The Hydrocharger, HHO scammers in the UK
[ More on Neil & Sam Prendergast's HHO scam sites here ]
I recently had my attention brought to an HHO, “run your car on water”, “water for fuel”, “water boost” scam in the UK. Hydrocharger used to clam all sorts of nonsense on their site, they used to claim to be able to reduce your fuel bill by 25% using a system which has been shown over and over to be a scam.
Hydrocharger‘s address is in Bolton, UK, Samantha Jane Prendergast is the Managing Director with her husband Neil. Neil and Sam Prendergast were also the founders of an old US based HHO scam “Water Fuel Expert“, they are also responsible for two more UK based HHO scams WaterMotive Ltd and Water4GasUK.
Note I say “used to“; since originally writing this article and reporting Hydrocharger to Trading Standards, Hydrocharger have changed their website a lot, one key example is that they no longer claim a “25% saving” in fuel, now they simply say that “most drivers notice a marked improvement”. However there are still many false statements on the Hydrocharger site and Sam & Neil Prendergast ‘s other sites still contain all the same old lies.
I have blogged extensively about “HHO” and why it is scam and why does not work, indeed cannot work, many times before.
Sam P: “I find it pretty amazing that you are ready to critise etc etc yet don’t actually have real and hard fast proof. Out HHO product has been endorsed in the UK, Europe and India. Each endorsement is government backed and has undergone extensive testing. But then I do really see why I have to justify myself.”
This response to criticism is straight out of the Ozzie Freedom manual on how to run an HHO scam and chocked full of logical fallacies , on the Water4Gas site Ozzy says to ask “self appointed experts if they have TRIED it themselves”. This is, of course, all bullshit. I don’t need proof because I am not claiming anything. Hydrocharger are the ones selling a product, they are the ones who need the proof… and they don’t have any.
Their product has not been endorsed by anyone meaningful in the UK or India or Europe; it has not undergone any type of meaningful, independent, repeatable testing; and yes they do need to justify themselves, they are selling a product for hundreds of pounds that does not do what they say it does.
I don’t need to test anything because I’m not claiming anything. I no more need to test their system to show it does not work than I need to visit the moon to show it is not made of cheese.
Sam P: “I am not prepared to share my research with you. I have spent thousands of pounds and years in time researching our product and the technology. I find you rude and arrogant and to be honest the fact that you haven’t even tried a HHO system is a joke in itself”.
Why will Hydrocharger not share their results with me? It is not because they are commercially sensitive, it is because they don’t have any meaningful results.
In order for me or anyone else to assess if their test is fair and their results accurate they need to make them available for inspection. Because they don’t do this it makes any results they have meaningless. This is the basis of any scientific process, peer review; without the opportunity to for us to review their test procedure and their results any research they claim to have carried out is meaningless and pointless.
Sam: “I also ask to think as about this… If hydrogen as a fuel is a con and everything else you say then why is the UK government offering grants to petrol stations to have hydrogen pumps fitted?”
Because, as she well knows, what Hydrocharger are selling is not a hydrogen engine. Hydrocharger are selling a run-your-car-on-water scam clone, an HHO scam, whatever you want to call it… Real hydrogen engines are very different to what Hydrocharger are selling and Sam is deliberately muddling technologies, what Sam is selling is not even slightly similar.
If I am wrong and if Hydrocharger’s system works and can save anything approaching the 25% they claim (even 1% would be a miracle), then Hydrocharger should sue me. I am standing here saying they are, whether they mean to or not, selling a scam. I am saying that their product does not work, that they are defrauding people by selling something which does not do what they say it does. I am saying Hydrocharger have no proof whatsoever that it saves any measurable amounts of petrol/diesel/gas whatsoever.
Years late, after several threats, still no summons to court. Not even a solicitor’s letter. Nothing.
Hydrocharger in the Bolton News
It seems Hydrocharger have managed to get the Bolton News interested in their product, there are four articles in this paper about them! Unfortunately, as is so often the case, the reporters have not done their research at all and have printed verbatim the nonsense they were told. A quick email to the paper got them interested in running a story on how it was a scam… we will see if they have the balls to follow through and write/print it… [it turns out that they don't]
University Of Bolton
In one article in the Bolton News Sam implies that the University Of Bolton are running independent tests of the Hydrocharger. However I can’t find these tests and Sam won’t tell me who carried them out or when or where can I find their results, I can only assume that it is either not true or that she did not like the results.
Hydrocharger’s website changed
Some time in the first week of September 2009 Hydrocharger changed the wording on their website quite considerably, this coincides with me reporting them to the Trading Standards and them saying they are going to sue me. Gone are many of the grand claims and the false statements, but not all of them… No longer are we “… going back to 1996 fuel prices“, now we will mealy “… find yourself able to travel further on every gallon of fuel” (not ture, BTW). Now “most drivers notice a marked improvement…” and “specific cost-savings will vary depending upon your annual mileage and the prevailing cost of fuel” and how “many [customers of Hyrocharger] report a perceived improvement in torque and acceleration” which is still all bullshit, of course.
Hydrocharger threaten to sue me! – 10th Sep 2009
Sam from Hydrocharger called me on my US cell phone asking for my contact details so she could sue me! Fantastic! Unfortunately AT&T are shit and the call was dropped, but i did email my address to her less than an hour later… so far no response… I can’t wait for the summons (but I’m not holding my breath either).
In addition to sending Sam my full name and address I also said the following:
Much easier [than suing me] may be for you to send me proof, any good, verifiable, independent proof, that the product you sell does what you say it does; that is saves money / fuel – I’ll shut up, print a retraction, shout it from the roof tops… but you can’t, because it does not do what you say it does, it does not save any fuel, it s a scam… and either you are a scammer or you have not admitted to having fallen for a scam.
If it did work it would break fundamental laws of physics, mainly the first law of thermodynamics, and since the sun continues to shine, aeroplanes do not fall from the sky, in fact the world around us continues to behave as we expect it to, I’d suggest that it is you that are wrong ad not the rest of us.
Please, name for me any product available in the UK which does not have to be able to prove that it does what the makers says it does. I cannot think of any.
Tell me why is it, with thousands of people selling this stuff, is there not one university study into it, not one car company who make them or who are even looking into it, not one government agency looking to legislate that we all fit one?
I think you know the answer…
Regards,
Jon.
Update – 16-10-2009
Sam commented on this blog, see below, saying I had “painted [her] as a most horrendous person“. She is right, I did. I’m not particularly pleased about this vitriolic aspect of my writing so I removed the offending words. I am not worried she will sue me for defamation of character (sue a guy with no money on the other side of the world over being rude and arrogant. Really?) but because it detracts from the point, that the “technology” she is selling does not work. Sam is just smarting from being called out and I’m not sorry about this, but for making it personal… maybe I am sorry about that… just maybe…
Miscellaneous Hydrocharger facts:
- Here, Sam clearly says “…will increase MPG for existing cars and light vans by around 25%, and at the same time will reduce emissions by around 40%” which is of course, complete nonsense.
- In Neil and Sam’s eBook “Water Fuel Expert – Run Your Car On Water Now” they clearly say they can save you “up to 50%” on your fuel bill (as well as 40% and 60% and 70%, they seem unable to stick to a figure). Whatever the claimed saving, it is all bullshit.
- Neil and Sam applied for a patent to the Intellectual Property Office for the Hydrocharger on February 11th 2009, and were rejected.
Sam:
Jon you have painted me as a most horrendous person… If we are con people why do we offer money back guarentees??? surly we would take the money and run. In terms of suing you, you know how to play the game and I am not suing over your speculations of the product just the defermation of my character!!!!!
13 October 2009, 4:59 pmAnon:
I was scammed by Sam last year. I signed on for the ‘course’ her and husband were running, supposedly training guys to supply and fit hydrocharger kits. Many signed up as installers paid their £600 for the 1 day ‘course’, then of course, because of extremely poor results of fitting these kits, including no improvements on most cars, Sam and her company were deluged with complaints by the guys who had paid to be installers. Their reaction? Close down the company.
9 November 2009, 5:52 pmSo all us guys who had paid for the course and kits, were left high and dry, myself £1500 out of pocket.
Sam of course, ever the dodgy entrepreneur, carries on under different business names, etc, but still flogging a highly flawed, poorly made kit that may or may not work. I went on the course, did my own research, and am still not convinced. Sam turned out to be a charlatan with the gift of the gab for sure.
Sam:
You are prepared to put a complaint on this site but not have the Bollocks to type your name! how brave. £1500 out of pocket how do you work that out then when the course was only £600.00?????? I find it great fun that people are always ready to point the finger, place the blame elsewhere and yet are never prepared to stand there and say ‘you know what maybe I am the one to blame’ I am prepared to stand tall and prove my product works. Watch this space in the very near future and all I can say ‘Peter’ is goodluck with your own company copying our product and trying to go for world domination with Hydrocharger!
10 November 2009, 12:13 amAnon:
Why you need my name Sam, I don’t know, you know full well I have my facts correct, what my name is is no consequence.
The “course” in a run down garage was £600, yes, then I spent £900 on Hydrocharger kits, virtually ineffective devices. You were so pleasant on the phone and in person; you could afford to be, the money you were raking in. Pity I didn’t realise sooner just what you were doing.
You know full well the problems us guys were having, most cars were having NO noticeable improvement. You told us at the course that the lambda gizmo we attach will mean the engine will not know that Hydrogen gas is going through it and so will make no negative adjustments. Not so, just ask all the guys actually doing the fittings, even Rob and Chris (you know them) have told you the same.
You haven’t listened to us, and refused to admit that these kits are next to useless. You over simplified just about every car in the UK with a ‘one kit fit’s all’ premise. The modern ECUs on cars pick up every change in fuel intake and alter fuel intake accordingly. A lambda bypass nut is going to do nothing. I had to conclude after much frustration that what you have is a good idea, not nearly ready for use, with plenty of wishful thinking and lets just ignore the facts, shall we?
You sold £600 courses to dozens of guys, then shut the door as soon as we all realised most of the kits don’t work. Absolutely despicable. And, NO REFUND, the exact opposite to the money back guarantee you touted.
Am I wrong then?? Are all the dozens of guys that you shafted, are we all wrong?? We paid good money to be part of what we thought was a great new advancement in fuel saving. You fed us all a line, you certainly have the talent to do that Sam. I cannot understand how you are still trading, I suppose all conmen know how to stay under the radar.
I am only glad I found this forum and hope others read this before parting with hard earned cash to you and your fraudulent companies.
11 November 2009, 10:24 pmSam:
Watch this space!!!!! I will within the very near future send you ALL a copy of the certification of testing which has been carried out by a world leading automotive testing facility. We have the results which are extremly pleasing and will back our product 100%, but will any of you apologise hmmmm I don’t think so. You can write your stories and have your opinions that is your perogative. I sleep with a clear conscious. BTW Jon I am over in America in your neck of the woods in the very near future if you would like to meet for a coffee!!!!!
[Post script by Jon - over 2 years later and nothing has happened... no "certification of testing", no proof, no coffee...]
16 November 2009, 8:11 pmJon:
Sam, if you manage any such thing I’ll be amazed… there is not much I’d like to see more than a 25% decrease in fuel consumption and a 40% decrease in vehicle emissions, I’ll become your number-one ambassador, but somehow I don’t think I’ll have to, I have heard it all before and it is extraordinarily tedious, all typical smoke-and-mirrors of running this type of scam.
Why do you say “in the very near future”, if you have it then why not send it now? I am willing to bet everything I have (admittedly, not very much) you have no such results and that anything you do have you are misrepresenting, distorting or otherwise being disingenuous about.
I want to see a fair, repeatable, reproducible, transparent test carried out on your system with no other modifications by an independent person. I don’t want any excuses, conspiracy theories or claims of a need for secrecy.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and so far your extraordinary claim has no proof whatsoever.
17 November 2009, 8:56 amJon:
I’m still waiting, Sam…
Meanwhile why not let explain to us all about your other HHO scams? Water Motive LTD & Water 4 Gas UK & Tranztec UK & Water Fuel Expert. Seems you have quite a collection. http://www.jonstarbuck.co.uk/archives/675
5 December 2009, 12:04 pmsteve:
i too have been the victim of sam and neils hho scam. as was my dad. 600 pounds each we paid for the course.
sam got really upset when i threatened to seek legal advise. their science is flawed badly. however, if they had used a electronic fuel injection enhancement device (an efie) this hho device will actually work to an extent.
that little screw in device in the exhaust what did you call it sam, an oxy isolator which cost 20 pounds? did nothing at all. on some cars it actually makes fuel economy much worse. e.g. renalt safrane, average mpg 28. with oxy isolator fitted, 19 mpg! VW scirroco, 30 mpg. hho kit fitted and suddenly 20 mpg.
i on the other hand fitted an efie to mine once i’d fitted the hho cells and got a large increase in mpg. you can buy a totally useless oxy isolator on e-bay for around 5 pounds. you can make a good efie for around the same price.
sam and neil prendergast have not got the technical knowhow to make this system work. it’s far more complex than the plug and play system that they boast! go back to school you two!
7 December 2009, 12:41 pmJon:
Oxy-isolators and EFIEs and lambda bypass are not the same as HHO! They do save you a small amount of fuel but at you will loose power, increase emissions and damage your engine, you can’t get something for nothing, and they are quite rightly illegal.
Adding an HHO unit and an EFIE and an oxy-isolator is changing three things at once, how would you ever be able to tell which was responsible for any improvements?
This is why you need a real lab test, not this preposterous “real world” testing.
8 December 2009, 12:22 pmAnonymous:
tride it it does not work
18 December 2009, 3:12 pmAnonymous:
For information Hydrocharger were at Auto Expo in India at the start of January. They would have received a grant from the UK Government to be there. They were signing up Indian distributors for their product. I met someone called Dougie, who is the Managing Director. He was a smooth talking person but something felt wrong about what he told me. I was at the show promoting the UK as a great place for business and having read this site I would now have concerns about this business.
13 January 2010, 8:33 pmsteve:
some time ago, sam sent out e-mails to all of her customers. when she sent them out she sent it to many. i noted all the addresses and contacted them to find the results. in return those people gave me e-mail addresses and telephone numbers of other of sam and neils customers. when i contacted them all i found not to my surprise that not one of these people had any positive results, in fact they all gave me totally negative results. with the exception of one man in scotland who claimed to be getting an extra 100 miles per tank full. these people have travelled from as far as canada,ireland,devon,liverpool,southampton,scotland. the list is endless. the fact is this product that sam and neil are selling does not and never will work. also nobody ever gets their money back regardless of how much they try.
18 January 2010, 11:15 amAndy:
I have researched this technology with some amusment and I suppose interest also… I have come accross this company and many others like it so I do struggle to understand how we can have a world wide con but then I’m not an expert. Another company I have found is http://www.hydrotechnix.com/ and they charge £1500 for a course and they claim that they can convert your car to run of Hydrogen hmmmmmmm
26 January 2010, 1:36 pmHydroman:
Re Steve Post 18 Jan 2010 at 11.15 am.
I would be over the moon to have site of all those customer contact details and the replies they sent you.
I have a Judgment against them in the County Court and now have to pursue them for the monies. I have had her in front of the court to give some answers to try to trace all this money they spout about making according to their stated sales figures but as expected they turned out to be a pack of lies! (all the figures posted on their various web sites are according to her FALSE! she claims to have had no control over the web sites and that these figures where posted by the site developer).
One thing stated by one eye in the figures for training was that they had trained fifty-three installers/retailers. At the cost of £600.00 per person this amounted to £31,800.00.This she disputes stating that “Only a few where charged” cant believe that as they demand payment upfront at all times. I need to prove their claim regarding who paid and who got it for free, so your information would be of great help.
Regarding general comments about this pair (The PRENDERGAST`s) she is the real bad apple as she also uses the names Lonsdale and Diggle and was responsible for three other companies namely S+N Hypnotherapy Ltd,Ms S Lonsdale Stress Management Consultants and B- motivated Ltd -Human Resources Courses, not only does she mess with peoples money she has even tried messing with peoples minds!
I hope with the help of Companies House to have the pair Struck Off as directors and if any one scammed by them would like to help then please do.It would also be good to know how many other people are chasing them for money as we should join forces!
I have been threatened by her before with legal action for trying to obtain information on them but am not at all bothered by her threats and would welcome any attempt she might take to silence me!So come on Sam you know who i am lets see your BALLS!
I hope people have noted that she was up for an award recently (see Blog on Hydrocharger website) I was told it was the TOM PEPPER CUP awarded for BULLSHIT and Lies.
If antone out there can pass on any useful information then i am sure it can be done,i will even be prepared to release my contact details or perhaps contact can be made via the administrator.Regards to all,Hydroman
5 February 2010, 12:25 pmHydroman:
Just a re cap on my recent post, sorry for the wrong information regarding them being up for an award. It was posted on their Twitter Page – see Bolton and Bury Business Awards, not on the website as stated, who can say if they are up for it? or is it just more bullshit! I just hope that Bolton+Bury realise the mistake they are making!
5 February 2010, 12:53 pmJon:
Hydroman – There are / were up for the 2009 award – see here http://www.jonstarbuck.co.uk/archives/681
5 February 2010, 3:53 pmHydroman:
Hi Jon,just read the articles.WOW!How has she got the bloody nerve to claim resposibility for the invention of a device that has been around for over a hundred years.What complete and utter BULLSHIT she talks.
6 February 2010, 2:03 amAs for making a £100,000 investment into R+D! I pose the question “How did they get their hands on that sort of money”??? perhaps they should think about paying back all the customers they have ripped off before they start investing their ill gotten gains in yet more BULLSHIT.Instead they use the money they have obtained by deceit, false and misleading claims to further their aims for a product that is not only “Not fit for purpose”but is also “Not of merchantable quality”I also know that in the wrong hands it can be dangerous! I have the pictures of an explosion caused by six of their units and the results speak for themselves.the explosion was caused to prove a point.guess what they had to say,”we have tried to replicated in every way what had been done to cause the explosion and we have not found it possible to replicate.They went on to blame the perpetrator stating that he must have staged the accident”.The person in question has a good reputation and is held in high regard by those who work with him.He has quite a few letters after his name and is well qualified.Trading standards are in posession of this information and are taking steps to investigate the dangers posed by making this kind of product available to an unsuspecting public.I could rant on for hours with all the information i have on the Predergasts and their antics but hey ho save some for another day.Watch this space.Regards Hydroman.
Interested:
nilco2technologies….anybody heard of these guys before? is this the same type of technology?
Would be interested in your comments.
14 March 2010, 5:11 pmJon:
Hi Interested, of course it is the same “technology”, preposterous bullshit. I am surprised you need to ask.
14 March 2010, 11:54 pmThe http://www.nilco2technologies.co.uk/ website clearly describes a perpetual motion machine. Thanks for the link, I’ll get on to blogging about them soon.
interested:
Easy Tiger!
15 March 2010, 12:19 amThe name gives it away, interested! Why doesn’t the mainstream press, in the American parlance ‘Big it up’ if it works or knock it down if it doesn’t?
I work in local government and we are always looking to reduce our costs and when companies like….. http://www.morempgnow.co.uk/ ….offer things like this making HUGE claims, why doesn’t (in our climate of sensationalism) our national press knock them out of the sky? Don’t get me wrong, more than happy to slap the ‘snake oil’ sellers when they try to sell crap to us gullible types but we Brits love the garage inventions if we think it MIGHT work! Marconi, Whittle, Faraday etc.
Annon:
HydroMan
I recognise you from what you have been talking about above. I know of hydrocharger but don’t know the prendergast’s personnaly.. What I do find really strange is that I came on your training course and it was piss poor in fact we where just stood around for one day with you going on and on about crap and things you knew little about.. so maybe its not just the prendergasts that are conning people People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones Dave. I am sure you know who I am as I wanted some money back from you for my course which you never gave me!
15 March 2010, 4:08 amJon:
Thanks again, Interested. I have now blogged about the Jubycell and More MPG Now. Have you got any more?
Why don’t the press shoot them down? Well they sometimes they do, but more often that not they are just trying to fill column inches or air time, investigative journalism is too expensive, it is a thing of the past, journalists are just happy to have something to print, they don’t think about what they are printing or question what they are told.
Marconi, Whittle and Faraday were all scientists, what we are talking about here is not science, it is magic, something akin to Alchemy.
15 March 2010, 4:31 amHydroman:
Hi Annon,I can`t say as i remember you as i have not personaly run any training courses.i have only instructed three people in the Southwest and that was when it first became clear that there were big problems looming with the Pretendergast`s.I was present at a training course in London but that was not to do with me.Had you been personaly involved with me at some time and had requested money back then we would have sorted this problem out.I am not sure you have the right Dave here as i have never talked any crap regarding the subject in question,i may be guilty of passing on information that i thought to be correct or relevant at a given time but that is all.As for throwing stones as you put it,i am not.I am hurling bloody great rocks in my attempt to try to expose this issue regarding the Pretedergast`s,it has been them that have been doing the conning!It seems that i am one of the few that have actualy tried to get redress via the courts regarding the Water4gas conn i only wish more people like yourself would step out of the woodwork and give a hand.Please let me know the place you attended your course.Should you wish to then please get in touch via the admin.Regards Hydroman.
4 April 2010, 2:01 pmAnnon:
I have checked out what you have said Hydroman and I have looked into the CCJ’s against them and I wonder why you would be suing for £9000. I would never part with that kind of money until I was happy with the company. I have heard on the grapevine though that you only spent around £3000 with them and that you are claiming the extra £6000 for out of pocket expenses??????? I can’t remeber the date of the course the people I remeber where you, I think Roger or Rob and I am sure there was a Steve its a long time ago now though. I just think that all companies at some point get bad press but I also think those who kiss and tell should be whiter than white if you get my drift. I am not sure what the prendergasts are upto but they have gone very very quiet.. Maybe they have got fed up of witches around the coldrun pots!
27 April 2010, 11:45 pmJon:
It has been six-months since Sam told us all she was going to send through proof that her system works, meanwhile I have seen with my own eyes a system of hers which did not work and which she would not give a refund for. I wonder if she even still in business? What a crock of shit.
27 April 2010, 11:56 pmAnnon:
Who knows Jon .. Who knows.. I was simply making the point that we only have the right to throw stones or bolders as Hydroman put it if we are whiter than white. I also wonder if Sam is still in business and to be honest after all the shit shes has thrown at her if she still is then it takes a lot of balls. I know there are loads of similar companies springing up all over the world and wonder why there are more people backing it than there is dissing it.. Just my thoughts. I have only found a handful of people who take issue with the systems as aposed to those who are enjoying them. I haven’t tried one yet but I intend to, just don’t know who to go with thats all. You say jon you have seen a system of sams that didn’t work??? Is that one she sent you or one from Hydroman??? just asking!
3 May 2010, 10:26 pmflyingdoc:
HI, Lets get clear on hho ,there are people who make hho scam units that dont work, there are hho units that do work, if your serious about this tech do plenty of research..! I use hho units on both my vans, made them myself. Some marketed units are a pile of crap. NOT all of them are. ps i sell nothing.
17 May 2010, 10:39 amJon:
Nonsense. Obviously it is me that is not being clear; no HHO machines will save you any fuel, none of them.
17 May 2010, 2:47 pmWhy would some work and some not work? They all do the same thing.
And the ones that you say do work, where does this extra energy come from?
I assure you, no matter how much you believe that your HHO machines work, submit your vans to scientific testing and you will find that you are wrong.
jonjo:
Listen guys, I don’t know if any hho system works effectively, but what I do know is it is possible providing the engine management system is reconfiguerd and the alternator boosted. After al we do know that “Browns gas” is reality and not fictional, and we do know that it is produced by sending electrical charges through water.
14 August 2010, 4:40 amThe technology is available and plausable, to introduce hydrogen into the air intake will effectively produce a more efficient and cleaner performance. This system has been perfected in the U.S. and seems satisfactory and does cut fuel costs providing all the other parrameters are met i,e, engine management mods.
Therefore I think is is unwise to label all the hho providers as scam artists, (although I agree the majority probably are) there are genuine suppliers out there, its just a case of knowing where.
Try not to be so pessemistic, I’m sure you could made a hho system yourself and find a mechanic or auto elec to make the necessary mods to the engine management system.
Jon:
There are no credible HHO makers out there, one system may be better than another, but they all don’t save any fuel. Show me evidence to the contrary, please, I have never seen any whatsoever.
23 August 2010, 9:00 amAnonymous:
I think Jon has made his mind up, and no seems to be able to convinve him otherwise that maybe, just maybe, HHO could work with ecu’s configured correctly, etc,etc. It seems some have done this in the USA, where their ecu’s are far less dictatorial than euro ecu’s. Yes, we all know the Prendergasts are conmen and scammers, that doesn’t mean from now on, all HHO units the world over are all rubbish. Someone will, if they haven’t all ready, perfect these to work in at least some cars if not all. I thank Jon for this site to have a moan at the Prendergasts and compare notes with other similar guys, but, you just can’t slam the door on all HHO now and forever more. That’s not fair or realistic.
4 September 2010, 10:26 amJon:
I have not “made my mind up”, I have simply weighed up the available evidence in favour of HHO (ie none, beyond anecdote) against the available evidence against HHO (an enormous amount) and concluded it is preposterous nonsense.
7 September 2010, 6:16 amSomeone Else:
It seems as if you might have made up your mind after all. At any rate you’ve clearly chosen to take down the item I sent you that might help you to ‘change’ your mind.
Why not prove to the ‘world’ that you are prepared to have it opened by some real evidence ?
Again, I suggest you read the following … and then comment accordingly … not just hide :-
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1K3gsSt6fmuoKuOgUnpz0W7TW7J9FeULM3eXj1Rtm51U/edit?pli=1#
29 September 2010, 1:54 pmmillgate:
Hi Jon,
If we’re to become buddies … here’s a psuedonym you can use.
It has occurred to me that I owe you an apology. Sorry, you’re not hiding; you’re doubtless taking your time to read all those references and deciding what to say about them. I should have been more patient!
In the meantime … here’s something else I’ve written … this time myself. Anecdotal, I’ll admit – but REALLY true, about my own experiences and views.
This further link might help you to understand – and hundreds of UK drivers are already benefiting from it hydrogen-on-demand … not to mention thousands more all over the world.
Here’s the link …
http://www.lowcarboneconomy.com/community_content/_discussions/9420
29 September 2010, 4:32 pmmillgate:
Hi Jon … again !!
The hydrogen-on-demand phrase in my previous post should have had brackets around it viz, (hydrogen-on-demand) … sorry
29 September 2010, 5:19 pmMichael:
Hi I have read a lot of the comments and I am confused. I can appreciate that people perpetrate scams but my understanding was that HHO technology was no where near the stage of allowing engines to run on water. But, and it is a big but, the energy required to split water into its component elements of hydrogen and oxygen was more than covered by the increase in burn efficiency of the fuel.
As I understand it the oxygen addition makes the fuel more inflammable and because the burn rate of hydorgen is about a 1000 times faster than that of petrol or diesel which are not gases but a very fine mist the resultant combustion of the fuel is more complete. And that means that more of the fuel is actually consumed in the burn process and not ejected as waste. A bit like cooking a chicken to a cinder rather than just roasting.
As for the burn rate I imagine that is like torching a forest. It will take a while to spread throughout the forest. But if you give a runner a torch and he runs through the forest then obviously the whole forest will be ignited quicker. And since the time available for the ignition process is milliseconds the addition of oxygen and hydrogen gas could make an enormous difference.
However, in modern cars the exhaust sensors will pick up the cleaner exhaust, interpret this as the engine running lean and automatically compensate. That’s what the engine management system is meant to do.
So without changing in some way the engine management system fuel efficiency may even get worse. Not because the HHO system didn’t work but because the engine management system compensated. Everything I have read says you must, change, amend or in someway update the management system. If that is done then clearly this technology should work.
So just because someone is touting the ridiculous idea that heavier than air machines can fly does not thereby mean they cannot. So please let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
“Concepts which have proved useful for ordering things easily assume so great an authority over us, that we forget their terrestrial origin and accept them as unalterable facts. They then become labeled as “conceptual necessities”, etc. The road of scientific progress is frequently blocked for long periods by such errors.” — Albert Einstein
2 November 2010, 4:10 pmJon:
Dear Michael,
9 November 2010, 5:57 pmYou are not a scientist are you? Defiantly not a physicist. Or a diesel engineer. Rather than reading a load of pseudo scientific nonsense written by other non-scientists and blatant scam-artists, please find me one single person who actually knows what they are talking about who can verify one single thing you have said.
Answer me this, when you have tooth ache do you go see a plumber? No. So when you need to learn something about engines and magic-fuel-savers go ask a scientist or an engineer.
Saltash:
The Prendergasts are now in the Yorkshire town of Keighley. Sam Prendergast is the director if a hairdressers called Pure International, she also runs La Chic. She is on Facebook as Sam Lonsdale Prendergast (intriguingly, she claims to be single but she is still with hubby Neil) and as Pureint Keighley.
Neil Prendergast is also on Facebook.
If you want to get in contact call 01535 601681 and ask for Sam the managing director.
12 November 2010, 1:35 pm234sapphire:
Jon,
13 December 2010, 5:10 pmCurious to know are you an engineer or a physicist?
Jon:
234sapphire,
13 December 2010, 6:04 pmAn engineer or a physicist? Can’t someone be both? Sounds like a loaded question to me. I did an undergraduate degree in physics but I am not a professional physicist, I am a renewable energy engineer right now and have done post graduate renewable energy engineering. Why does it matter?
More relevant is that I am a skeptic, I apply critical thinking and science, I won’t simply believe anything, I require evidence.
These guys have no evidence whatsoever, none, nothing, zilch…
Jon.
234sapphire:
Only curious from what basis you make your assumptions.
We have a small dyno rig here and are due to do some basic tests on the effects of HHO in an engine with known output data. we will be measuring the effect of HHO on the speed of the flame front propagation in the combustion chamber.
13 December 2010, 10:54 pmI know a senior guy in a well respected automotive R&D consultancy who did some evaluation work for a client on a commercial diesel engine and saw positive results I think in the order of 6% fuel consumption reduction. Obviously the engine settings would have been optimised to get the best out of the fuel/gas/air mixture. My gut feeling is that there will be some benefits in some engines.
Jon:
Hi 234sapphire again,
13 December 2010, 11:22 pmMy “assumptions” are based on the complete lack of evidence and complete lack of plausible theory.
In your HHO tests with your dyno be make sure to blind the experiment, put proper controls in place and do proper error analysis… I’d be very interested to see the full report when it is done. Anyone can design a bad experiment and get the results they were looking for, follow the scientific method and you, like everyone before you, will find that HHO does not work.
As for your friend’s experiment and his 6% result, this is meaningless without more info, how can anyone evaluate an anecdote like that. In saying “the engine settings would have been optimised” you seem to imply that more than one parameter was altered during the experiment; this is ridiculous, how would you know which one of them resulted in the aleged improvement? And besides, this 6% improvement, where is this energy coming from? How does it not violate conservation of energy laws? Or is it magic?
234sapphire:
Steady now. Don’t be so negative!
14 December 2010, 1:20 amAs I’m sure you’ll know from the experiments you must have already carried out to gain such knowledge in this field, with all engine tuning you set engine parameters to make the best of what you’ve got.
Ultimately it’s an energy equation, what you put in vs what you get out.
At the moment I’m not convinced one way or the other but before long I’ll have data and then if it works there might be a business opportunity in it!
Jon:
Sorry for being so “negative” but understand that I hear this exact same story about three times a week. And you know how many times the guy comes back with any knid of meaningful results? Yup, you guessed it, not once.
I have never carried out experiments on HHO, I don’t need to, that is not how science works. They are claiming something, not me. I can’t prove anything, it is a logical fallacy to prove a negative.
If you feel it necessary to re-tune your engine with and without HHO then make sure you run the same experiments with the HHO on and the HHO off for each tuning setting. Also, make sure you blind the tests and the results so the experimenter does not know which of the four settings (HHO on and tuning setting 1, HHO on and tuning setting 2, HHO off and tuning setting 1, HHO off and tuning setting 2) they are testing.
Energy in = energy in the fuel getting burned = 99% (actually more like 99.9%) of the energy in the fuel. If you get a 6% increase in performance (assuming 100% efficiency in this magic reaction) then you will get a total energy release of 105%. Clearly this is preposterous because it violates both the first and second law of thermodynamics. This extra energy has to come from somewhere, so where is it coming from?
Incidentally, this 6%, sounds well within the margin of error of any crude dyno experiment, especially one with no blinding or much in the way of control.
14 December 2010, 2:02 am234sapphire:
I think you are overlooking several fundamental points here.
14 December 2010, 10:35 amEnough said!
Jon:
234sapphire,
14 December 2010, 6:31 pmNo, enough not said! What “fundamental points” am I overlooking?
That is not an argument or a point of view, that is lame. Why don’t you explain to me what it is that I can’t see? The truth is that it is you that has overlooked several fundamental points and you don’t like it when I point them out, am I right?
234sapphire:
No
14 December 2010, 10:24 pmJon:
Yea, of course not.
14 December 2010, 11:06 pmWell, you will let us know when you have done your experiment, won’t you?
Can’t wait to see those results!
234sapphire:
I’m sorry Jon but as you know you are right there is no point trying to engage you in debate. I would suggest you pay more respect to those who have a more open mind. Over and out.
15 December 2010, 1:07 amJon:
Won’t debate me? There is no debate here. You are not presenting an argument, and when pressed for one you throw the “open / closed mind fallacy” at me!
15 December 2010, 1:28 amThe UK Skeptics have that as #1 in their list of seven fallacies of thought and reason.
234sapphire, AKA Paul Andrews, you should be careful not to be so open minded that your brain falls out.
Allen:
Only just come across this site a day or so ago.
26 January 2011, 12:13 pmI had a kit fitted in 2007 at gasontap in Bolton.
Worked fantastically well at first. Real improvement of about 40% at first, until the EMS decided that things were not quite right and began to make adjustments.
Over about 4 weeks my fuel consumption went back to where it was originally and more than that my engine warning light kept flashing.
Removed the unit but then initially the engine ran like a lame donkey until I had done about 2 miles and the EMS had started readjusted the settings. It still took a week or two to settle down and the settings had to be reinstalled at a main dealer.
Contacted gasontap, went up to see them, they did a few adjustments, fitted me a new ‘improved’ version free of charge but EXACTLY the same thing happened again.
Contacted gasontap again and they could only offer an ‘never heard of this happening before’ comment.
Not put the unit back on.
Instead i’ve had LPG fitted, it paid for itself in 17 months and now I get the equivalent of 40% more miles for my money campared to petrol so well pleased.
Jon:
Gasontap? These jokers http://www.gas-on-tap.co.uk ? Phil Easterbrook? You must be joking! LOL.
26 January 2011, 9:07 pmAnyway, you have to be mistaken, this 40% improvement is preposterous – where is this energy coming from?
Allen:
Jon; You are quite right about gasontap although I’m not sure they started out with the intention of deceiving anybody although thats the way it ended.
27 January 2011, 8:25 amI did get a vast improvement in mileage initially but I was not trying to defend them. It didnt work out and as far as I am concerned they dont have anything that can fool the EMS in the long term.
Be sceptical if you want, but my MPG went from 23 up to close on 30 and no I’m not mistaken. I have kept a log of MPG religiously for years, its a good way of spotting if anythings amiss, but like I said it wasnt sustainable and I cant see any way it can be.
Oh, and before you comment on the LPG, no I dont get 40% more on LPG than Petrol, I actually get slightly less, my MPG goes from 23 down to 21. The extra MPG is relative, only to the cost of Petrol v LPG, its so much cheaper.
Hope i’ve made that clear.
If anyone wants to get better value for money, forget HHO systems, stick with petrol and get an LPG conversion, or buy a car thats already been converted. With Petrol at £1.30 litre and LPG at 65p ish, its a no brainer.
Jon:
Hi Allen,
28 January 2011, 12:19 amNot starting out with the intention of deceiving anybody but ending up doing exactly that is the way I have seen to go several hundred times. They are fine lines between being mistaken, self deception and outright fraud.
It is your experiment that is flawed, it is not blinded or controlled. You and I have no reason to believe your results because we have no way of knowing what caused to improvement or if the improvement ever occurred at all. Employing the scientific method removes (or at least identifies and measures) these unknowns and takes away bias, whenever this is done to an HHO system the improvements disappear. Unfortunately most people don’t understand this. Just like every quack medical treatment ever tested by science, HHO fails to stand up when scrutinized properly. Bad experiments give bad results.
And besides, you are claiming to get 40% more energy from somewhere, where is this energy coming from? You are either violating conservation of energy laws or you are mistaken. Which is more probable?
Regards,
Jon.
Allen:
Hi Jon
28 January 2011, 10:18 amI’m no scientist,I’m a Ceramist so I really cant argue from a scientific veiwpoint.
All I know is that on two seperate occasions for a short period of time I did find myself getting more mpg. And I did check my figures, 23mpg up to ave 30mpg is actually 30% not 40.
The only common denominator was the installation and reinstallation of the HHO system. In both cases the savings disapeared as the EMS relearned the settings.
I can perhaps see, unscientifically, that it may work on older engines that are not so refined as modern ones with all the EMS controls that they now have.
If you say its impossible, I cant offer, scientifically any answer, and I bow your greater knowledge.
As you say many times, the only way to really prove that it works is to provide verifiable test and scientific results and if they were able to do that and convince auto manufacturers that there was merit in developing it commercially then the uncertainty surrounding it would be dispelled.
As it happens, I wouldnt go back to even trying to use it. I’m more than happy with the savings I’m making running on LPG.
As you, I hate scams and getting ‘ripped’ off, so keep up the good work in attempting to expose them.
Best Regards
Allen
Anonymous:
Jon, I have returned to this site after many months absence to see if there are any updates. Why Jon, are you so hostile to people who are considering the possibilty of HHo actually working? The way you have spoken to 234Sapphire, I don’t get it. You seem perched on the edge all the time, ready to combust at the mere suggestion HHO may have some possibilities. I, originally posted on here to report my experiences with the Prendergasts, and my doubts as to the validity of their HHO systems. I know, hydrogen engines is the way forward for cars, I am still not certain that a reliable add-on system can be developed and fitted on all petrol engines, with a really noticeable improvement. But, to shout down and get in a lather when good people offer their possibly layman thoughts on HHO, is just rude and insulting. If you feel you know more than them or us, then reason and politeness should suffice. There is no need for hostilty, in fact that hostility actually undermines your argument and suggests an underlying problem with your reason…’he protests too much’
28 January 2011, 3:05 pmconfused:
Jon, I’m interested in your consistent question. If there is evidence why is it not available? If there isn’t evidence why do people claim what is not proven? this is not science it’s common sense. Everyone who argues with you disappears the moment you ask for evidence or they hide behind a barrage of expresions that tries to detract from your personal credibility. It’s like listening to politicians avoiding the unwanted question. So I would like to ask it again. Does anyone have incontrovertable evidence that the HHO system offers the benefits claimed? If not why not? This should not be a belief system it should be easy to show improvements that are claimed.
6 February 2011, 7:58 pmJon:
Scientifically speaking, incontrovertable evidence is never available, it is always a matter of probability. The evidence they these people do have is always anecdotal. “Well it works on my car.” The problem comes in that people don’t understand the value of anecdotal evidence, it can be a guide to what could maybe be worth rigorous study but nothing more.
7 February 2011, 6:16 amconfused:
I thought I might have a play with hydrogen production I have some friends who are quite clued up in electronics and mechanics. Of course the problem in a nutshell is if H2O can be broken down into its constituent parts, then reconstituted, it could be kept going in a closed system that was running on its own power. This would mean perpetual motion. The only difference in the salesy blurb is that it omits the closed loop and I presume this is to avoid the perpetual motion claim. Thanks for your blog, I have enjoyed reading the various attempts to cajole, discredit and then attack you, and I appreciate your relatively calm responses it has ben refreshing after the hype.
7 February 2011, 11:58 pmconfused:
by the way Jon, have you seen this you tube video? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKKNsW29a0g&feature=related
8 February 2011, 1:46 amI’m just trying to work out what motivates these people, they present themselves as not interested in money (although later they make some reference to optional monetary participation to help them develop the technology). What are your thoughts or have you seen loads of these and its gets boring to you?
Jon:
There are thousands of these on YouTube. Read Voodoo Science to learn all about how and why it happens.
21 February 2011, 9:11 pmshabz:
lol am from leicestershire uk and i was thinking to purchase one for around £300 from that so called douggi, (a local garage i know) he lives in leicester, he told hes 1 of the main guys as a mannaging director an told me he was gonna have a contract with india, in my mind lol i was thinking “then he shud be a millionaire , was he doing oppening a garage body workshop?”. well Lucky i read this site! but i need somthing for my diesal to increase mpg. what can i use then?
22 February 2011, 3:52 amshabz:
but gettin ur car ruinning on water i think that works as honda released it first, wat u say guys
22 February 2011, 4:15 am?
Jon:
Hi shabz – how to increase you MPG? Drive less, get a bike, catch the train, take all that heavy crap out of your car, use the more expensive diesel fuel (BP Ultimate and the like), get a smaller car, get a more modern engine, drive more slowly, don’t accelerate so harshly, ensure your tires are at the correct PSI… all the usual stuff… unfortunately there is no magic fuel saver bullet, it does not exist.
22 February 2011, 4:19 amJon:
Honda have done no such thing! Have they made a hydrogen engine? Or a fuel cell? Because it is not the same thing at all, not even slightly similar.
22 February 2011, 4:21 amJon:
Any improvements you saw were down to poor experimental process and design. You are a human, you were in the experiment and you knew that the experiment was happening – this is called a non blinded experiment. Also you set no controls, how were you to know that the improvement actually happened or if it was caused by your hydrogen generator or by something else?
22 February 2011, 4:27 amGav:
If this technology was good enough to be used then I’m certain the major players in the automotive industry would build it before some scammer. Think smart.
10 March 2011, 1:48 pmJohan:
@Gav
21 April 2011, 11:43 am“Major players in the automotive industry” are the ones trying to ban HHO because profit from oil would drastically reduce. but lately being “green” is “cool” and oil reserves are smaller, so people are actually allowed to sell those generators. My father is retired chemist and skeptic by nature and he said that it is logical by adding hydrogen to fossil fuel (which is not burning 100%, catalytic converter is the proof. Catalytic converter is there to neutralize unburned fuel) will improve explosion. So by adding less fuel with hydrogen will produce same explosion as factory wanted inside the engine. And there is your fuel saving!!
Check on Youtube hundreds of tutorials of people creating, testing, using and saving money… search there for “hho dry cell”!!!
Johan:
AND!!!
21 April 2011, 11:50 amcar is not running on water!! Water is used as a fuel for HHO cell where, by electrolysis, water is taken apart into Hydrogen and Oxygen gas. And that gas is plugged into intake manifold where it is mixed with regular air and going into regular procedure of burning regular fossil fuel (diesel, petrol, lpg). Now, because intake air is rich with Hydrogen, explosion in cylinder is stronger. So it is not running on water, it is turning water into hydrogen to make the explosion better.
Chris:
[deleted business name] has been in business for around 20 years, patents and customer reports to prove it. I’ve measured the performance increase myself and the HP increase with before and after dyno readings. HHO and browns gas is real, with numerous studies to back it up by different organizations. Try to keep an open mind on this topic……
28 April 2011, 12:46 amrobert smith:
anybody no where sam is now she owes me money
4 May 2011, 6:36 pmJon:
Chris,
13 May 2011, 2:19 amJust like all of us you are fallible. Please go get your HHO machines tested in a lab under controlled conditions and let me know what you find out. HHO and Browns gas are indeed real, they just can’t acheive what you think they can. I have an open mind, just no so open that my brains have fallen out.
Thanks!
Jon.
Anonymous:
Jon your a nob
14 September 2011, 9:08 amJon:
Dear Anonymous,
14 September 2011, 9:58 amI am so upset by that comment that I think I may cry :’-(
However your use of “your” and “nob” made me laugh so hard that I forgot all about that.
Fuck off. Seriously.
Jon.
Jons Pet:
Jon – You’ve been soldiering on here since oct 2009 – you sure must have an exciting life doing verbal battle with all these scamsters.
Angry Troll – Dont Feed em, this guy lives off this stuff.
Good lord give him a medal though, he does try really hard and is always on hand to spit sarcasm and perfect english mind you! Check back soon guys for the next hilarious insult!
And if its a good’un make sure you feed the troll this christmas!
2 December 2011, 7:23 pmJon:
Dear Jons [sic] Pet,
3 December 2011, 3:23 amWhat the hell are you talking about? What is your point? Who is Angry Troll? I do not understand what you are trying to communicate to me. I’m not ever sure that you are talking to me or someone else.
Jon.