HHO vs water vapor injection

[flapdoodle]

Sucking it in. The line is hooked to the vacuum venturi port. Flow is controlled by an irrigation dripper and a squashed 1/16" brass tube. The irrigation dripper is okay by itself for distilled water, but added restriction is needed for the water/methanol mix I am using now.

[flapdoodle]

Sucking it in via the vacuum venturi port.

[flapdoodle]

I have reached the limit on reducing the jet size at 31% smaller area than the original jets (#65). The car still runs ok with a slight reduction in mid range power, but not open throttle performance. The BIG disappointment is that I can no longer see any difference with the hydrogen generator turned on except at idle.

Perhaps the fellow that told me that you are better off with water/methanol injection instead of hydrogen is correct, at least on my car.

[flapdoodle]

I finally have some real figures on mileage. Previously the best I could get in mostly town driving was 10 MPG. Sometimes that went as low as 8 in the winter.

With the HHO off, and the leaner jets and water/methanol injection I got 12.94 MPG (this is mostly stop-and-go driving). Much of the time the air conditioner was on, and I made a few performance runs that really suck up the gas. Not all of the time did it have the really small jets, just the ones I purchased that were 9% less flow. The main jets now are 31% smaller in area.

I can see no drastic reduction in power or acceleration.

This is very encouraging for a 5600 pound car with a 7.5 liter engine.

My previous MPG highway was 15.4. Hope to get that up to 20 MPG.

Guess I just have one of those cars that prefers water injection over HHO.

[ZugyNA]

A 30% gain in city driving isn't peanuts?

You should find an econobox and set that HHO gen up in it?

[GasSavers_Dust]

Something to factor is is how much water/meth you used, and how much that cost. Just because you used less gas, doesn't mean you saved any money.

[flapdoodle]

Originally Posted by ZugyNA

A 30% gain in city driving isn't peanuts?

Not sure if you understood. The 30% gain was with water/methanol mix injected. So far I have seen NO gain with hydrogen in any test I have made, with any ICE. My experiments will not continue with hydrogen. They will continue with water mix injection.

[flapdoodle]

Originally Posted by Dust

Something to factor is is how much water/meth you used, and how much that cost. Just because you used less gas, doesn't mean you saved any money.

.516 ounces/minute
$.0059/minute
248 minutes per gallon
$0.35 per hour

Average cost of water/methanol, city driving, 7 cents / gallon of gas used.

For this test with lots of stop and go miles the saving per gallon on gas is $.994 (actual measurements)

[ZugyNA]

Originally Posted by flapdoodle

Not sure if you understood. The 30% gain was with water/methanol mix injected. So far I have seen NO gain with hydrogen in any test I have made, with any ICE. My experiments will not continue with hydrogen. They will continue with water mix injection.

Guess I wasn't paying attention. With my one test of HHO...I lost mpg...but also had other stuff going on....currently testing again.


So I figure that on the highway at 55...you are typically using 3.5 gallons of gas per hour or 112 oz. And using 30 oz of washer fluid? (doesn't account for mpg gain)

The way I was figuring it when testing...your injection rate is around 26%...or 26% washer fluid relative to typical gas used.

When I was testing water injection...one time I used around 1 qt in 50 miles...or maybe 17% for this car....and I was afraid I'd messed up the engine. I finally got the flow down to 2% and tested a 10% loss in power and no mpg gain. I wasn't leaning it out any though. Straight water.

You might want to use some MMOil in the gas as a top lube? That water/methanol mix might be hard on the oil film?

I might give this a go this summer.

[flapdoodle]

Originally Posted by ZugyNA

So I figure that on the highway at 55...you are typically using 3.5 gallons of gas per hour or 112 oz. And using 30 oz of washer fluid? (doesn't account for mpg gain)

The way I was figuring it when testing...your injection rate is around 26%...or 26% washer fluid relative to typical gas used.

When I was testing water injection...one time I used around 1 qt in 50 miles...or maybe 17% for this car....and I was afraid I'd messed up the engine. I finally got the flow down to 2% and tested a 10% loss in power and no mpg gain. I wasn't leaning it out any though. Straight water.

I have no idea where you got the figures in the first paragraph. None of the driving in that test was at 55 MPH. However, 3.5 gallons would equal 448 ounces, NOT 112. At the current rate the methanol mix consumption would be 30.96 ounces (or 6.9%) and cost 36 cents for the 3.5 gallons you quoted.

The loop through town where I have done all the tests has a max speed limit of 45, but in town it is 25 with lots of traffic lights and stop sign. I have owned the car for 24 years so I know that getting 13 miles to the gallon for this this type of driving is pretty incredible.

This is not the first time you have questioned my statements without checking your own math. Your statement that I am using 26% washer fluid makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Is this your idea of Leading the perpetually ignorant and uninformed into the light of scientific knowledge?

I am still wondering why you e-mailed me telling me I should not post to this forum. With a few exceptions, I find this to be the best of all the forums I have encountered, and sincerely hope that it stays that way.