Some thoughts on HHO
 

HHO by weight is 12.5% hydrogen. Thats your fuel, not oxygen. 2 parts hydrogen (atomic weight 1), to 1 part oxygen (atomic weight 16). I rounded the numbers off slightly to make the math easier.

Liquid hydrogen contains 1/3 the energy of liquid gasoline per gallon.

1 gallon of liquid hydrogen evaporates into 860 gallons of hydrogen gas (at 68 degrees F).

Thats 6880 gallons of HHO.

Take my VX as an example, it burns 1 gallon of gasoline per hour, in lean cruise at 55 MPH.

I gallon of gasoline vapor is 30 cubic feet at 7.5 gallons per cubic foot or 225 gallons of gasoline vapor.

Figure the lean burn AF ratio at 20 to 1.

That means it takes 4500 gallons of air fuel mix per hour at 55 MPH.

Now lets assume your generator is producing a gallon (very optomistic) of HHO per minute, thats 60 gallons per hour.

7.5 gallons of hydrogen vapor (12.5% of total HHO by weight) divided by 848=.0088433 gallons of liquid hydrogen divided by 3=.002811 gallon of liquid hydrogen, of the equivalent energy content of gasoline by equal energy content (1 gallon of hydrogen=1/3 gallon of gas).

You are adding 60 vapor gallons to 4500 (75-1) vapor gallons and only .002811 liquid equivalent (at 3 hydrogen to 1 gasoline) gallons of the 60 vapor gallons is hydrogen fuel, compared to 1 liquid gallon of gasoline.

Thats an equivalent energy content of 355 parts gasoline to 1 part hydrogen.

Obviously to achieve a 50% improvement in fuel mileage the energy is not coming from the hydrogen, and it can't come from the oxygen since oxygen has no energy content to convert.

All this math is from the internet and my calculations could be wrong, but I don't think so. Please feel free to correct the math.

If the hydrogen is perfectly recombining with the oxygen and forming a steam vapor it still doesnt make sense that 60/4500 additional humidity could account for the mileage increase. Superheating steam would also reduce peak combustion chamber temperatures and reduce expansion ratio (or use the heat created in the hydrogen combustion itself). I don't think that is even a facotor since the HHO starts as a vapor anyway, so it would have to ignite, condense and expand in the milliseconds it would take for the piston to travel 1/2 revolution from TDC to BDC.

In testing with premixed fuel and air perfectly atomized the net gain is 25%. Its called homogenous charge compression ignition and produces emissions so low no aftertreatment is necessary.

I would appreciate constructive comments, spare me the character assasination.

regards
gary

I goofed, will correct.

regards
gary

first of all, before I even say anything, I want to say that I think that it takes too much energy to make the hydrogen than you will get from the hydrogen. a friend of mine was saying that he had a friend trying this out and his theory is ( remember this is from a friend of a friend and it is just a theory so it may be crap):


it takes a certain amount of hydrogen to make a difference and at some point the increased amount of hydrogen doesn't matter. this leads him to believe that there is a "sweet spot" where the generator is producing just enough hydrogen to create gains but not enough to suck the energy back from the alternator/battery. he said himself that he didn't think the gains would be as high as all of the web stuff is claiming even if you "dialed it in". he also went on to say that it is vehicle and motor specific so that the "sweet spot" for one wouldn't be the same for the other.


this has nothing to do with the math stuff that you found and I comend you for the research. I figured I would share what I had been told. I also posted some information that I had found on wikipedia about electrolysis of water where it said that the efficiency was only 35% or so (can't remember the exact figures). this always seems to be a controversial subject which is ironic because this site promotes some of the sites selling the stuff. still waiting for someone to do an A-B-A test on something or just "post a gas log" showing their extreme gains. I have a cavalier rated 25MPG mixed and I am getting 35ish. I would love to get 50s out of it with water. I just don't think it is possible.

There that should be correct.
regards
gary

Mygawd, is that statement ever going away? From what I've studied so far, it's not about the volume of gas over the volume of petrol liquid, it's not about the motor running on hydrogen (although that's possible) and IT'S NOT ABOUT MANUFACTURING ENERGY!!!
Post after post (if you will search) will show you that the hydrogen produced makes the petrol more efficient than it's normal 20% range. It raises the octane. It cleans the engine. If you could get a much higher octane gas for the same price as your regular, wouldn't you jump on it? ESPECIALLY if you had a MAP sensor enhancer to regulate the fuel mix?
That's as much as I've found so far, but anyone really studying this stuff will soon become a believer, rather than an armchair sceptic. I run more amps on my subwoofers than this thing will require. How is that hurting my production of free energy?

Yeah, you figure it that way, it doesn't seem like it should add up...

What I'm thinking though is that while you burn gasoline at 25% or so efficiency, any H2 you get in there up to a certain point (25% according to MIT) is burning at near 100% efficiency.

It makes sense that it's engine dependant, because the big effect it seems to have is on flame speed, making combustion rapid enough that more of the energy in the gasoline as well as a high proportion of that in the H2 turns into cylinder pressure instead of heat. Ergo different engines with different strokes compression and rod ratios will have different ideal mixes for optimising power output...

Theoretically, you should be able to tune it a bit by retarding your spark, spark advance is only about power in as much as it allows one to fiddle the peak pressure to be at the optimum mechanical moment, some people seem to think "Oh no, less advance, that will suck for power" since factory advance is set conservatively and tweaking in a couple more degrees has been a staple "free power" recipe for years. So if you can get peak cylinder pressure sooner with a retarded spark, you may be able to tune-in whatever HHO mix you can make for best MPG.

A further effect of the mixture making pressure rather than heat is NOx is reduced to diddly squat (A technical term referenced to the "just about nothing" mark on the platinum iridium thumb at the national standards institute) , so you can lean out your fuelling quite a long way and not make NOx. When you add to that that even minor amounts of HHO appear to have the effect making the octane real high, it seems possible that you can have it running at obscenely low air:fuel ratios, like 25:1 and make enough power to move.

When it also appears that loading your alternator might play games with BSFC and "cost" you only 5% more gas to ramp output by 20% then it kinda looks like you're getting 8-16x as much out of the H2 as it should "cost". However, that's not quite the case, on it's own the H2 would get a max of 50% efficiency. What's really happening is that you're scavenging inefficiency from the gasoline side... there's a whole bunch of energy there to claw back.

As I stated in the post concerning Homogenous Charge Compression Ignition.
It burns the fuel so completely there is no need for aftertreatment. All the fuel is consumed, 100%. It is being achieved as we speak under controlled conditions.

Your 20% figure sounds like the efficiency of an internal combustion engine, which on average is 35% for gasoline and 41% for diesel in engines used in automobiles. Tested under controlled conditions. Consult one of the hundreds of efficiency maps for IC engines, or for diesels.

These figures are from EPA documents and are calculated using very scientific methods. Hundreds of institutions WORLDWIDE have tested engines to come up with these figures.

The overall efficiency of a vehicle is more in that range, but that also includes idling which wastes 13 % of the total energy consumed. That's not the engines fault.


The best engines in the world drive the huge container ships.Their energy conversion rate is 51%. Its determined by calculating the work produced and subtracting that from the energy content of the fuel.

Can you clairfy exactly with data where you came up with the 20% efficiency figure. If you are sitting in your car with the engine idling and doing nothing, it's not because the engine is inefficient, its because you are not moving. No matter how much you make the engine more efficient you are still sitting there not moving.

Do you think Germany would not have used browns gas in Uboats in WW2, which would have extended their range when they were at war with the US?
Did they intentionally deny their U boat captains any advantage they could gain from range extension? They used any technology they could to win.

regards
gary

you know, it also depends on where you are doing your research. I can start a web site that says you will stay healthier if you eat dog poo. it doesn't make it true but I can put it on the web and if I pay people enough money then they will advertise my web site on theirs. still doesn't make it true. I can quote people to say that they felt up to X% healthier by eating my dogs poo. still doesn't make it true. I can have a man that is 100 year old talk about how he has ate it for years. doesn't mean its true.

try researching where they DON'T sell a product or where they DON'T promote a web site. I hear people say they are tired of hearing it. show me a gas log. show some evidence HARD EVIDENCE that proves what you have works. seems like all the supporters for "WATER CARS" can't prove a thing.

if you could double the mileage of a car or even get a 50% increase, you would be a millionare in todays economy. why hasn't anyone cashed in on it. no proof. where is this car that is getting such great mileage. there are cars on here that run on just gasoline that are getting 60+ MPG. I think it takes a pretty smart person to get their car to do that. understanding physics, chemistry, aerodynamics and other such competencies. you'd think they would have heard about this "WATER CAR" that can make their car approach the 100 MPG mark. then they could go out for the new X-prize and win themselves 10 million dollars.

.....and all with a mason jar and some tap water.


*edit* quadancer, you don't happen to be selling these things are you? maybe for a really reasonable price?


*edit 2* I happen to notice that your research consisted of web sites (like this as you claim) and youtube and also ebay. no crooks there just good honest folks out to make some money right? try researching somewhere where they aren't using the old "used care salesman" tactics. start with searching for "ELECTROLYSIS" and maybe even "ELECTROLYSIS OF WATER". amazing what you will find.

they lost

Heh that's a new one. "X technology can't work because otherwise Germany would have come up with it 60 years ago to win the war."

They did come up with Nitrous oxide injection and "Washer fluid" injection, or MW50 as it was known.

The fact is HCCI proves there IS a POTENTIAL for a 25% improvement, due to perfect distribution of the fuel and air molecules at the point where they can be ignited by compression instead of ignition.

That's RIGHT you can get more power out of the fuel, as the H2O for fuel advocates claim.

Unfortunately it requires greater compression ratios to ignite a homogenous mixture, and in experiments it takes longer than the time period you have with port fuel injection.

I met with the owner of a small start up company here in Virginia who had an article published in the local paper about water for gas. I wanted to put a system in my Del Sol. I rode around with one of the two people for a day while he drove his routes and left people with information about the system, and he had a functional system in his vehicle.

The idea certainly appeals to me, precisely because I understand the additional potential of HCCI in gasoline engines.

These people had dedicated a lot of time energy and effort into this system and I was riding around in a Chevy Van that had one functioning. The interaction ended when they told me Virginia had passed a law that made it illegal to sell the system to customers with vehicles that had Federally required emission controls, UNTIL THE SYSTEM HAD BEEN CERTIFIED TO COMPLY.

They were selling to Diesel truck owners, who did not have to worry about the emission controls or compliance.

It used to be that the EPA would fine only manufacturers and dealers, as well as repair shops for non compliance. Now they can fine INDIVIDUALS for emission violations.

Road Warrior, I didn't start this thread with the attitude it is not possible for HHO to actually enhance the homogenous mixture of fuel and air and increase power and efficiency.

I actually think it is possible to improve it somewhat, if the HHO creates a staged combustion process that has the effect of better distribution of fuel and air particles in the mix.

On the other hand any claim above the perfect HCCI mixture which is a 25% improvement simply claims there is energy being created that doesn't exist. HCCI requires greater compression ratios for auto ignition just like a diesel. In fact HCCI is like a diesel engine that runs of gasoline. Maybe the hydrogen burning temperature and the additional oxygen have the ability to actually do exactly what many different research organizations have succeeded in doing under laboratory conditions.

Believe me I have experienced the skepticism of established institutions when it comes to miracle cures for IC engine efficiency. Their barrier against innovation was built by 1,000,000 snake oil salesmen for 100 years with miracle carburetors and other miracle engines. Unfortunately when you walk into a meeting with people who have been through it, they have come to the conclusion that there is practically NO CHANCE that your idea has merit.They are not going to stick there necks in the noose to become the brunt of their colleagues jokes for decades.

Virginia can actually enforce the law and fine me for installing an uncertified system, although I have never read of them even fining someone for removing a cat, they have the legal authority.

regards
gary

Road Warrior, my father landed a P47 at LeBourget (Paris) after his last B17mission, on D-Day june 6th 1944. There were acres of German Kubelwagens (little VW jeep like vehicles like the Thing) next to the airport that had coal gas generators so the vehicles could run on coal.

The Germans were desperate for any means of creating fuel substitutes. I thing you can understand this. Browns gas has been around for at least 100 years before WW2.

The Me 162 Comet
The Walther Uboats
The V2

Some of their Very dangerous alternative fuel type machines.

regards
gary

If they'd have discovered the Italian Navy had a 2 year reserve of fuel oil kept secret from their German pals before we started landing in Italy, we'd have been in a heap of crap.

Well if it worked I think all of the large fleet operators would be doing it. When I see a sticker on the side of a UPS truck stating that it is running on Brown's Gas I will follow suit.

BINGO!

Haha, naw, I'm just a working slug who has about 25 hours of looking into this, and my business partner and a helper have them in their trucks. I'm still collecting info, still skeptical on certain things, but NOT on the ability to generate HHO and use it in an engine.
I say you're right about ebay and Utube hucksters, especially Utube where you can get some weird sort of gratification just by recognition. OTOH, would you really think that so many people with HHO generators are all "proving" themselves right by lying about mileages and NONE are saying "I tried all the gear and electronics and couldn't get it to work."?
At this point I only have a couple of concerns as to using this system. One is possibly excess water in part of the combustion, another is using my 105 amp alternator on my big v-8, another is the use of multiple cells.
Oh, and the cost of the electronics.
Like you guys, I'd prefer to see some test done by someone we could call reputable. Maybe the moderators of this forum?

quadancer,

I'm confused. you totally back the mason jar magic, then you come back with you are still skeptical? I can't understand this. there are things on this site that aren't mass produced that work and the reason they aren't mass produced is because they have negative side affects and are easily done by someone with a little time on their hands. like a grill block and wam air intake they both cause more heat to the engine which if it isn't watched could cause your engine to overheat. this hydrogen producer claims to have no negative side affects and the best claim I have heard is double your mileage. and you don't get the energy for free there is an exchange of energy.

you have a large amp and sub. I had a system that was pushing 125dB (if you don't know what that means then the rest won't make much sense either) when the base would hit, the current draw from the battery/alternator was so extreme that the voltage would surge downwards causing the lights to dim. I had the voltage go down so far once that it choked my car off. this is from the alternator. I guess it would also be from the decreased voltage possibly going to the plugs and what not as well. I was impressed with my stereo after that. my point is that your alternator doesn't give away free energy. it takes a lot to keep these things running. also your amp is only pulling that power when the bass is hitting and most music doesn't have long bass runs unless you are listening to synthesizer type music (techno and such). I had a 120 amp fuse on my system and popped it a few times myself. I got out of that about 10 years ago because I found other places for my money to go.

if you really want to do research on this subject, just do a search on this forum for HHO. most of the people backing it have less than 10 posts and no gas log. that should tell you a lot right there. on the other hand, you have veteran/senior members here that can explain out why it (theoretically) shoud work and why it doesn't. will it ever work? maybe. will we ever see twice the gas mileage by dumping water into our engines? I dobut it.

side not: I don't doubt that hydrogen can be made with electrolysis. I just doubt its efficiency in the process of doing so.

Let me shed some light on this. HHO generators don't do JS because you can't make enough brown's gas to run a lawn mower much less a 2.0L 4 banger.

Now if you add in the rest of the BS electronics and change your driving habits you will get an increase in FE.

The main part of this amazing BS is fooling the ECU to run leaner than 14.7:1 AFR. Actually most engines run richer than that for power and to keep that CAT hot enough to burn a hole in your wallet.

Air up your tires
cut out the cat
get a high flow muffler
Good tune up
reprogram your ECU to run @ 15.7:1 or greater at light load cruising speeds
Keep your foot off the floor

BAM!!! 30% Increase! Can I get $1.00 from everyone that does this? I just saved you $100's in fuel and $1000 on BS equipment.

Was just reading about ignition advance and discovered another inefficiency that the HHO might be helping to scavenge. This could also apply to how acetone, isopropyl, mothballs, or fuel heating might help some motors...

It seems that most motors are set up with a conservative very shallow ignition advance curve for "emissions reasons". This would appear to ding peak cylinder pressure by as much as 35% at 2000-3000 RPM. Therefore something that speeds up the burn in this range, thus allowing peak cylinder pressure to occur sooner would obviously improve midrange torque and economy. As would making the ignition advance more aggressive, so it peaks sooner.

Probably so. My work partner, regardless of FE, says his dodge truck is running smoother and seems to have more power. But with a leaner mix, that would seem questionable. And so if we need a cutoff switch to pull a trailer, pass cars, where is that power? Just thinking 'out loud'.
No doubt we can make HHO, at around 1.7 liter/min. with a bit of work. I'm not doubting that HHO makes octane higher, and adds to the burn. I can see how it (or the water) can clean the engine. I'm skeptical in just a few grey areas such as timing when the unit is on...we may eventually incorporate some special timing unit later? And what about alternator drag? Some loss there, I imagine (good thing we don't have the old generators!), and in our little car we won't be able to use the subs under way; too many amps. (my silverado has a 105 amp alt. and can buy a stock unit up to 130 amps.) So I turn down the radio I guess. And then there's the lack of anyone doing a videotaped, controlled experiment, with and without the accessory parts like voltage modulators and the like. I just can't seem to deny that it works, or if not, there's one heck of a lot of guys spending time and money to just spread a lie. And I don't think so.
Personally, I just want to be sure before spending hard earned money and spending valuable time.
RW: that was a really good little blurb you put in the other thread about the IC engine efficiency. Funny too.

The coal (and it's relative, the wood) gas generator...there's an interesting fuel source...shows up in Mother Earth News magazine from time to time...only wish it didn't take up so much room (of course, living as I do in the desert, it wouldn't do me much good...)

quadancer,

are you starting to see my point? all of these companies and all of these people are talking about doubling your mileage but when it comes to hard evidence, they have none or maybe a comparison with a half mile run. I can make my car get 22MPG in a half mile and then turn around and hypermile that half mile and get low to mid 40s. that is their trick, that is how they suck people in.

Is it possible to make hydrogen and oxygen out of water? yes it's chemistry at its best. can you do it efficiently enough to show a gain in your car? I guess time will tell. I doubt very seriously that if someone got gains from it that they will "DOUBLE" your gas mileage.

still waiting for the infamous gas log

That's a reasonable position for the most part. But, one always has to keep in mind that the masses are not always right. It's akin to stating that "I'll believe that the sun is the center of the solar system when I see astrologers changing their maps to reflect that viewpoint, they have a vested interest in astronomical accuracy after all".

But still, yeah, when money is a motivator you'd think that something more economical would catch on pretty quick.

That said, why aren't most UPS fleet vehicle drivers being instructed on employing the "safer" hypermiling techniques, which clearly work for enchancing mpg by a good margin? They clearly drive their trucks like they drive their cars, which is like everybody else, which is inefficiently as possible.

Meh, just taking both sides of the conversation and rolling them around in my brain a bit, lol. :)

UPS drivers cannot drive their trucks for FE. If they did, you'd get your package in 6 days instead of 3. Having a friend who drives, he's had to quit at 9pm (starts at 7am) because that's the limit UPS allows. Delivering 300 packages to 280 destinations in 10 hours is no small feat.

They can take minor steps, like not mashing the accelerator like they were in a car race, or traveling the PSL at all times. Nothing earth shattering, yet I see no educational attempts (maybe there are some, and they by and large ignore them, who knows?).

I'm not for or against HHO, I know nothing about it really, it's just the 'if it were a good idea everybody would be doing it' argument tends to put too much faith in human rationality and reason. Unfortunately that kind of faith rarely pays off when you examine humans closer than surface level. The moment you deal with more than one human being you enter a world where reason gets thrown out the door at the slightest disagreement or opinion. Wish it weren't so.

IMO there's the same problem with some of these efficiency devices as there are with "herbal cures"... some of them may work very well, some may not, but because they are to some extent public domain, no company can invest the time and money in testing and certification, when any other company can come along and undercut them with no recourse through the patent and/or copyright system. Ergo only fresh, new ideas are likely to make it into cars and aftermarket products, because they have patentable and protectable aspects.

When us grunts have done all the legwork, and accumulated enough data, empirical and otherwise, about particular devices and methods, such that implementation in a product would cost a negligible amount, because all the performance criteria have been hashed out and all that's needed is to write a spec, plug the right numbers in, and have the design jump right out.... then this sort of stuff might start appearing in commercial products. This would be because there would be no large risk or outlay involved at that point that would disadvantage you WRT to a competitor.

Even though HHO might seem like a really neat trick, there are still HUGE problems to solve as regards practicality for the non-experimenter, non-handyman, non-thinking member of the general populace.

Amen. Joe dropwrench could have a lawsuit on you in a New York minnit when he knocks off a tube and his cigarette fries his face or something. Another problem I see is that my V-8 will probably require a dual-edge MAP sensor enhancer, but my wife can't be depended on to do more than what she allready knows. Go and stop. So these things will have to be idiotproofed, safety-factored, cost-effective, and mileage proven in respect to engine damage. As you said, WE take the initial risks, do the experimentation, legwork, and cash outlay.
Say I own a fleet of trucks. Do I really want to risk my engines and possible replacements on an unproven, untested (on a large scale), uncertain product that produces explosive gases and puts them over my engines in little vinyl tubes? The average corporate owner would sneer in derision at this IMO.
I should start collecting the posts and videos I've seen where guys are claiming success with these. There are actually quite a few out there, and I'll be the first to say that some of these guys are high-siding their claims. As I said, I can't see how every one of these guys are lying. They'd have more to gain by telling the truth and getting help with their units. Of course, don't believe anyone who is selling them; they may lie.

R.I.D.E. -

I don't think it was called Brown's Gas in WWII. I *appears* that the first "engine application" happened in 1935 :

Browns Gas / HHO History
https://www.brownsgas.com/brownsgashistory.html
Attachment 1303

Sooooooo, I don't think the U-Boat analogy is a good one.

PS - Oh yeah, the Comet's P-Stoff and C-Stoff, a deadly combination :

Rocket Fuels - Liquid Fuels used in the 109-509 Series Motors
https://www.walter-rockets.i12.com/design/fuels.htm


CarloSW2

Hi
New guy here. Interesting discussion. I used to follow the yahoo water car and hydroxy boards. I haven't been reading them in a while, but it seems like back a year or so ago the consensus was that hydroxy could supplement an ICE only with some modification. If I remember right there is an adjustable sensor or a workaround to the increase of fuel. Another development that was being studied was the use of water and h202 along with hydroxy. The hydroxy was generated and was bubbled into a mixture of distilled water and H202. That mixture acted as a storage vehicle for the hydroxy. The mixture was placed into a jar that was teed to the pcv line. Under throttle the hydroxy vapor was sucked into the intake and combusted. No engine modification was needed. Now some folks were claiming an increase in millage, others none. Not sure if the testing proved anything solid. Water injection has been a round for years and some claims of increased millage may be attributed to the cleaning of the water. Older vehicles often increase in mpg if the intake and combustion surfaces are cleaned of carbon.

Of course you have the total hydrogen car built by Stan Meyers, the research by Bob Boyce and Daniel Dingle. They are at one time or another purported to have produced a car/ice that ran on 100% electrolysis produced hydroxy. The Stan Meyers set up is what is being researched the most.

I recently was told about the product linked below. I believe it works along the same principle as the water injection. It is supposedly some sort of nano technology. They are claiming a 4oz bottle will treat 150 gallons. The result is supposed to be an average of 18% millage increase. The product retails for $26.00/bottle. I have no affiliation with the product or it's distribution. Just thought it might be of interest because of the water involved.
Glad to take part
Brad

https://www.fuellegacy.com

come back to earth....this is ground control!!!!
 

I'm getting 2-3 miles mpg....whose the idiot telling you guys there's a 50% increase?

I should take a picture of the plugs I just pulled out....beautiful. Common sense says "no emissions" mean something complete and powerful is happening.

the "IDIOT" saying 50-100% increase are all of the web sites selling the things. if you look at the top of this page to the right and to the left, you will find a host of advertisements to "double" your mileage and run your car on water, and the answer to the rising fuel prices.

If you have legitimate results then post them. I work in the engineering field and we like data, and lots of it. show us some testing. if you have something that works then show us. do some A-B-A testing on the thing, start a gas log, pictures would be nice too.

and just a side coment: the phrase 'NO EMISSIONS" is a very bold statement.

I can tell you they're idiots
 

It ain't goin' that high - 50%. I'll give you milege. I'll start posting each week.....watch for an orange 92 harley jeep wrangler on the garage. I was an electronics tech a lifetime ago (navy)....I've been in the tech thing a bit. I do know when my little gas sucker is getting more mpg's, and it certainly is.

I hear you on the emissions thing....Especially with the stupid HHO add's on the site. If I lived in an emissions state I'd post the results of that....that you're not getting. I don't, and I really don't care a lot about it. I'll show you spark plug pictures. You can come sniff the tailpipe if you want. Unless you're bunking with Al Gore, who cares. I want mpg. No emissions is relative. There's no such thing as "no". I'm not here to split hairs. I will show you great gas milege for a murderous gas sucker.

=BEEF;104056]the "IDIOT" saying 50-100% increase are all of the web sites selling the things. if you look at the top of this page to the right and to the left, you will find a host of advertisements to "double" your mileage and run your car on water, and the answer to the rising fuel prices.

If you have legitimate results then post them. I work in the engineering field and we like data, and lots of it. show us some testing. if you have something that works then show us. do some A-B-A testing on the thing, start a gas log, pictures would be nice too.

and just a side coment: the phrase 'NO EMISSIONS" is a very bold statement.[/QUOTE]

You obviously have not been married for 10+ years! :eek:

I work for a chip manufacturer as an engineering tech where we design amplifiers for cell phones. efficiency is the key to our business, the higher the better. the efficiency of the generator is partly determined by other members in the stream, not just the efficiency of the generator. how efficient is your motor? what about your alternator? delivery system? there are a lot of factors. I think if the common man could plug up a few wires to a mason jar full of water and see instantaneous results (repeatable results) then it would be happening everywhere.

most of these conversations on the HHO have been started (and usually finished) by people trying to cash in on a quick buck and not caring about the legitimacy of the claims they are making.

if you are getting good results, that's great. if you are willing to share those results, even better. I am not sure how hard it would be or if you are willing to do it but, run a tank with your HHO set up (an entire tank equalling a few hundred miles) and then disconnect your HHO and run without it for a tank (few hundred miles) to see if the mileage goes back down. don't change driving habits durning this experiment. to complet the experiment, hook back up the HHO and do another tank to make sure that other factors have not changed the results.

many of the people that back their claims of the HHO do tests on a half mile stretch or 2 miles. depending on the 2 miles, I can get 100MPG out of the old cav. not consistantly but that is my whole point.

I hear you
 

Funny, I went to selling hot air rework equipment for placing ubga's on pc boards after I left the military.....you probably use them.

I will start posting "with cell" figures tonight. I'm adding a PWM this weekend so I want to keep track of the added hydrogen output when I get it tweeked. Soon after I will turn the unit off and give you figures for that. (after a few weeks). It will be interesting to see how the added hydrogen output effects the mpg.....I'll be able to add more electrolyte so it should go up a bit. Right now I'm between 5-10 amps for the unit....since I drive 5 miles to work, it usually doesn't get hot enough to get to 10 by the time I'm at work.

feedback
 

Actually I sell guns for a living now....I'm selling nothing HHO....I really don't want to be bothered with the selling thing. I do agree, there are lots of folks bragging about hho but very little hard facts. I believe about 1/10 of what I hear. I've lit the stuff and it goes bang...not poof like gas....if you get it into the air manifold or pvc line it's definately adding fuel.

I have milege figures for about 200 miles but they are skewed with variables. I'll post them anyway. I changed driving habits, air filter, hho added. They're still interesting. Especially the airfilter stuff. The K&N performance air filter killed my mileage.

I'm driving consistantly "old fart" so that's set in stone. With the hho and old fart I'm at 17.25mpg. EPA new car window sticker was 16-19. The jeep has 102,000. miles, a tune up, windjammer, tonoue cover. Stock autolite plugs, gapped at .001 below minumum. New wires. Fairly new cheapo air filter. Tires are 44lbs. in the back and 41 in the front....about 9 lbs over maximum.

I'll post the jeep picture and info tonight. I'm totally open minded to the end results. I have no problem saying it sucks if it does but if I get 2 mpg it's worth it. My skewed figures say I am....we'll get a better feel in the next few weeks. If it doesn't I have a nice dash mounted amp meter, relayed set up for my new fog lights.

I used to play with BGA parts (ball grid array) when I worked in ericsson but now I am back to the good old surface mount parts. we are experimenting with flip chips which will make the parts even smaller. I think the spec is 1.2mm square and not sure of the thickness but close to a quarter milimeter. and we are soldering the die straight to the board. no package involved.

I am interested in seeing what an actual non-biased person can get out of this HHO uproar. I call it an uproar because people are making unbelievable claims and the ones saying it can't even explain what is going on with it but they will sell you one for under $200 with free shipping (just an example).

I was hoping that someone would do it on a more fuel efficient vehicle but as of right now, you are the only one that actually said that they would take their experimenting this far. also, as part of the experiment, can you keep up with cost. I am sure that the pulse width modulator is not cheap and maybe I am wrong. are you chopping the 12volts and rectifying it again for a lower voltage to the generator? just curious.

this is the data that a lot of people have been waiting for on this site for a while. remember that non-biased is the key.

Gas will do that too if you get it mixed with oxygen like that. You're comparing hydrogen and oxygen at stoich vs gasoline and air at a mixture not even close to stoich.

simple
 

Keep it simple. It goes bang. I'm not comparing anything. I'm saying it is a fuel that has power.

I've listed some stat's on the garage.

It's listed under "rolling box car"

ubga's
 

I worked for a company in Key Largo that made a machine called the Sniper. It used a prism to align the balls and the pads. It was interesting stuff.

The car info is listed as "rolling box car" on the garage...

I've got probably 300.00 in it so far. I could do it for about 75.00 now. I'd do it differently this time. Use a flat topped water filter container with pre built-in hose connections...they're about 30.00. The PWM modulates the frequency of the pulse. It's listed here https://electronic-light.com/advan.html - 19.95 for the board and components. Shouldn't take more then an hour or so to solder up. The voltage stays at 12v. I didn't do a lot of reseach on it....cheap so grabbed it. The guy seemed up front online.

Believe me you're gonna get it straight. I've got no agenda's. I'll destroy the fuel cell thing online if it doesn't work.