HHO Mod, Does it work?

[elhigh]

Ultarc answered your question straightaway:

Originally Posted by UltArc

No.

I believe he was speaking directly to your question, "Is it worth trying?" This topic has beaten to death, back to life, chased with torches and pitchforks and stabbed in the heart, but for some reason it keeps coming back around for another go. You won't find many proponents of it here, and what few you do find tend to keep their HHO light under a bushel.

[CapriRacer]

Originally Posted by elhigh

.........This topic has beaten to death, back to life, chased with torches and pitchforks and stabbed in the heart, but for some reason it keeps coming back around for another go.......

So, so true - and not just about this topic. Many others as well.

I think everyone ought to look at their own prejudices and examine why they think something is true (or not!) If your answer involves belief or a conspiracy or anything other than data (ie. Evidence), then you need to chuck that answer.

[Frank Lee]

[Ecky]

Probably redundant, but why should we expect HHO systems to do anything?

1. Our engines and computers should be designed to be optimal for burning gasoline, not hydrogen. If they were better at burning hydrogen, why wouldn't manufacturers realize this and redesign engines so they're actually best at combusting gasoline and not hydrogen?


2. As I understand it, this idea is this: Combust gasoline -> mechanical work -> electrical energy -> break chemical bonds in water -> reform chemical bonds to create water in the combustion chamber -> mechanical work

Every step added will have losses involved, why not just take the mechanical work you get from burning the gasoline and cut your losses?


3. HHO systems that are available make minuscule amounts of hydrogen. Unless there's some weird chemistry going on in the combustion chamber (see #1), any gains or losses should be small enough to disappear into background noise.


Maybe there are engine designs that would work better with a hydrogen-gasoline mix, but current engines were designed to burn pure gasoline. In the case of those hypothetical engines, you probably still wouldn't want a HHO system because of the conversion losses, you would want a hydrogen tank filled at home where energy is relatively cheap.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

And you do realize it is complex. It is not the simple scenario for an A-B-A test as one can run an engine so lean with hydrogen that turning off the hydrogen stream results in a no-run condition. Even the stoichiometric burn has to be adjusted for with timing changes. Stop the hydrogen stream and you must reset the timing advance or the engine lags and smokes.

Its too complex for A-B-A testing?
Can you not undo timing changes almost as easy as flipping a switch on these modern computer controlled engines?

I know exactly how you could change your timing at the flip of a switch on most vehicles. MSD sells ignition accessories for almost every vehicle made, where you make or unmake a switch connection and that instantly changes the timing for a nitrous hit.

[elhigh]

At this point I'm strongly considering building an HHO system and buying some time on a dyno just so I can generate some solid, irrefutable numbers. I don't need them for my own convincing, I already know it's 100% BS.

Unfortunately doing that would only bring out the flat-earthers shouting I had done it wrong, that I was faking it - faking it failing! - that the system was rigged. Knowing that it would be expensive to do and that that would be the result, however, takes all the potential fun out of it.

[CapriRacer]

Originally Posted by elhigh

......Unfortunately doing that would only bring out the flat-earthers shouting I had done it wrong, that I was faking it - faking it failing! - that the system was rigged.........

This is a classic lose/lose. No matter what anyone does, if the results come out negative, "they" will be convinced the system is rigged to fail.

Heck, I'll even bet some have found out it doesn't work and never bothered to report the results - from embarrassment.

It's hard to eat crow.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by elhigh

At this point I'm strongly considering building an HHO system and buying some time on a dyno just so I can generate some solid, irrefutable numbers. I don't need them for my own convincing, I already know it's 100% BS.

Unfortunately doing that would only bring out the flat-earthers shouting I had done it wrong, that I was faking it - faking it failing! - that the system was rigged. Knowing that it would be expensive to do and that that would be the result, however, takes all the potential fun out of it.

The only way to convince a true believer is to have them see it always fail all of the time for them selves and even then that doesn't always work.

[Frank Lee]

Because there is always something you did "wrong"- even if there isn't.

[elhigh]

Frank, before I signed in your comment was also graced with an ad for a "water improvement" gizmo, complete with a 400% "zoom" photo of the water in the glass. I found the juxtaposition very, very amusing, hoaxes within comments on hoaxes.

Reminded me of this: