RankingsPrimerArbiterPhysicistMathematicianContrarianQESites logClaimsSourcesResearch notes

Rex Research: Edwin V. Gray dossier: 2026-10-06

URL: https://www.rexresearch.com/evgray/1gray.htm (Chrome navigation gave a stale page, so the page was read with web-fetch and a saved copy: research/files/rexresearch-evgray-1gray.htm, 251 KB HTML.) The old URL /evgray/evgray.htm returns 404.

Rex Research is a compiler of alternative-technology documents. Most items are reprints from the National Tattler (a tabloid; reporter Tom Valentine), which championed Gray. The page also sells, or points to, Lindemann's products (Clear-Tech).

Contents (as listed on the page)

  • Tom Valentine, National Tattler, 1 July 1973, p.5: "Man Creates Engine That Consumes No Fuel; Invention Could Change History By 1984"
  • Tom Valentine, National Tattler, 1 July 1973: "Gasless Auto Gets $6-Million Backing"
  • Tom Valentine, National Tattler, 23 Jan 1974: "Two Inventors Work To Devise Fuelless Car"
  • AP wire, Progress Bulletin (Pomona, CA), 7 July 1975: "Either Saint or Sinner: Auto Motor Inventor Just Fueling Around?"
  • Tom Valentine, National Tattler, March 1974: "Inventor of the World's First No-Fuel Engine is Suppressed by L.A.'s District Attorney"; and "Threat of Arrest Spurs Tattler Reporter"
  • Jack Scagnetti, Probe The Unknown, June 1973: "The Engine That Runs Itself" (with an "EMA-4" data sheet)
  • Tom Valentine, NewsReal (date unknown): "EMS: Electronic Power That Could Change The World's Economic Power Picture"
  • US 3,890,548; US 4,595,975; US 4,661,747
  • E. Gray, patent application "Regenerative Energy Recovery System, e.g., for Electromagnetic Propulsion" (10 April 1980), marked "[Unidentified British Application Number]", with its abstract. This is a Gray filing not mentioned in the folder.

Key findings [web: https://www.rexresearch.com/evgray/1gray.htm]

  1. The AP story of 1975 is a mainstream wire report of the prosecution, from the DA's side. In its words: investigators "seized the prototype engine, plans, drawings and bookkeeping records" in July 1974. "It was not until May that charges were filed against Gray --- one count of conspiracy to commit grand theft, eight counts of grand theft, and three counts of a securities violation." Gray "began selling shares in his invention in 1971 and attracted some 800 shareholders." Deputy D.A. Mitchell Harris said two DA investigators "went down to see and got hustled themselves --- they invested money of their own for a while, but later got it back". The DA said it had been "hard to find investors willing to press charges". Gray's attorneys "cite the 10-month delay as one sign of harassment." - This gives the charges in detail: 12 counts, filed May 1975. Lindemann's account has one "grand theft" charge, later dropped, and a March 1976 plea to two minor SEC violations. The AP story fixes the case to Los Angeles County in 1975, so the court docket can be looked up. - Interested parties: the DA's office was the prosecutor (the stake of a prosecutor). Gray's attorneys and the Tattler were advocates.
  2. A test witness against the claims: Donald Cronin, "a staff scientist at TRW Systems, Inc., who watched a test of the motor about a year ago" (so about mid-1974): "It ran for about 10 seconds and then everything blew". He also said: "A group of scientists from a big research firm in Japan had come with an elaborate amount of equipment --- gauges, instruments, and TV cameras --- and were ready to sign a letter of intent. After the test, they packed it all up and went back to Japan." And: "If it did what he says it would violate all the laws of physics". This account comes from one published source (AP 1975), and no second source was found yet. It bears on Lindemann's own finding that a copy built to the motor patent gave "dangerous discharges".
  3. A test report for the claims (as the Tattler presents it): Tattler, 1 July 1973: "Tests conducted this past September by Crosby Research Institute (Beverly Hills, CA) showed the original EMA prototype motor had a 'measured overall system efficiency exceeding 99%'." Testing was by "Crosby Engineering director J. A. Maize ... on behalf of Pan World Enterprises Company, Ltd., a Japanese conglomerate". Maize "operated the motor into a 10-horsepower dynamometer load at 1,100 rpm, a power output of 7,460 watts. But the batteries used in the test were only capable of 5,454 watts per hour." Maize is quoted: "The system will operate continuously for 203 hours at 10 horsepower and 1,100 rpm without recharge since the total battery power consumed is only 26.8 watts per hour". These are the most specific numbers on record. They are the Tattler's report of a test commissioned by an investor, Pan World, which had a stake. The units are mixed ("watts per hour" for energy). No Crosby report document has been found yet.
  4. Endorsements: Tattler/NewsReal say "Dr. Norm Chalfin and Dr. Gene Wester of California Institute of Technology have publicly endorsed Gray's motor". Chalfin at a stockholders' meeting: "There is no motor like this in the world ... energy is used only during a small fraction of a millisecond. Energy not used is returned to an accessory battery for reuse." Also "nominated for 'Inventor of the Year' by the Los Angeles Patent Attorney's Association". (Caltech affiliation as stated by the Tattler; not checked.)
  5. Named people (keywords for later runs): Richard B. Hackenberger (engineer, VP Engineering); Fritz Lens (ex-Volkswagen mechanic); Paul M. Lewis (designer of the "Fascination" car); C. V. Wood Jr. (McCulloch Oil); Donald Cronin (TRW); Norm Chalfin, Gene Wester (Caltech per Tattler); J. A. Maize (Crosby Research Institute); Pan World Enterprises Co. Ltd (Japan); Ran Novell (DA investigator, who threatened Valentine with arrest per the Tattler, March 1974); Mitchell Harris (Deputy DA); Joel Ward (Gray's attorney, who said none of the "800 stockholders" had demanded money back).
  6. "EMA-4" data sheet (Probe The Unknown, June 1973): input "12 volts DC", "2550 rpm constant", "Brake HP 32.05", "Fuel Consumption: None". The inventor's company's figures.

Bearing on claims

  • Claim 5 (raid, charges, plea): the AP 1975 story is independent mainstream confirmation of the raid, the seizure and the charges, with the DA's characterization and counts more serious than Lindemann reports. The outcome (plea or dismissal) is not in this source.
  • Claims 1-2 (gain): both the only numerical test claim for the motor (Crosby/Maize, via the Tattler) and the only witnessed failure (Cronin, via AP) are here. Both concern the 1973-74 motor, not the 1980s tube circuit that Lindemann centres on.