Anyone used one of these? Up to 50% more MPG
#32
I will second the motion to allow someone on this site to try one of your units
With what I have been reading, it may work, older cars and trucks no problem, but the computer controlled intakes and exhaust now, how do you plan on fooling the sensor (maf), or oxygen sensors in the exhaust to put less gas in the chambers?? That seems to be the issue to me. I have a 2005 f150 sc, and it will be under powertrain warranty until 100k, so I don't want to "try" one of these on my vehicle until somebody legitimately tries it, and documents the findings...totally. I'm all for good ideas, heck I've tried some myself, but I don't want to risk it when I don't know you guys from Adam. I need a commonly known professional(like the show trucks) or a good friend of my own to try it. Thanks for the info anyway.
#33
Well, well, well........ For all the folks who said it was a crock. Look what was in today's paper!
Hydrogen joins gas at station in Calif. | ajc.com
Hydrogen joins gas at station in Calif. | ajc.com
I'd just like to see some proof that these actually boost mileage in a gasoline motor, thats all, and not from some small internet based business making these things.
#37
Well, well, well........ For all the folks who said it was a crock. Look what was in today's paper!
Hydrogen joins gas at station in Calif. | ajc.com
Hydrogen joins gas at station in Calif. | ajc.com
where's the air fuel ratio reading at cruising and wide open throttle of before and after?
oh yeah, and the whole big corporations are plotting to keep this a secret and they poisoned some douchebag scammer; I guess that's the reason they keep making prototypes that run on hydrogen, right? like the Superchief... but of course, you guys can do the same thing for 600 bucks and retrofit it to a 1978 delta.
#38
If the device operated as claimed, the combustion cycle would start and end in the same state while extracting usable energy, thereby violating both the first and second laws of thermodynamics, allowing operation as a perpetual motion machine.
Your friend of a friend is a liar.
Your friend of a friend is a liar.
#39
huh?
they state that you take a molecule of water, split it, burn the hydrogen off, exhuast passes into tailpipe, then it magically recombines into water
this violates several proven theories. and your right, it isn't perpetual motion.
Fosters was off on a tangent about the article that proved HHO technology worked. The article instead demonstrated that a true Hydrogen vehicle was around and Fosters commented about the Superchief doing the same as the little Yota mentioned.
they state that you take a molecule of water, split it, burn the hydrogen off, exhuast passes into tailpipe, then it magically recombines into water
this violates several proven theories. and your right, it isn't perpetual motion.
Fosters was off on a tangent about the article that proved HHO technology worked. The article instead demonstrated that a true Hydrogen vehicle was around and Fosters commented about the Superchief doing the same as the little Yota mentioned.
#40
I haven't had this good a laugh in a while. Take it from a NASA scientist, this won't work.
What's funny is their "HHO" nomenclature. Oxygen's stable form is diatomic and at STP will exist as a diatomic molecule. So, basically, their chemical equation lacks balance. It seems to me the only thing making it into the engine is water vapor or the ambient air in the reservoir.
What's funny is their "HHO" nomenclature. Oxygen's stable form is diatomic and at STP will exist as a diatomic molecule. So, basically, their chemical equation lacks balance. It seems to me the only thing making it into the engine is water vapor or the ambient air in the reservoir.
#42
I'll be waiting.
#44
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: Enjoying the real world.
Posts: 23,165
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
10 Posts
.
.
.
.
.
.
Its many people never took physics courses or didn't do well in them.
#45
The water part of the equation would be perpetual motion machine. The reason is in order for this concept to work you'd have to extract as much or more energy out of burning the hydrogen and oxygen as is used to split the water in the first place. The underlyin concept of perpetual motion is extracting more energy from something than it ultimately inputs. Perpetual motion doesn't mean it runs forever - rather it means the perpetual part of the machine is a closed system which produces more than it consumes.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Its many people never took physics courses or didn't do well in them.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Its many people never took physics courses or didn't do well in them.
Have taken physics and if you actually read up on the ideal ( I am not saying it works but lets use an open mind and not say it is breaking laws of physics) it uses the gases to help burn the gasoline/or diesel more completely (efficiently) as a catalyst then the gasoline or diesel normally burns creating better economy. I have been told my an automobile engineer that the most fuel efficient cars are still less than 25% efficient so there is alot of room for improvement so if you improve the efficiency of burning the fuel (gasoline/diesel)with a little HHO maybe you could have enough extra energy to power the HHO generator. I do not think it will run using this HHO generating reactor at all without the addition of another fuel source, not sure if it will help at all but I am open to the idea if it pans out I might intall one oneday.
Tim