Figured I'd get that wrong....yea...3.5 G = 448 oz and 30 oz = 6.7%

My calculator goes on the fritz now and then...jumps into stats and other crapola...that's my excuse anyway.

No point in being so aggressive/defensive...we're all learning here?

This forum is inhabited by some cultish naysayers who apparently don't test...but do criticize others testing with no real evidence other than their supposed greater technical knowledge. There are also some clones of this forum with apparently the same people posting on them. The intention seems to involve discouraging testing other than driving techniques and aero. I suspect black $ funding...oil, auto and/or govt...or others who don't respect the truth.

You've heard of the Cult of the Swimming Elephant (COTSE)? How about the Cult of the Pulse and Glide Aliens (COTPGA)? :-0

So a 7% rate is not too bad...looks like a potential winner....if you put in smaller jets or lean out in some other way. Testing at a steady 55 mph would be a more accurate/comparable test? Do like your technically-based testing.

Flapdoodle, turn the water too steam, run 2 to 7%, increase vacuum advance 2 to 4 degrees, shoot it past the idle discharge ports if you can.
edit: Double up the carb gasket. Sandwich a small tube between, point it at the idle discharge port.

If I am reading this correctly, the tube would extend into the bore. This would create a problem since the the throttle plates extend below the base of the carb when they open and would sever the tube. I believe two tubes would be necessary; one for each bore.

I could handle the vacuum advance as you suggested.

The double gasket idea reminded me to post something I was told by some old-timers (even older than me) in North Dakota they used during the depression. I will do that on a new thread.

No problem, as the plates go up as they uncover the idle tranfor port as well. In between two gaskets. Doesn't have too extend into the bore. You can buy very thin carb spacers.

Researchers Observe Hydrogen-Bond Exchange

For those of you who are technically minded:
https://www.physorg.com/news129471213.html

[QUOTE=flapdoodle " I started this because the hydrogen generator caused ping (I expected that) and retarding the ignition did not seem like something I wanted to do, because it made the vacuum drop (which means the carburetor is putting more fuel in)."

At idle when the vacuum drops you pull less fuel.
Retard your timing 3 degrees. Run a little less water flow.
Still run the HHO.
I was reading on a link over on the "Speedtalk" web site. "Sorry can't find it" was some SAE papers on humidly effects on CO oxidation. Bottom line it said that the proper amount of humidly in creases the speed that CO burns during the combustion process.
Mark

Can you expand on that? What exactly do you mean?

I know water vapor 'helps'. I remember about 8 years ago My Toyota Carina S/W developed a small leak between the cooler and engine. So when the water heated up the vapor would get into the system. I noticed that the car had more power during this 'problem' and better fuel efficiency. So, HHO and Vapor does work.

I am an experimenter and I have tried many experiments. Actually, if you look at engines closely you will see that the OIL vapor is taken into the air intake. So, it figures that if you increase the 'richness' of the oil then you get more power/milage.

I am in Sri Lanka.

Run a copper wire through the exhaust...

Inject free out of hose water into intake above (lets say) 1,500rpms.

Done.

This heated water will take a lot of space in the combustion chamber so less fuel is injected and you then just lean out the mixture to around 15.1
-------
My question is, how far can you lean it out before you start seeing knock? (detonation). Could you go 17.1 maybe if the heated water got really hot?

I think you can go about 17.5:1 before it knocks without the water. Then the trouble is getting an even burn. Best economy is supposedly around 16:1 due to power dropping off like a stone after that. There's a region in between stoich and 16:1 though where NOx spikes, so you can use water for combustion cooling to prevent NOx in transition, and to keep it lower when you're at around 16. When ratios as low as 25:1 are talked of in lean burn modes, what's really happing is that the charge is stratified such that there's a richer pocket that burns completely and evenly, and the remainder is air that is heated by the burn for extra piston thrust. A homegenous 25:1 charge would not burn at all well, unless it was plasma jet excited or had other exotic means of ignition (Microwaves, UV burst, other ionising radiaton etc..*)

(* oh yeah, that's what I need to invent next, pulse laser spark plugs)

Edit: We might also regard HHO as an "exotic" method of ignition promotion, due to flame front propagation speed.

So with super heated water (by routing it to the exhaust under pressure; thus you can heat it more without boiling until it is released off pressure into the intake tract and then it becomes really hot steam) I guess we could be easily pushing 18.1 with steady cruising and like you said 16.1 or 15.5 under load so power doesnt drop so much.... ??

Now the problem becomes tuning these freaken fuel injected cars under closed loop.... they all try to learn back to 14.1 !!! GRRR!!

I pulled the carburetor off and was surprised that the base gasket had disintegrated to something resembling paper mache. The shiny machined surface of the base is now black and pitted by corrosion from the methanol.

If I continue experimenting with alcohol/water injection it will be with a ethanol/water mix, but I am now leery of even using that.

Back to the drawing board.

I have just finished building my own HHO generator, and it works a treat! Heaps of gas when hooked up to my car battery. Will be installing it this weekend. My friend met a guy from Sydney yesterday, who has the system in his 5.7l v12 jaguar.

He is very excited about the initial results...close to 30% better mileage.Don't listen to the sceptics.......let them continue to pay top price for fuel and pollute the environment. Their choice.I purchased the ebook from water4gas and have built my own to a slightly different design, but heeding their advice on the overall setup.

The technology works, and is nothing new. For the sceptics, this technology has been suppressed for almost 100 years. NASA uses it, so why shouldn't we? Enjoy your experimenting.

flapdoodle, so would you suggested the metering of liquid water, the injection of steam (created with exhaust heat), or just a simple bubbler to create some water vapor?

I've thought for a while I should create one of those PVC valve collectors and though maybe create something similar to that and run it in line after the collector, but before the engine and you hook engine vacuum to top of container and the inlet to the container runs through a hose to the bottom of the jar, hooked to an acquarium bubbler stone and then fill with water.

So vacuum would produce bubbles and should suck in some water. Probably no where near as much as steam or liquid injection.

Just curious your thoughts, sounds like before this I need a way to tune and lean out my FI. Sounds much easier to experiment on a carbed car.

Hi Flap,
Just curious, why the preference of methanol over isopropyl, is there a deffinite advantage? It's my understanding that iso bonds with the water molecules wheras meth doesn't so much. Can you explain please?
Thanks.

Meth with stick to water too. It kinda sounds like he is using washer fluid.

Generic blue winter washer fluid is gettable for $1.50 a gallon and is usually a 50% methanol mix. Don't use anything with de-icer, rain-X or bug remover in though.

I have to disagree, it's really hard to find a 50% mix. Most are in te 20% to 40% range. Read the label, and look for any kind of advertising about bugs, spots, etc.

It has seemed to me, during the course of my reading, that H2O injection is best for high load situations during which you can replace the excess fuel used to cool the engine with water, thus reducing fuel consumption and improving efficiency, and that HHO injection is best for light load cruising enabling you to go leaner and still be able to ignite the air/fuel mixture.

So, a significant improvement in city driving with H2O, with insignificant results with HHO, would seem proper with this line of thinking...

Ah, maybe in areas not quite so cold it's harder to find, the stuff they sell here is good to -55C, we sometimes see lots of stuff cheap that's only good to -25 or -35 I guess that's lower concentration.

It is far cheaper to use windshield washer fluid.

Water Vapor Injection + HHO Booster
 

On water vapor injection only, I tested approx 2600 miles on my civic and I got max 45mpg average on a good driving day. I combined a simple HHO booster + vapor injection, now I am getting 50+mpg average consistently for more almost two months now.

The HHO booster I used is based on this design https://www.greenfuelbooster.com/refe...entations.html

CArburetror cars & trucks
 

I have built several HHO boosters. On a 2000 taurus I get great hp and a little less mpg. I finally went to an evaporative system. Same results. I putchased a 1983 Dodge Rampage 2 brl carb 4 cylinder. I put the evap on it and got a 31% increase in mpg. 22 mpg to start and now 29 mpg. I do not inject water. All my vehicles I have an evap on draws a fumes of water I connect to the intake manifold and let the vacuum draw the wter molecules into the engine. The system is sealed to outside air and has only on hose connecting it. No air travels through it. I just evaporates under a vacuum that starts at 17" of mercury and as engine accellerates goes to 22" of merc. To see the details goto my web pages and review the 1983 rampage page. Cost of the evap system is under $15. My ratio of gas to water is 425 to 1. It is 1 gal of gas to 1/3 oz of water drawn in over 1/2 hr traveling at 60 mph. I will be installing a HHO booster soon. But probably as a second system leaving the evap connected and running. I have other ideas that I will be trying and all is reported on my web page. NOTE. information I provide on my site is: If data provided is not covered by a patent or copywrite it is to be considered as OPEN SOURCE and int the PUBLIC DOMAIN. This means that it cannot be patented or copywrited. It can be freely used, constructed and sold at will. If you build and sell any of my free to the public data you are respondsible for what you sell, not me. My data is for information purposes only and what you do with it is up to you. Best Wishes. My web pages: web.hometel.com/~tron

Hey, I was just thinking this same thing. I've been wanting to add a bubbler for a while and then started thinking, why not hit the whole charge and then I thought, I've got FI and a thottle body, couldn't I swap the throttle body for a old down draft carb and run the carb with water/meth? Carbs are usually brass or more plastic in the newer ones, but water shouldn't corrode it much and meth should prevent that even more.

This seems similar to what flapdoodle was doing with his vacuum draw but I'll be using a whole carb with very tiny jets instead.

Thoughts?