I posted this in another part of ecomodder and felt I should repost: Because I've ventured into the HHO crap many times from a chemical and scientific approach in many forums I've grown tired. There are many sound physics, mathematical and scientific methodologies applied that have more than proven the many on board electrolysis methods available on the net do not work. Regardless of the claims by many. Many of the claims are based far from credible scientific applicable means. Or more, sudo-science. Below are links to a engineering forum that have other links to more appropreate tests. Dr. John Heywood from MIT, for example, has done such tests on HHO units/concepts and the results are made available on the SAE site (for a fee as all their papers are) that show the testing and the methodology used in testing. What cracks me up is the slyness as to how the "water for fuel" site lists his name (recognizing the clout Dr. Heywood caries in the automotive field of engineering) to an unrelated paper related to hydrogen in general as a fuel for automotive use. The paper referenced Dr. Heywood, had nothing to do with HHO but the pure compressed gas of Hydrogen or hydrogen fuel cells. Yet they listed it as a reference to some kind of affirmation for their systems. Anyway, here are a couple links to read that will carry the reader to many others:
http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/35169#newcomments
http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/464...ut-of-Business
The video posted at the end of this paragraph is based off what the basic principles of the I.C.E. functionality with the math involved. This is a ridiculously simplified method to get the point across, but you'll find it's validity if you have any understanding of basic physics and an base understanding of thermodynamics and chemistry.
http://www.youtube.com/user/Silverad.../5/dISUpy6uNHw
There are 5 or so in this series. Of course the true believers will always find a way to disagree with real math and science.