View Single Post
Old 01-06-2014, 05:05 PM   #84 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 954
Thanks: 240
Thanked 353 Times in 244 Posts
It is not "stone soup".

Originally Posted by P-hack View Post
The other really annoying thing is that many insist on a bunch of other changes to make HHO "work", fooling the ECU to get the timing and mixture you want, adding heat to the fuel and air, etc. Without benchmarking the effects of each change and various permutations under various loads/rpms, it just looks like stone soup (HHO is the stone in that scenario).
There are conditions to be met. Otherwise, the addition of HHO is inconsequential.

If a combustible mixture has a sub-critical condition for detonation and is ignited, it does not gain efficiency in comparison to "cooler" mixtures. However, with the seeding of HHO, it does gain a small, but measurable amount of efficiency. So? What would your conclusion have to be?

The problem with this whole discussion is the lack of actual experimentation on the part of the forum members and the lack of understanding by those who come into the forum trumpeting the virtues of HHO.

The chasm between the two sides is massive and obvious.

Forum members simply are not going to "stoop so low" to do experimentation on an "obviously useless" idea. HHO proponents are crazy zealots for the most part and naive researchers at the best. Because of the complexity of the subject as well as the high costs of testing compared to simple mass or aerodynamic improvements, we could be forever stuck bantering back and forth.
  Reply With Quote