I have heard it used as a pseudo "nitrous" type cylinder filler..... 50% MPG increase, no, 3-4% possibly. I saw something with that stuff and it output a 14.7 air/fuel on a wideband at cruise with some fuel taken out of the ECU. It wasnt much, but it was a neat deal.

i have seen the video on the hho for cars, but not in person, so i dont know if it would work for a car but i do know that we have a hho cutting machine at work and it runs off good ol h20. i have used it and already have had the flame over 12,000 deg f.

i have a friend of mine who has built is own hydrogen powered car, i runs with a mix of hydrogen and gasoline in the motor, it does not run off pure hydrogen, he has it on a old volkswagon, early 80's gas powerd rabbit. he gets about 100 miles to the gallon as we speak. he said it used to get about 35mpg.

he built his kit for under 350.00 but then again he is a machinist, one of the best i have ever seen.

all he does is tinker with odd things all the time, he spent about 6 months trying to figure it out and it works, i did not believe it till i saw it, he puts water in a small tank and the damn thing works.

i dont know how it would work on fuel injection but he got it work on a carb, i think you would have to tune the computer to work with a fiero

quote Originally posted by punksable: i have a friend of mine who has built is own hydrogen powered car, i runs with a mix of hydrogen and gasoline in the motor, it does not run off pure hydrogen, he has it on a old volkswagon, early 80's gas powerd rabbit. he gets about 100 miles to the gallon as we speak. he said it used to get about 35mpg. he built his kit for under 350.00 but then again he is a machinist, one of the best i have ever seen.

If you get a chance, ask him what he uses to make and store the hydrogen.

The problem as I see it is that you need a good hydrogen source. Even electrolysis give impure hydrogen, so you have to run it through a dehydrator and something that takes out any oxygen that got into the process.

it's really sad how much coverage this BS has gotten
even "legitimate" reports by local news coverage (*cough* FOX . .. )

It's like a chain letter,
all over Google (which owns YouTube).

It's really sad

quote Originally posted by punksable: i have a friend of mine who has built is own hydrogen powered car, i runs with a mix of hydrogen and gasoline in the motor, it does not run off pure hydrogen, he has it on a old volkswagon, early 80's gas powerd rabbit. he gets about 100 miles to the gallon as we speak. he said it used to get about 35mpg. he built his kit for under 350.00 but then again he is a machinist, one of the best i have ever seen.

More details please. Can he build one for you?

quote Originally posted by Kuta: BTW there is no such thing as HHO There is Hydrogen, and there is Water. there is NO way two hydrogens and an oxygen are gonna rearrange themselves (without splitting) other than a polarized molecule ("bent" shape, VSEPR- valence shell electron pair repulsion) -covalent bonding -electronegativity and lets not forget about intermolecular forces -Hydrogen bonding -Polarity (london dispersion / weak intermolecular / van der waal's) -dipole-dipole HHO? There is none other than H2O.

HHO is not a molecular makeup. It's just the term used to describe Brown's Gas, which is simply a gas mixture of Hydrogen and Oxygen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxyhydrogen

All you're doing is creating Hydrogen and Oxygen gas with electrolysis and then burning the Hydrogen gas as fuel. Problem is the power input required is going to be greater than the energy you get out, so I don't see how a car-based system could work. An at home Hydrogen generator maybe, but using HHO to power the car which also has to generate power to make the HHO seems impossible.

Myth Busters busted the "HHO" myth. The car could not come close to generating enough Hydrogen to even idle. BUT, if you used a large tank filled with hydrogen, a car could run off of it.

Those Youtube videos show NOTHING!!!! Those are proof of water-powered engines just as Star Trek TV shows are proof of warp drive.

I used to extract hydrogen from water in junior high using a power supply. It takes a LONG time to get enoughto make a good flame.

he has three seperate canisters on his setup, there are a stack of plates that cant touch each other in the canisters, he stressed that to me about a thousand times already. as for it to combust, it does, he has a small setup in his shop, we call it the bunk house. he will charge the canisters with a 12 volt battery and then the vapors coming off can be ignighted with a lighter, it pops alot but not enough to explode like a bomb. it mixes with the gasoline and gets burned, that is where the fuel economy comes in.

but believe what you may, i have seen it with my own eyes.

also the hho machine we have at work is real, i know because i have used it for cutting.

Yes, the HHO machine at work is real. What is it powered by?

That's the hangup. How much energy is required to generate the HHO gas, and how much would be required to run a car.
Being able to fill a cylinder in your garage, then use it in your car might work. But, I don't see a car based system generating the gas on the fly.

Here's an HHO generator for sale: http://www.actionsalvage.com/H2O.asp
It draws 17 amps at 240 V. To run that in a car would require your 12 V alternator to put out 340 amps.

It also costs $7000.00 - used.

Now, how much do you think that $49 system for your car is gonna make?

[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 05-20-2008).]

quote Originally posted by punksable: he has three seperate canisters on his setup, there are a stack of plates that cant touch each other in the canisters, he stressed that to me about a thousand times already. as for it to combust, it does, he has a small setup in his shop, we call it the bunk house. he will charge the canisters with a 12 volt battery and then the vapors coming off can be ignighted with a lighter, it pops alot but not enough to explode like a bomb. it mixes with the gasoline and gets burned, that is where the fuel economy comes in. but believe what you may, i have seen it with my own eyes. also the hho machine we have at work is real, i know because i have used it for cutting.

omg 3 canisters filled with ultra exlosive oxigen hydrogen mixture ..........
he should never get a backfire or car accident

Real testing you ask???

I had the opportunity to test a system like this about 10 years ago (yes that is right , nothing new - it's just in the spot light now because of gas prices).

Mind you it was never tried on a Fiero, but the vehicle that I did use it on was a 1994 Dodge Dakota with the 3.9l Magnum engine and auto tranny. After a full year of testing, what did I find? Nothing - if anything the gas milage had actually dropped a couple of miles per gallon.

It could be that the people that say it work convince themself that it does in order to justify the money they put out (I did not have to pay for the system, they were looking for people to try it out and give positive statements that it does work - of which I did not). Anyways, did peoples driving habits change once this was installed? They might have made slight changes to their driving since they bought this thing and wanted to get the best mileage they could, etc - blah, blah, blah...

I would also like to point out that the company that I was testing it for has since disappeared, probably laughing all the way to the bank (I might add).

It also wouldn't be surpised if there was a fine print clause in the 'contract' that says: "your results may vary"

wanted to add: maybe I am missing something here as well, but without actually changing the code in the engine management system - how would anything that is a add on such as this actually increase mileage? I mean, the ECM is going to output a certain level of fuel based on sensor readings (O2, MAP, TPS, etc) - so unless they are 'fooling' these sensors to tell the ECM something different, would it not still put in xx amount of fuel reguardless if you are adding something to mixture or not? I can see additives adding power (NO), but fuel mileage???

[This message has been edited by Mickey_Moose (edited 05-21-2008).]

quote Originally posted by punksable: he has three seperate canisters on his setup, there are a stack of plates that cant touch each other in the canisters, he stressed that to me about a thousand times already. as for it to combust, it does, he has a small setup in his shop, we call it the bunk house. he will charge the canisters with a 12 volt battery and then the vapors coming off can be ignighted with a lighter, it pops alot but not enough to explode like a bomb. it mixes with the gasoline and gets burned, that is where the fuel economy comes in.

Umm, okay. Not what I was expecting I guess.

I was hoping he was generating the hydrogen at his home, and storing it on vehicle.

.

[This message has been edited by JazzMan (edited 04-21-2009).]

Here is an interesting item that was on TV here in San Antonio yesterday. Could not find the video but the report itself is interesting.

http://www.mysanantonio.com...r.KENS.131e4416.html

------------------
John

This stuff reminds me of the Prolong infomercials a few years back. Wanna run you car w/o any oil in the engine? Prolong "did". Consumer Reports tried to repeat the infomercial claims and locked up some engines. Then the government stepped in & forced them to stop their claims. After that you used to be able to purchase Prolong, V-Max and other "magic" additives at the auto stores for a fraction of the infomercial price.

P.T. Barnum hit the nail on the head when he stated, "There's a sucker born every minute." and he wasn't taking about infants. It's just that YouTube gives one greater access to them.

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: The ECM adds fuel in preprogrammed amounts based on MAP, TPS, and CTS readings. JazzMan

For what it is worth (and I'm not an expert) some of the systems do use an electronic device to "adjust" the MAP.

man this and my "Tornado" and my "electric Supercharger" man, ill get more than 150mpg

i have one statement to make on this post, if this actually worked we would all have generators in our yard with 10 of these systems in it running 24/7 to power our homes and charge our cars.

The most sucessful system i have ever seen was basicly a small hydrogen farm, guy had solar panels and wind generators that would power his home, and convert extra electricity to hydrogen and store it in tanks, he would fill his hydrogen car and use reverse electrolisis to power his house during low sun/wind conditions. a very very nice system, but the initial cost was well over 75,000 USD and prolly more. that does not include the car.

also if a system like this truely worked they would have small cars with a few of the devices and alternators producing hydrogen, and using hydrogen only via reverse electrolisis

Todd

quote Originally posted by vamper: i have one statement to make on this post, if this actually worked we would all have generators in our yard with 10 of these systems in it running 24/7 to power our homes and charge our cars. The most sucessful system i have ever seen was basicly a small hydrogen farm, guy had solar panels and wind generators that would power his home, and convert extra electricity to hydrogen and store it in tanks, he would fill his hydrogen car and use reverse electrolisis to power his house during low sun/wind conditions. a very very nice system, but the initial cost was well over 75,000 USD and prolly more. that does not include the car.

This would work, in the manor you are describing. You are getting energy from the sun and wind, so there is no loss in the conversion from the alternator. The return rate is SO far out though that it is not practicle.

All this talk and has it been done yet?

quote Originally posted by Rickady88GT: All this talk and has it been done yet?

My thoughts exactly. Who is willing to shell out $200 to find out? That's really what it comes down to.

Here is another tech that is proven to work: Thermoelectric generators. They are light, small, and reliable. This could be used to generate the current needed for the electrolysis on a car since a car couldn't use 1.1kw of electricity.
But it will work best with hybrids or 18 wheelers that use allot of electricity.

Lets say it takes 40hp to cruise. Then assume we have an engine that is 27% efficient.
So, 40*1.73 = 69.2 waste hp. Just a guess but assuming that only 50% of the waste energy is heat going out the exhaust.
50% of waste is useable = 34.6 hp in the form of waste exhaust heat
Current commercially available TE generators are ~5% efficient. 5% current efficiency = 1.73 hp or 1,288 watts.
Unfortunately this would cost $13,800 with current tech for an individual. A company could reduce this to about $5k
A power conditioner is needed due to the variable output of the generators.
12% loss to power conditioner = 1.52hp or 1,133 watts returned.

There is a new tech that is not currently available to purchase by individuals (but is available to researchers) called quantum well, which promises to be cheaper and far more efficiency.

20% quantum well efficiency = 6.92 hp or 5,155 watts
12% loss to power conditioner = 6.08hp or 4,536 watts


For the quantum well tech, a 17.6% reduction in wasted energy would be a significant cost reduction for shipping companies considering current diesel prices.

Oh, I also looked into HHO. The people that actually post their results claim about 15% increase in MPG and these were mostly on larger vehicles. HHO + tuning (MAF modification, timing, etc) claim 15%-30%. Nowhere near the 300% some websites claim.

[This message has been edited by Dracor (edited 08-21-2008).]

I would expect a 15% gain with a wideband tune... but still 15% is not much for the effort 32 * 15% = 36mpg...Maybe $5-6 bucks a month for me... and possibly up to 20 for more of the guys driving really far to work.

Its not the extra fuel you get out of it, or the scavaging effect, its mostly due to a "displacement on demand" effect of the displacement of air/fuel in the cylinder. I would imagine in a simple system where it injects all the time... you would see significant performance decrease.

I get a kick out of this stuff when it re-appears decade after decade. This HHO crap was around in the late 90's and thousands of people got suckered into it back then as well with lots of "testimonials".

If anyone wants the plans to this silly stuff, dont spend the money, go looking on the torrent sites for it.

EDIT: In fact, I just found 2 of them. PM me and I'll send you the PDF files. I dont want anyone to give their money to these scammers.

[This message has been edited by timgray (edited 08-21-2008).]

quote Originally posted by darkhorizon: I would expect a 15% gain with a wideband tune... but still 15% is not much for the effort 32 * 15% = 36mpg...Maybe $5-6 bucks a month for me... and possibly up to 20 for more of the guys driving really far to work. Its not the extra fuel you get out of it, or the scavaging effect, its mostly due to a "displacement on demand" effect of the displacement of air/fuel in the cylinder. I would imagine in a simple system where it injects all the time... you would see significant performance decrease.

For me it would be $17 per month minimum (just to work and back). If I could get 30% it would be about $400 per year. I'll take every penny I can at this point. My next engine (starting this weekend) will be a 2.8 (because I have one) intended for mileage instead of HP. Currently I get 25 to 28 MPG. Not very impressive.

We should write Mythbusters and have them test it on a Fiero!

quote Originally posted by R Runner: For me it would be $17 per month minimum (just to work and back). If I could get 30% it would be about $400 per year. I'll take every penny I can at this point. My next engine (starting this weekend) will be a 2.8 (because I have one) intended for mileage instead of HP. Currently I get 25 to 28 MPG. Not very impressive.

Solution: lob off half the cylinders and have a 1.4L 3 cyl. Instant 50-60mpg!

quote Originally posted by HC: We should write Mythbusters and have them test it on a Fiero!

They already tested them. They came to the same conclusion as science, they do not work.