Why it is now possible (see recommended) to equip your vehicle with a Gillier Pantone water injection or doping kit Edit by C.Martz to 1 / 1 / 09.
Since I wrote Part 2 of the article below, at the end of 2005, a lot has changed. Here are the three most notable in my eyes and which go in the direction of the democratization and legalization of the renowned water doping kits since the Gillier-Pantone kit.
- In spring 2007, the town hall of Vitry sur Orne 2 team of its municipal vehicles with a steam generator + reactor. Results: 20 at 30% reduction in consumption and 80% of fumes. Discover more et a video of France3 diffused more than one year after the assembly.
- At the beginning of 2007, J. Rochereau and myself published a document ofscientific explanation of water doping by partial ionization of water vapor. This theory has been confirmed by numerous experiments, the kit sellers see c) all advising to slightly acidify the doping water.
- Since 2007, the cooperative COPRA of 40 employees has joined HYPNOW on the market for the sale of water doping kits. We regret that these two companies are waging a small trade "war" instead of working hand in hand in order to democratize water doping. Important thing: in the last quarter of 2, COPRA obtained a written document from the insurer AGF certifying that it insures vehicles equipped with an e-COPRA Kit. This is my first knowledge and a big step forward for the democratization of water doping which comes out of illegality! See the AGF insurer's document
These 3 “major” advances for Gillier-Pantone water doping therefore strongly qualify the article below written at the end of 2005, so 3 years ago, where I advised against the (commercial) installation of a doping kit. at the water.
I nevertheless recommend reading this entire article in order to understand the evolution over these 3 years.
Why is it premature to buy “pantone” (G system) or “Spad” kits? by Christophe Martz, the 22 / 12 / 05
After the interest for some French-speaking media and the beginning of the marketing of kits and while being, I think, one of the French-speaking precursors of the process, I would like to make some updates in relation to these steps.
The basics of the problem
Indeed; in the absence of any serious public scientific research on water doping, it is premature and risky to buy such kits on your engines and this for 2 essential reasons:
- No guarantee of result is provided by the sellers
- The loss of your warranty, insurance, in short you become illegal by installing such a system (imagine the case of a fatal accident with your uninsured car?)
If the 2nd point is, in a way, an administrative formality (and therefore solvent), the first point is much more difficult to resolve. Indeed; no salesperson is able to prove, with the support of a measurement bench, that his kits are effective, moreover all the independent tests on a test bench (including mine) have not revealed tangible results. And even more serious, none of these "sellers" accepts scientific or commercial collaboration from us. Why ? Do they have something to hide?
Attention, on the other hand, we highly recommend the prototyping of your engine as long as it is carried out by yourself. For this you will find a lot of information on the forums.
So does water doping work or not?
There are too many assemblies which have been carried out and which have given results for years without loss of reliability to no longer have to doubt: doping with water works and it is reliable.
Nevertheless, depending on the quality of your “doping” and especially the conditions of use of your car, the results in terms of consumption may be low or zero.
From our experience, we have found that the process is functional under certain conditions. But these conditions are far from being mastered and explains the non-guarantee of results on the part of these kits.
It is obviously for these reasons that we refuse to trade with such kits until the 2 points mentioned above are resolved.
Let's now analyze in more detail the sellers' approach.
In the case of water doping, it is, logically, wrong to speak of a “Pantone” process. Not only does the Pantone patent not mention it but, in addition, when I spoke about it in person to Paul Pantone, the latter claims that this assembly does not "work". Nevertheless, part of his patent, the “reactor” is used but no one, to my knowledge, is able to say if there is something special happening in this reactor other than a classic reforming (of hydrocarbons therefore not of water craking)… Even if the hypotheses of all kinds are legion!
The paternity of this system, the "G system" indeed belongs to Mr David and to the owner of the very first tractor mounted: Mr G. (who, for the septic systems of the net really exist, I met them in 2001!) And , to a lesser extent, to Mr Jean Pierre Chambrin who also uses a proportion of water "treated by exhaust gases". It is very likely that other patents also support this idea.
However, it should be noted that the dissemination on the internet of this system at the beginning of 2001 put the basic principle of water doping in the public domain. This may also be why no industrialist is interested in the system. Whatever the case, the copyright deposited by the APTE association is not only abusive because it appropriates the work of Mr David (not to be confused with David X, editor-in-chief at APTE precisely) but in addition does not protect anything process.
With regard to "water doping" on diesel engines, it should be noted that it is still too early to draw conclusions on various points:
- The major problem is obviously the understanding of the phenomenon (which does not necessarily happen entirely in the "reactor"). We would like to stress that it is only through a full understanding of the assembly that improvements (other than trial and error) and flawless reproducibility (1st way towards industrialization and democratization of the system) will be possible. For the moment, this assembly is far from being understood (at least by us because it is probable that the engine manufacturers have already covered the question).
- The second important point comes from the efficiency of the system. We can hear very evasive figures on this subject (mental evasion seems to be a habit around the pantone process!) And a 50% reduction in consumption would double the efficiency of the diesel engine and thus exceed the theoretical (and mechanical efficiency by construction) of the diesel engine. This is impossible without energy supply… Except, once again, no one (myself included) has been able to prove on a power test bench (comparative consumption figures in support) this drop in consumption.
Nevertheless, it is certain that a certain quantity of water injected into an engine will, under certain very specific conditions, improve efficiency. The problem is that the opposite effect can occur and nullify or, worse, reverse the gains made.
- Even if the first assemblies are already several years old, the hindsight is still too low and the studies, public, too few to show that there is no mechanical or human risk with this assembly. But this does not seem to prevent the trade made by some.
Indeed; some people are starting to make a real trade in this system. This is done either in the form of "assembly kit" or in the form of "training course".
The "trainers" are also people unknown to the community created around the pantone and self-proclaimed as well. This is not very serious… and worse, risks discrediting the system, in the eyes of some (the most skeptical). The only real interest of these internships is access to information for people without Internet access… but at what price?
In any case, we (me and the econology site) do not support the sale of kits or these pseudo-formations.
On Econologie, we do not sell kits and denounce attempted scams. Our goal is currently to advance the understanding of the process! !
Towards the understanding of the process.
For nearly three years, my friend engine technician, Olivier (owner of the ZX, click here ) and myself are working independently of any organization (and of course including kit sellers) on this project.
We confirm the improvement of combustion, behavior and engine efficiency under certain conditions. We tried, with our only means:
- to understand what was happening in a doped engine,
- to find the best conditions to get the best performance.
- to reproduce the results
- We are currently focusing our research and development on these points.
We found that the operating conditions of the process are not satisfactory on engines with low load and variable rotation speed.
We have managed to overcome these drawbacks after many hours of trying and failing. These improvements resulted in the device that we found useful to patent. This invention patent bears the number FR2858364 and was published in the official bulletin of industrial property on February 4, 2005.
The document is available on this site, click here.
The technical aspects of this patent clearly show the complexity achieved in obtaining “correct” results on a road vehicle. Our work as engine manufacturers no longer has much to do with the mechanic-welding work of the kits sold, but you can be sure that these traders were inspired by our work. It is moreover I who gave the first information on water doping to the president of APTE ...
In conclusion, I would say that we find that at this stage of research, it is still risky and risky to market any type of kit using the "pantone" method in water doping.
The system is currently absolutely not marketable because it remains experimental and done on a case by case basis (more or less efficient prototypes)
This is confirmed by contradictory testimonies of two major specialized magazines: autoplus et Action Auto Moto (click on the link to read the articles)
Nevertheless, the distribution of such kits has the merit of making the system known and democratized ... while knowing that any innovative product development always involves a more or less measured risk and that zero risk will never exist!
Thanks for reading.
5 comments on “About the Gillier Pantone kits sold”
For the attention of Christophe
We started to write an article on the oxidizer and "the oxidizer"
source inpi and cnrs by ecopra
Following the latest development of oxidizer kit.
And especially to research based on the basic stoichiometric ratio differences following the oxidizer.
It is not uninteresting to see that this report brought back to our human nature (its air consumption and the air combustion of a liter of fuel)… It is equivalent. The first advertisements on combustors are all the same BELGIAN http://www.ecopra.com/fr/component/k2/item/105-comburant-et-comburateur
always for the attention of Christophe
Here is a combustor application on "RATP site LOCOMOTIVE"
What is relevant on the application is a modification upstream of the air filter
There is therefore no modification of the engine.
The application here is in order to limit the opacity "especially in the tunnels" change of neon lights in led big building site 2015- 2016.etc
So for the oxidizers of 1827 (see on the patent) can annihilate
that is to say to cancel the harmful smoke pollution it is smoke-eating.
with regard to maritime lamps (the oxidizer makes it possible to reduce the opacity and therefore of the facets of the glass making it possible to be seen from the coast and or from another boat).
at that time the engine does not exist it is only imagined 30 years later.
Thank you for the info, I relayed the RATP video on forums: https://www.econologie.com/forums/montages-injection-eau/injection-d-eau-a-la-ratp-sur-l-orlyval-service-t14817.html
Hello, I thought I read that no kit vendor was prepared to perform scientific tests to prove their veracity.
What is not our case at O2 MOTORS, I am sending you a link which dates back more than 6 months on the equipment of an O2 MOTORS kit on a Renault diesel vehicle from 1989 with an index of 6 down to 0,50, XNUMX