Hydrogen on demand system?

[ConnClark]

Can we Unicorn this thread yet?

[t vago]

Originally Posted by ConnClark

Can we Unicorn this thread yet?

Please? Pretty please? With Splenda on top?

[ctmaybury@yahoo.com]

You're right. Let's not try to understand and improve the combustion process. There is no room for improvement at all. I think someone is duct taping some pizza pans on there wheels.

[RedDevil]

Originally Posted by ctmaybury@yahoo.com

You're right. Let's not try to understand and improve the combustion process. There is no room for improvement at all. I think someone is duct taping some pizza pans on there wheels.

That does it. To the corral please.

[Xist]

I am pretty sure nobody here has duct-taped pizza pans to their wheels.

Zip ties, though...

[acparker]

While the specific offer referred to by the op surely qualifies as unicorn material (huckster with a mohawk was probably a good indicator), the subject of hydrogen or hho injection, as well as in-vehicle production of hydrogen is not. Granted, there are many shysters and hucksters pushing free energy and miraculous mpg improvement, however, there has been a lot of serious scientific research done on the matter and the results, while not miraculous, are not negative.

I was looking forward to the direction the discussion was taking. I hope the constructive comments will continue.

[RedDevil]

While I too like the direction the discussion was heading, it also became apparent that it requires ECU reprogramming at the very least to even have a chance to prove there could be a benefit.
A thread that approaches this stuff as a research project, without bias, would be a good thing.

Onboard bubblers with an unmodified engine have been debunked.
Threads on those are what the corral was built for.

Pizza pans and the use of duct tape, while not complex or sophisticated in themselves, have been ABA tested, well documented and proven successful.

We can try to understand and improve on the combustion process to our hearts content, but I am not convinced HHO does that to an useful extent.
I fear it destabilizes the combustion; accelerating it when it is already underway, but doing nothing when it is slow. That may explain some of the effects Rusty witnessed.

[ctmaybury@yahoo.com]

Anytime you have unburnt fuel going out the tailpipe, there is room for improvement. My old 98 diesel probably leaves more potential in that area than newer cars, but no engine is perfect burn. More sophisticated control might be able to squeeze something out of the waste. Hho research might lead to something we can use. I'm not willing to dismiss it as unicorn.

My apologies to aeromod guys. I love reading about the great gains to be had in that area. An earlier statement came out sounding more insulting than I intended. Alot of cynical people on cumminsforum.com have slammed lpg fumigation hard the same way. They always site btu content and price per gallon and it can't work. What they don't realise is there is something else going on besides dumping another fuel in. I've read about a lot of success stories and have run it in my truck long enough to know it's doing some good. I can't quantity it yet beyond my mileage logs. When I get it dialed, I'll be able to post some numbers and share the details for others to build similar systems, without the trial and error.

[ChazInMT]

Originally Posted by acparker

the subject of hydrogen or hho injection, as well as in-vehicle production of hydrogen is not.

Look Man, It Is Utter CRAP. You can NOT produce hydrogen in-vehicle and use it to create a more efficient vehicle. That is the definition of perpetual motion.

It's like wondering why we don't just hook up an electric generator to our rear wheels to power the motor on the front wheels. Would you really think that is a subject for serious discussion???? The small efficiency gains you might achieve by injecting HHO can never overcome the huge inefficiency to create the HHO.

In my previous post I posted that the energy alone required to electolyze water into HHO would result in a 8 MPG loss in efficiency. That is a real scientific fact, it requires a lot of electricity to produce HHO, that energy has to come from somewhere.

The amount of HHO in relation to the fuel stream ends up being 250 to 1. So if you can explain how it is even remotely possible that 1 part in 250 can result in any measurable improvement in the combustion efficiency. I'd love to hear it.

How does the 1 red dot make the other 250 work that much better???



Seriously, we're not stupid. If this had any chance of working I'd see it and be all for it. It has No Chance. It's a moronic pipe dream.

I have no doubt whatsoever that HHO improves the combustion efficiency. Get that? I agree HHO will help improve the engines efficiency.

It's just that you need too much energy to produce an effective amount of HHO, and the energy to create it far exceeds the additional energy output it creates. You can talk all the gibberish you want till you're blue in the face, it will not overcome basic facts.

[gone-ot]

In the BIG circle of things it TAKES more energy to produce the H2 gas (while driving) than the combustion process GAINS while burning that added H2 gas with the hydrocarbon-gasoline vapors.