Hho

[101mpg]

Quadancer - I appreciate the answers you've given here. "I see all these anecdotes, here's a forum link for those, I am seeing positive results, etc." These are positive things.

Many, including myself, look forward to you and others posting your gaslogs, including "this worked, this made things worse," etc.

Personally I am on a quest to figure out how Smokey Yunick and others have made vehicles run on gasoline vapor, sort of like 376milespergallon.com vehicle. Make that run a series hybrid....you might end up with 500 MPG and foreign oil would cease to be a concern for the US.

I too have heard anecdotes about the gas vapor engine, including someone I knew personally who had a science teacher in High School who made such an engine, and he disappeared one day after a big payoff. Can't get ahold of him - I tried with modern search methods. He modified a Corvette that ran for over 24 hours off the vapors of a pint of gasoline - idling only. It apparently was drivable, just not sure of the MPG.

In its place I'm eventually converting a CRX to propane - long life engine, nearly no wear. That's my tangent to the HHO issue - I understand about where you come from, but I too want more info. Imagine HHO and propane...

[Rower4VT]

HHO proponents testify that you'll increase gas mileage 10-45%. If this were true then you'd be use A LOT of hydrogen, a lot more than you could produce from an HHO generator. Even if you optimistically estimate that you can get 2 times the miles out of a kilo of hydrogen than you could out of gas, and then assume that the hydrogen is only accounting for 20% increase in your fuel mileage, so we'll say conservatively that you're getting an additional 5 miles from the hydrogen per gallon of gas consumed...Let's assume a vehicle that gets 25mpg. That 5 miles, once again "conservatively" would use 1/13th of a kilo of hydrogen. If you were to drive 25 miles round trip in a commute then you would need 1/13th a kilo of hydrogen to increase mileage 20%. A 1/13 kilo = 0.08 kilos. There is about 0.42 kilos in a gallon of water. So a quart would offer you about one-and-a-quarter "commutes" and that is if you could use every drop of water in the HHO generator (given a 1 qt. capacity generator)...which you can't. I don't have an HHO but I'm assuming that the electrodes need to stay covered with water to work, so if you have a 1 qt. HHO then the usable amount of water is well less than a pint, which would only allow you that 20% increase in mileage for about 10-15 miles before you have to fill up the water tank again. If you question my numbers and findings, then pick up a chemistry book, do some research, and find out for yourself. How often do you have to refill a HHO? If you have to fill it everyday, how much water do you add? Using my "optimistic" numbers, see how much mileage you could theoretically get from the hydrogen you produced. Once again you can only get .42 kilos or .92 pounds of hydrogen from a whole gallon of water.

Here is the kicker argument: The perpetual motion machine. If indeed you are getting more energy from the hydrogen you produced from the HHO generator than you put into it, you have to assume that most engineers/physicist/chemist are wrong when they say that it takes about as much energy to get the hydrogen as you get out of it when you use/burn it. Let's assume they are wrong and that these HHO proponents are right. SO then we are getting more energy out of the hydrogen than it takes to get it. If this is true then why not put a bigger alternator on our engines, fill a tank in the trunk with water, and increase our mileage by 80%!! HHO proponents say we get more energy out of the hydrogen than we're putting into it, so this must work!

If anyone has the science or absolute proof that this could work, then PLEASE tell me. I would love to win a nobel prize and put a 20 gallon HHO in the back of every American's car. Our dependence on foreign oil would all but go away. This is great!!

Disregard the sarcasm if you can. And please provide alternative "numbers" and "scientific proof" if you can. Ultimately, I'm just trying to save you money from a scam that simply is as impossible as a perpetual motion engine.

[GasSavers_gassaver]

Originally Posted by quadancer@bellsouth.net

I finally had a little time to look at the OU site this morning and here's an example of what I see all over the place in the way of anecdotes - hard to ignore hundreds getting results:
http://oupower.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1882
That site is much older than our new HHOinfo.com site so there are other designs and much info new to me. Including many saying the Smack unit is actually pretty poor, but mine was modified from the start. Smack himself said it wasn't the best; just easy to make.

Yes, beside the Oupower.com group there are two other groups also getting results at:

http://www.fuel-saver.org/Forum/index.php

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/watercar/

With this many active users getting results, the question is not if it works, but how well can you make it work.

The educational division of the National Hydrogen Association also talks about it on their H2&You website.

http://www.h2andyou.org/caseStudies/injection.asp

Over 50 million miles of road testing is hard to ignore.

[quadancer@bellsouth.net]

Thank you Gassaver. I've been ready to quit this site for a while as I'm so busy studying everything I can about HHO and the continuing developments; and that's when I'm not in the garage building something for one. I just don't have the time or patience to answer the same questions over and over to people who won't study this because of their superior knowledge.
As Gassaver posted, I posted and others...regardless of knowledge, it works. As for a LOG, I've had one going of sorts, as I experiment with my installation, log changes, output, amperages, heat (very important) and finally a road test that blew me away. I always check my mileage at fillups for many reasons, and know exactly how my truck acts. Gaining mileage in traffic that exceeds highway mileage has me very optimistic, to say the least.
My log as is: http://hhoinfo.ning.com/forum/topic/...3ATopic%3A5601
There is a lot of antagonistic attitude here and only a few defenders or people with working units. I just prefer to spend my time in the positive enviornment of fellow experimenters for this particular subject, as we learn from each other. I don't learn anything from pseudo science that considers only desktop realities. Our cars are different, the variables are many, and there is much to learn beyond the basic laws of physics.
I don't know all about HHO, but enough to understand the installation and how to calculate the results. The sciences are interesting, but not totally necessary. That's how inventions are borne; of faith and persistence.

[GasSavers_RoadWarrior]

Originally Posted by dkjones96

You do realize that the ideal Hydrogen-Air mixture in an engine only burns at around 8 ft/sec right? Gasoline in open air burns at about 70 ft/sec and in an engine that goes as high as 170 ft/sec with compression. Gasoline burns more efficiently. And, saying you don't care about the fundamental laws of science doesn't help your case much. That just tells me that when you installed the HHO generator you probably drove differently.

The figures I'm getting for H2 flame speed are 3-4 m/s whereas unleaded gas is 0.34 m/s

I've laid a gasoline "fuse" before to burn out a hornets nest and I was maybe 20ft away, I can tell you the flame took several seconds to get there, was definitely nowhere near 70ft/second.

[Jay2TheRescue]

Originally Posted by quadancer@bellsouth.net

Thank you Gassaver. I've been ready to quit this site for a while as I'm so busy studying everything I can about HHO and the continuing developments; and that's when I'm not in the garage building something for one. I just don't have the time or patience to answer the same questions over and over to people who won't study this because of their superior knowledge.
As Gassaver posted, I posted and others...regardless of knowledge, it works. As for a LOG, I've had one going of sorts, as I experiment with my installation, log changes, output, amperages, heat (very important) and finally a road test that blew me away. I always check my mileage at fillups for many reasons, and know exactly how my truck acts. Gaining mileage in traffic that exceeds highway mileage has me very optimistic, to say the least.
My log as is: http://hhoinfo.ning.com/forum/topic/...3ATopic%3A5601
There is a lot of antagonistic attitude here and only a few defenders or people with working units. I just prefer to spend my time in the positive enviornment of fellow experimenters for this particular subject, as we learn from each other. I don't learn anything from pseudo science that considers only desktop realities. Our cars are different, the variables are many, and there is much to learn beyond the basic laws of physics.
I don't know all about HHO, but enough to understand the installation and how to calculate the results. The sciences are interesting, but not totally necessary. That's how inventions are borne; of faith and persistence.

I think the big thing here is that there are a lot of people who post here, and only talk about making a 10 or 20 mile run, and calculating mileage from that. If someone were to post their mileage figures in the garage on this site, everyone would be able to see exactly what mileage they are getting over time. I can make my pickup truck do 30 on the highway, but I can't make it do that every day with my daily driving. What we need is a real world, long term test.

-Jay

[GasSavers_RoadWarrior]

Oh btw, I'm confident that HHO performance falls within the known laws of physics, it's just the naysayers like to misinterpret them, or use the wrong ones, when they're trying to tell you how it doesn't work...

example 1: Does it take 10% more gasoline to increase load on the motor by 10%? Naysayer: Of course it does, you can't violate the holy divine law of thermodynamics. Right Answer: No it doesn't and a proper understanding of the thermodynamics of an internal combustion engine would tell you that.

example 2: how can some of the output of a 25% efficient engine converted at 60% efficiency result in higher efficiency? Naysayer, of course it can't, you can't violate the holy divine law of thermodynamics. Right Answer: A proper understanding of the thermodynamics of HYDROGEN in a spark ignition engine vs what is known for gasoline, would tell you that it more efficient, you don't get only 25% back out when you put it back in.

[GasSavers_Russ]

dose any one have any new ideas towards hho i would be interested to try ?

[quadancer@bellsouth.net]

Hey Russ; still here and thot I'd check in looking for the same thing. Have you seen the videos on Utube from zerofossilfuels? He has a lot of them and did some very interesting experiments with some things you might try or not. I'm building another Smack unit but this time sealing the sides and most of the bottom, no bolts, and using fishing line for my spacer. That's an extension of one of his ideas that did work well. I'm using black RTV silicone sealant to hold the plates together and seal plastic sides to it. The bottom will have an entry hole (lack of sealant) for electrolyte and the purpose of sealing the sides will be to eliminate the current leakage thru the surrounding electrolyte. He used a series cell setup; Smack's is a parallell series unit with the voltage drop adjusted by the floater plates. I'm hoping it's a step up for the easy build units.

[GasSavers_Russ]

Originally Posted by quadancer@bellsouth.net

Hey Russ; still here and thot I'd check in looking for the same thing. Have you seen the videos on Utube from zerofossilfuels? He has a lot of them and did some very interesting experiments with some things you might try or not. I'm building another Smack unit but this time sealing the sides and most of the bottom, no bolts, and using fishing line for my spacer. That's an extension of one of his ideas that did work well. I'm using black RTV silicone sealant to hold the plates together and seal plastic sides to it. The bottom will have an entry hole (lack of sealant) for electrolyte and the purpose of sealing the sides will be to eliminate the current leakage through the surrounding electrolyte. He used a series cell setup; Smack's is a parallell series unit with the voltage drop adjusted by the floater plates. I'm hoping it's a step up for the easy build units.

I have seen Zero and i respect his work.,

has done some good things and tried some rely out of the box ideas,

i think u got a god thing going with the fishing wire i hope you dont mined if i give this a go to, are you using PMW?