A gift for HHO Skeptics!

[euromodder]

Originally Posted by HydroJim

But I will definitely go for longer trips now that I am 16 and have my license so I don't have to make my dad drive for hours on end without a destination.

Avoiding trips without a destination seems to be a better way to conserve fuel ...

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by IamIan

Bold Added:


A few clarification requests:

#1> Please post the dyno charts of your testing that shows no loss of power.
( Or have you not done the testing? )

Asking for dyno testing or a 3rd party BSHC testing from these guys is like asking for a big foot interview shot by a news crew.

Originally Posted by RiceCake

Page 14 (16 on the PDF), "Total Energy Consumption". It goes on to state that the engine they used experienced a %3 (three) increase in energy conversion efficiency.

There is nothing special about this, any super heated at room temperature flamable gas seems to do this when applied to the intake of a gas or diesel engine.
So the OP is coming forth with stunning information most of us are already aware of.

Originally Posted by RiceCake

To get 1 kilogram of hydrogen, it requires about 55kWh of energy.

I ran the electrolysis calculation a few years ago and your numbers are with in about 10% of what I got.

Originally Posted by RiceCake

1815 / 13.4 = 135.4 amps of current. Awesome; your alternator is absolutely maxed out or way over its capacity at this point. Most cars don't even have an alternator capable of over 80 amps constant. This also eliminates everything else in your car operating. This is how much current is necessary to produce /less then/ enough hydrogen to match the NASA test. Bearing in mind, I divided the required figures /by seven/, meaning this extrapolates to something around the hydrogen required to increase the efficiency in a 1.1 liter engine a whopping %3.

And I could easily calculate the horsepower draw but needless to say, people disabling their alternator have already net more gains then %3 anyhow. According to Google, with a perfect (perfect) translation of energy, 1815 watts equates to 2.43395509. A 1.1 liter engine in a FIAT Panda as an example, generates about 50 horsepower. Using 2.5 horsepower to generate hydrogen to net a %3 gain means you're getting 1.5 horsepower in increased power output from more efficient fuel burn. 50 - 2.5 + 1.5 = 49. Not a lot, but that is a loss anyhow, with the added cost of ruining your alternator.

They dont like the numbers !

[user removed]

The most common misconception among HHO advocates seems to be that they believe the alternator produces electricity for free, when in fact the alternator reads the state of charge of the battery and keeps it topped up as long as demand does not exceed supply.
Generate HHO and the alternator has to work harder which makes the engine work harder and uses more fuel.

regards
Mech

[oil pan 4]

I would like to know how the 3% gain on that NASA test translates into 30% and 50% gains?
What do you guys know that NASA doesn't?

[t vago]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

I would like to know how the 3% gain on that NASA test translates into 30% and 50% gains?
What do you guys know that NASA doesn't?

See, you're missing something. Ask instead this: Why did NASA kill off all the unicorns on their property? Answer that, and you'll come closer to the answer you're looking for.

[oil pan 4]

I got a new aerodynamic kitteh pic you might like.

[t vago]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

I got a new aerodynamic kitteh pic you might like.

Cool! May I see it?

[oil pan 4]

New developments in fat cat aerodynamics....

[t vago]

LOL! A guided cruise missile cat!

[lastic]

science has been wrong many times and hydrogen does work improving horse power and gas mileage get your head out of the sand and use your god given brain.