I really need to fill the tank and do an official MPG test. I will say a normal trip i would use close to a 1/4 tank, now i'm using an 1/8. I was kinda figuring the MPG gauge was still reading right. Either way, I will try to fill up and check by hand to get a more accurate number.

Thanks for the info on ecomodder.com

 

This is the key.
Fooling the pcm into giving great mpg via the odb2 port is all i've seen you do so far. I agree, the mpg via the odb2 ( i use scangauge) is fairly accurate, UNLESS you do something that confuses the pcm's fuel consumption or speed/distance inputs.

I have driven my 6l from fl to nc and back to sc(940 miles) on one tank 20.6 mpg. When you can go 800-900 miles on a tank hiway, then you'll have real info to backup your claim..

I can get 200-300 mpg coasting downhill as read from the odb2 port.

Sent from my Sprint PC36100 using IB AutoGroup

 

Obviously confused on modding sensors into unlocking leaner fuel maps & different timing maps, vs what the gauge reads when it measures fuel consumption. Either way its not realevant when people aren't open to something they don't understand, that my friend is the key.

This has turned into one of those "does hho work and why not threads"....This is a waste of time.

 

I've found it a cool read both ways, thanks guys!

Cheers,

Nate

 

Interesting idea though...using the hyrdogen as an 'additive'.

Curious...I see some trucks with LPG as a fuel...anyone know if that's more cost efficient?

 

Just fillup drive to near empty and report the distance/ fuel consumed.
I can drive farther on the first quarter of a tank than the last quarter, so far all your info is subjective.

It'd be great to double fuel mileage, just those pesky laws of physics to overcome. But i'd love to have you show us your results.

Lots of previous negative experiences clouding my expections

Sent from my Sprint PC36100 using IB AutoGroup

 

yes and no.
Yes , it's cheaper to operate, and no, it's not more efficient since the install and lpg system is going to cost quite a bit.
Unless you drive a lot it's not going to pay back itself.
Kinda like diesel... minus the breakdowns..

 

ecomodder.com is really good, I go over there sometimes

 

Well if nothing else it makes for some interesting reading on the system that he has devised..

 

Thanks to those who read this and find it interesting. Today I have filled the tank and reset the trip. I have also zeroed the cars MPG, and the ultragauge's MPG as well as trip on it to see if it is accurate, since that would affect the MPG reading. Either way we will have a definitive answer on ACTUAL MPG.

I will post the results when I get them. It may be a week or so since I will be out of town all next week. It just depends on how much I drive before then.

 

Couple years ago I read all I could fine and then some on the hho believers.
I ended up never using it but read so many stories of people who claimed improvements that I am not a 100% deny-er of it.
The claim that the gains are due to the fine tuning I don't believe. No way you can go from 12mpg to 20mpg by 'fine tuning'

What you need to do is fill up at the same pump each time. Measure the exact distance and do the math. Do this a few times and then you can be sure. Don't use the onboard meter and also question your electronic gauge.

 

I'm not sure if u understood what I meant by fine tuning. I mean to say that just HHO will not yield good results, you have to help the gas computer comply with hho. Like changing the switch point on the o2 sensors because hho is both hydrogen and oxygen.

o2 see's more oxygen and its job its to keep the a/f correct so it adds more fuel decreasing mpg's. It runs rich and it doesn't know it. Same with the timing. All that timing advance is good on a gas engine, but when u add HHO to the mix it will ping. You want to back the timing off so the engine will run correctly for the effects of HHO.

The biggest problem with the whole HHO scenario is trying to make an engine and computer designed by the manufacturer to run only on gasoline, run with the added HHO. Thats where tuning(maybe the wrong term used) comes into effect.

I would think it would be no different than slapping a turbo on a normally aspirated engine. The engine one would prob be higher compression, there wouldn't be a boost sensor to detect the extra air coming in to add fuel under boost, and the timing advance would cause serious issues. I say all that to say this, there will always be issues with trying to do something with an engine its not made for.

Obviously the turbo would damage the engine from leaning it out, plus boosting a higher compression engine and timing advance would be a lethal combination on a na motor. Could one say that a turbo is bad from that, who had tried it?

But if you build the same engine with lower compression, add something like MSD boost control to retard the timing based on per lb of boost, increased the injector size or added a fuel computer, now you have a performance beast. It has to be done correctly to see the results. In my opinion stand alone fuel management is "done correctly" but cost is the reason I didn't do it. So I am using a black box so to speak to modify the factory computer to get fuel & timing maps more compatible with HHO.

Now that I have wasted enough of your time, jk, I did fill the tank up like you said. I never gave much thought to fords mpg gauge. My concern is what one of the other members said, that the ultragauge may be off more than I realize when the HHO system is on.

It will be interesting for all of us, hopefully I won't be posting with my tail between my legs. I'd be devastated......

 

No, I understand what you are (trying) to do. I was referring to the persn who said your gains are due to fine tuning.. and not the hho.
Keep reporting, would love to hear your results.

 

I'm curious too.

I KNOW my UltraGauge is off - can't seem to dial it in - it's always 1mpg better than what I calculate by hand...not sure what variable to adjust to get it dialed in. But again, knowing it's 1mpg off for me and you are seeing double digit improvements tells me SOMETHING is improving - I doubt the UltraGauge is off that much.

 

you obviously have no idea of how the motor works internally. Your HHO system isn't doing anything for your vehicle besides being a parasitic draw on the battery/alternator

what you are actually doing is ruining your motor! Your "tuning" of the fuel maps has caused your motor to go extremely lean. You mention several times that the motor must be warm before you can "turn on" the system. Otherwise it doesn't work.

ever wonder why?

that's because your PCM is still OPEN loop and is using factory tables to run. your system can't over-ride those tables...yet! Once the PCM sees temp come up, it goes CLOSED loop and starts using variable tables based on motor sensors/inputs.

spoof/tune those sensors/inputs and the PCM will adjust accordingly.



so what you have done is LEANED out the air/fuel mixture to very dangerous levels. 13:1 is considered a "SAFE" mixture for N/A cars...although Ford has late model vehicles run upwards of 15:1 at highway speeds under no load conditions.

When you exceed 13:1 ratio, the pistons start getting hot. The fuel mixture is leaned out and you do see MPG gains, and depending on your motor profile, performance gains. But at some point you reach negative equity and cause motor damage.I'd be interested to see a before and after view of your pistons and valves. Chances are that you already have damaged pistons and at some point will burn a valve, or piston itself. Enjoy your high mileage while the motor lives. All that money saved is going to be needed for a new motor./rant