammers off my thread.

I have seen one Meyer patent where he uses JUST water. 2 WFCs...one making gas....the other making and burning gas, then the 2 outputs are mixed. I think he was replacing natural gas in that patent.....he is still mixing non combustible gasses with the HHO.

[Aaron]

water fuel

In Meyer's system wouldn't the exhaust gas be mostly water mist. A quick browns gas pop would stop a piston in its tracks at 25 degrees before top dead center IMHO.

There will be water mist, about the same as gasoline combustion. But there is also ammonia leaving the exhaust. Meyer even admitted his exhaust smelled like ammonia and others that replicated this technology found the same thing.

No, the "pop" won't do that. The net pressure difference is almost nothing. And if you're using the water fuel as a supplement, you won't get gains by burning extra hydrogen. The gain is the reactive oxygen molecules you're creating in the water gas - those radicals strips electrons from the heptane molecule and break them into smaller pieces so you suddenly get more BTU from the same fuel.

If you have enough water fuel to run an engine without being a supplement, then you're talking about a whole different animal, but you need the fuel to burn slow - candle flame slow is a good analogy. And you're only going to accomplish that when you modify nitrogen in the air to receive the hydrogen and oxygen upon combustion, which will create nitrogen oxides and ammonia as a by product. That prevents the formation of water and allows the hydrogen to give you thermal expansive energy that you can run an engine on.

[Aaron]

conditioning vs corona dope

BTW, has anybody got comparisons between conditioning tubes vs Super Corona Dope

I was the one that showed Ravi how to condition his tubes. He put out the best info on that and you can find his work online. I also did tests with super corona dope.

Don't forget testing with plastidip.

[jonabel1971]

Carona Dope.

I also bought a big can of Carona Dope about a year ago. But, if you hit resonance, I am suspect if you even need it. I can't see how a thick, syrupy layer of Carona Dope would fit inside an injector reaction zone. The gap is only .02" inches wide. I am pretty sure it would plug up the hole.

Ravi's replication is one of the most assuming, so I stay away from it. If you helped him with that, then you assume too much, also.

[MasterBlaster]

Conditioning the tubes

@Jon, In your interview you said you conditioned your tubes.
1- How did you know that you have to do this,
2- What did you do to condition them
3- How long did that take?

Thanks.

@Trolls, You don't need to be here.

[Jeff Pearson]

I'm not sure why my quote is on post 85.
I will replicate your circuit...I was just gonna use a 4093 to generate both waveforms but since this thread is current and active I will replicate your circuit...I believe it will have to evolve into a PLL to track resonance. Got a couple things in my budget to take care of before I order parts. hope I havn't offended you..I have been asking myself Lots of questions in between experiments

[Jeff Pearson]

Have you looked at the gas processor....It ionizes the ambient air. (I believe ionization is happening inside the WFC and I can pull the ambient through there) While I agree tutanka and aaron may appear to be bullying, they do seemingly to me make some valid points

[jonabel1971]

Conditioning.

Back then, I accidentally mixed some Stan Meyer and Bob Boyce Technology together. I was explained to later that this was not correct. Conditioning is a Bob Boyce process, not a Stan Meyer process.

My machine has always produced rust with tap water, and has always left the water clean-looking with distilled water. This has never changed. I don't believe conditioning is needed with Stan's tech. I don't believe it is ever mentioned.

@Jon, In your interview you said you conditioned your tubes.
1- How did you know that you have to do this,
2- What did you do to condition them
3- How long did that take?

Thanks.

@Trolls, You don't need to be here.

[Jeff Pearson]

Im not trying to argue...trying to gain understanding of this thing...You didn't call this thread WFC replication, You named it Stan Meyer replication. A Stan Meyer replication is not just the WFC. It is a whole system. Ionized ambient air is part of STAN MEYER's system. We may also be attempting to replicate 2 different WFCs. I'm attempting to replicate the resonant cavities that came out of the buggy when it was switched to the injection system, not the tubular array he used to get the electrical polarization process patent

[jonabel1971]

I am sooo glad I am leaving this discussion group. You ARE trying to argue, and that's what you don't recognize. It IS a Stan Meyer replication - he had 50 patents. You think I have to replicate all 50, before I say that I replicated Stan Meyer tech? Go live under a bridge, and take the rest of the trolls with. It's funny how you breed anti-science in your own discussion group.

To everyone reading : Build the machine, or don't - I don't care. Honestly, due to the abuse over last day, I would no longer help ANYONE on this discussion group. If I see your names on other discussion groups, I will block you. You have no one to blame except yourself & your moderators.

Im not trying to argue...trying to gain understanding of this thing...You didn't call this thread WFC replication, You named it Stan Meyer replication. A Stan Meyer replication is not just the WFC. It is a whole system. Ionized ambient air is part of STAN MEYER's system. We may also be attempting to replicate 2 different WFCs. I'm attempting to replicate the resonant cavities that came out of the buggy when it was switched to the injection system, not the tubular array he used to get the electrical polarization process patent

[Jeff Pearson]

Yes I believe you have replicated a version of the WFC. Now what? Are you going to attempt to run an internal combustion engine on JUST that gas? Stan says you modify that gas before it goes into the engine.?

[kenssurplus]

Hi, I don't consider myself on either side of the arguments and bickering, as I feel there is enough ego on all sides to dampen communication about the subject.

Back in 2008, I built the Dave Lawton dual 555 PWM circuit. I did not go so far as to build the tubes or the chokes, but did test it out on the field windings of an alternator because that was where my energies were focused on at the time.
I still have the circuit and winding some chokes shouldn't be that hard, but I have no access to S.S. tubes or funds to buy anything so my replication would automatically fail.

I do have a few different HHO units, however, that I could test it on: S.S. condiment cup units and Smacks boosters.

Is attempting a 100% replication the only way that data would be valid?
Would I come under attack for posting my results - whatever they might be?
How broad is the allowance of deviation from Jon, or from Stan?
What if I found that a coil system with one end stuck into the oil of my engine increased mileage 25%? could I mention that?
How much can I explore concepts, ideas, and various comminications before I get told to sit down, shut up, leave or that I don't know s**t, and have mental probs???
It can't be that hard to take a breath and allow each to contribute.
There! Now I can go back to the Lab and burn something up.
Ken

[jonabel1971]

Good, you're learning. But, it is still obscure questioning meant to discredit. Here's my answer - none of your business - you are a paid troll. How do you like that? "Discussioners" are wondering why your members have such poor replication success rates. It's because the last two replications were killed by talks of Nitrogen technology that doesn't exist.

Paid agents and bots killed your group.

Yes I believe you have replicated a version of the WFC. Now what? Are you going to attempt to run an internal combustion engine on JUST that gas? Stan says you modify that gas before it goes into the engine.?

[jonabel1971]

Good, you're learning. But, it is still obscure questioning meant to discredit. Here's my answer - none of your business - you are a paid troll. How do you like that? "Discussioners" are wondering why your members have such poor replication success rates. It's because the last two replications were discredited and killed by talks of Nitrogen technology that doesn't exist.

Paid agents and bots killed your group - if not all of them.

Yes I believe you have replicated a version of the WFC. Now what? Are you going to attempt to run an internal combustion engine on JUST that gas? Stan says you modify that gas before it goes into the engine.?