This guy was talking about adding these to his car. I knew nothing about it and had never heard of it. Looked online it was very interesting. Me not being a car buff I have no idea if this is a hoax or if its true. So to all the "experts" out there please inform me. Am I missing out on a good thing. For those who dont have a clue like I did google it "HHO" Start at post 18 for the sugar and alcohol switch over

I'm building one this week, My concern is will the hho generator produce enough gas to compensate for the amount of load on the alternator recharging the battery?? I know it will in fact produce hydrogen, but enough to actually improve mileage is yet to be seen. Ive seen people claiming 10mpg increase, others claim its a stupid waste of time and money and mental energy etc,etc. I'm in the middle I don't think it would increase mileage by 10mpg but I'm not so rabidly biased that I wont try it out and see for myself (there is always something new to learn). Note that it is hydrogen gas is very flamable, so if anyone tries it make sure to use a bubbler and good ventilation.

A friend of mine is all hot about this, he is in the planning stages now. I told him go for it and we can name it the Hindenburg when he done. I listen, encourage, and cheer - then I'll take a cab.

edit for lame typing

This gets mentioned a lot. I hope to build one this summer to see for myself. And to do my own before and after results. I believe there's some merit to the system, but neither the wild claims of success, nor the "it'll never work" claims, are convincing to me.

If and when a DIY site starts on this and more info of people who are doing this is availible then I will show more interest in it.

Here is one.

http://hhoforums.com/

Now thats what I call a response!
ndnjoeh just got served. heh!

I'd love to see hard data on this, and an actual description of how this is supposed to work. A quick browse through that forum didn't seem to yield any plans to build, or even a materials list. I may look more in-depth later.

I agree.
I’ve been tentatively looking at HHO devices for a month or so and so far I haven’t seen anything that makes me believe that it will increase mileage (kilometereage?? ). Allot of you tube stuff just go along the lines of “I installed this in my car and now my mileage has doubled”. There’s no doubt that Hydrogen is being produced but is it actually making the car more efficient? The experimenter in me wants it to be true but the sceptic says it’s all wishful thinking.
As far as I can tell water molecules are separated using electrolysis but with a difference. A pulsed electric field is passed through the water at the correct frequency, resonant frequency of the water???, which causes the system to be very efficient?
I still fail to see where the extra energy, besides the energy from the battery or alternator, is coming from. If the hydrogen or oxygen atoms where being split then I can see extra energy but I don’t think that would be safe .

If something looks too good to be true, it probably is. I still keep looking though .

I'm still planning on giving this a go if I can get around to it. But like everyone else I want exact comparisons before and after. If I ever do get it going I'll post my test results here.

I got my reactor built this week, It seems to produce gas pretty good, It will still be a while before I get it installed in my guinee pig 90 s10 since I still want to do some more bench testing.

If I call you all fools now, with out testing it myself, I myself would be the fool. I guess my opinion would be, wont work. Well it will work, but your not going to get something for nothing.

If say electrolysis was >%100 efficient (meaning you can get more energy out from the combustion, then it took to separate the O and H) then one could pump the H and O mix made by electrolysis into an engine, in-turn running the engine, then have a generator on the output, feeding more electrolysis (using the byproduct of water to replenish what was converted in the electrolysis process) you would have a continuous running process.

You might be able to time trade it so you dump your Hydrogen load all at once, increasing you fuel eco. for that short bit of time, but your still putting a heavy strain on your alternator, consuming gas.

IMO you'd get better outcome reducing your motor size (and reducing weight), and just pumping the Oxygen directly into the cylinder allowing for more fuel to be added, increasing your power output of a smaller motor (kinda like NOS, just alot more dangerous )



Good Ol' Wiki:

Serious question here, help me understand the difference between these two scenarios.

Tank full of gasoline with a given potential energy. Energy is released by combustion. By all accounts an engine is pretty inefficient, (a figure of 40% is rattling around in my head for some reason), but it works. Fuel in, power out.

Water has potential energy. Energy is released by first splitting it, then by combustion. Goes into the same inefficient engine.

OK, so the major difference is that energy is required to split the water prior to combustion. Is that basically it? The doubt of success arises from the required extra energy input? Or is there something else that I'm missing?

Ok guys. Now it's time for a little reality. Mythbusters tested this. It doesn't work. The science behind it is that it takes gas(HP) to make hydrogen. Don't let me ruin the party though. Don't get your energy from the alternator! Collect as much of that heat going to waste as you can. I have seen a working model fitted to a Miatta. The energy for electrolysis was being made by Thermo Electric Modules. You heat one side and cool the other and they make electricity. Equally so, if you pass electricity one side will freeze and one side will get hot. One side goes on the exhaust the other is cooled by a passive heatsink. That is the only way it will work. Of course the whole making hydrogen idea is still tits on a bull when you consider the fact that you could just remove the alternator and charge the battery with that electricity and skip the Hydrogen producing bits. A plus is that TECs have no moving parts. You do know that it only takes 40hp to get a 1500LB car up to 40MPH. You only have all that extra because we like to go fast. The problem isn't that cars are inefficient by nature, it's that we wont buy one that is. And plz no one say Pruis.. A Volkswagen golf TDI gets about 10miles to the gallon better in all conditions. Plus it does 150mph. So If you want to save the plannet, get yourself a 55hp turbo diesel and make a small light car to go around it.

um, hey now. with a name like Rembrandt you should be supporting creative thinking instead of bashing the idea of hho generation. I do, however, agree with you completely.

serious question here: How does the law of supply and demand work? If people really need something theres demand and then the price goes up??? I thought it was the other way around... I mean the whole gas situation.

If people need something and there's not enough supply then prices go up. However if there is more supply than demand then prices go down. With the gas situation there's more than just supply and demand in the equation, (supposedly there's enough supply to meet demand).

By no means do I want to discourage people from trying idea. Shoot I work in the R&D energy field, and this is what I get paid for. How-ever there is a difference between multi-million dollar, PHD ran energy research companies and some ad for plans for some contraption found in the back of Fishing Digest. I'm not saying only PHDs or Scientist can come up with ideas, some of the best ideas I've seen have come from Joe Publics basement or garage. I just dont like seeing people being brain-washed thinking that this is a perfect fix and it will solve all the worlds energy needs.

If you would like to try it, have fun! Just dont expect it to work. And who knows, someone (here) could try it, find out a major flaw in the system and be the next Bill Gates of energy! However, the illusion of this even remotely producing a positive energy output is just a pipe dream at this point.

IMO, there are many different ways we can focus to increase our fuel economy, I just dont feel this is one of them.


But I do know one thing, I bet having one of these in your back seat sure can make some peoples head turn!

Lets see if I can stear this somewhere else and see what peoples opinion are of this

http://www.efuel100.com/

Please let me know what you think of this!

I don't think their price of E100 at $1.25 is true. I have seen most production cost of E100 at over $2.50 gallon.

I am surprised that the whole system is only 10K.

Most stills require heat to work and I didn't see any power requirements for the still.


I never have liked the idea of the food for fuel because of the amount of fresh water needed to make the base product. In the long run many places will have water shortages long before we have any true oil shortages. Sugar is cheep now but if you had 10 million of these things around all of a sudden "Big Sugar" would find a shortage and double the price. For the amount of work needed to produce sugar it is a surprising that it is as low priced as it is, perhaps it's all that near slave labor that harvest the cane and beats . If the price of sugar doubled would any of the workers get paid more?

As with any system you have to ask what would happen if half of the world did this? (The other half of the world is still walking and cooking with twigs) We would drive up the cost of sugar world wide and use billions if not trillions of gallons of fresh water and savage much of our non replaceable farm land to fuel our autos.


There are ways to burn gas 3 times more cleanly and electric cars are coming too which will make coal and solar much more important.

http://gm-volt.com/

Even though the system will not scale well it is a cool idea to have your own gas pump at near the same price and not have any of your money go to our "friends" who only wish us the best.

If I had loads of cash I might just buy one.

Just an idea about HHO.

As I understand it most cars use large engines for excelleration not to sustain speed. If regenerative breaking was used to generate HHO and then the HHO was used to boost the initial excelleration, then a smaller engine could be used. (if it didn't blow up being supercharged with HHO)

This website is really nice. The colour combination is fantastic. Sugar alcohol is also called polyhydric alcohol. Sugar alcohols are not as sweet as sucrose. Sugar alcohols are neither sugars nor alcohols.
==========================================================================
Sam

HHO a misnomer in itself is a Teslaish attempt to follow the experiments of a now dead, man named Stan Meyer. Supposedly Stan found the ideal frequency of splitting water which increased hydrogen production.

Now for reality, whether or not there is an ideal frequency for splitting water to 2H2 and O2 there were experiments during the 70's which involved injecting water into internal combustion engines to reclaim waste heat and turn it into energy which can be used to drive the piston. On average it was found that 30 percent of the fuel normally injected into the combustion chamber prior to ignition could be replaced by water without losing energy. When one injects 2H2 and O2 into the combustion chamber, then the byproduct of the combustion results in water vapor, (steam). the additional heat of the petrol combustion is then added to the steam causing it to further expand reclaiming some of the energy that is usually wasted. This is a portion or the reason why this seems to give back more than it takes, the something for nothing mentioned above.

I have built one of the designs found online and installed it in a Honda. There were some other added benefits. The injection of a higher level of O2 added some pep to the acceleration of the car. The application of manifold vacuum to the cells caused additional water vapor to be produced which was then expanded further within the cylinder during combustion reclaiming waste heat.

The efficiency of the catalytic converter did not seem to be affected though with the added amount of moisture in the exhaust pipe life expectancy is shortened. Some of the electrolytes used are extremely caustic. If this setup saves you 50 or a 100 bucks a year in fuel but then you have to replace your exhaust system every couple of years you end up in the hole. Also, one of the reasons the water injection experiments were left by the wayside was that increased levels of water vapor in a hot engine left to cool overnight caused cylinders to rust. Heat, moisture, oxygen and iron, ... RUST. Add a caustic electrolyte, ... lots of RUST. Over time the small pits that form in the cylinder walls will decrease efficiency of the already inefficient engine.

There are possibilities here. The model T Ford got 24 mpg. Russia had a car that got 54 miles to the gallon almost 50 years ago. There was an experimental Opal Manta which was racking up 75 mpg tooling around the mountain roads of western North Carolina in the USA during the late 70's. Keep experimenting folks, maybe one day we can tell the oil barons to stuff it.

Fuzzy

Actually HHO was coined by a Man named Brown who supposedly patented the Name but we can find no record. Brown used a simple electrolysis device to produce the gas. The term HHO was frequently used to describe the gas. Stan Meyers used a conversion technique designed to home in on specific frequencies of resonance which he claimed were in water. It is rumored that he stole the technology from a person Putrarch who published a paper on it three years earlier. Both used high watt, low amp signal to "tear" the molecules apart, but his work has never been 100% verified. The Brown and Meyers are only related in that they both produce HHO gas.



The frequencies mentioned are well documented. There are actually three within the human hearing range. Water injection is a pretty standard response to fuel consumption.

I have built one of the designs found online and installed it in a Honda. There were some other added benefits. The injection of a higher level of O2 added some pep to the acceleration of the car. The application of manifold vacuum to the cells caused additional water vapor to be produced which was then expanded further within the cylinder during combustion reclaiming waste heat.



There is a large difference between water injection and HHO gas injection. With water injection, there are no caustics used and the amount of water is regulated by the intake draft. With HHO the gas is produced on demand, but really needs to go throw a bubbler filter to prevent caustics from reaching the engine and to reduce the risk of flashback. Water will form during an HHO burn but it is fairly insignificant compared to standard water injection.



You are correct! The major probelm that faces each of the people wanting to use Hydroxy gas generators is the adaptive fuel systems that modern cars use. With older models, the fuel systems can be adjusted easily for maximum benefit. The new computer controlled cars are simply not designed to handle alternative fuels and often end up costing more gas that they save because of misinterpretation of the available gases in the chain.

Just my two cents.


SJ