Ok, we have all seen these all over the web...usually in conjunction with "big oil conspiracy" websites. Well I'm about to build one, prolly going to get what I need after work today.
Reason: Talked to my brother-in-law last night and he built one for his '91 F150. He was getting 9-10mpg and went up to 14-15mpg. Also, my Uncle built one for his '04 Silverado Z71 w/ the 4.8L...he claims 28mpg.
Not sure if they are blowing it out their azzes or what, but I'm gonna build one for the hell of it. Prolly not going in my truck, but I'm just gonna build it. The chance of vapor-lock spooks me...lol
Ok, I built one. Kinda went out on a limb and built it different than the ones I had seen pics of.
It produces Hydrogen, but my canister is leaky, so I can't collect much. It was enough to light and blow the lid off the container though...lol
Here is a cost break down: 2" pvc coupling ---$0.86 25ft 1/4" tubing---$2.68 19ga wire----------$1.97 Hot glue------call it $1 I had a Powerade bottle, zipties, and the locking container at the house, so call that like $2.
Total---$8.51...and that's estimating high.
grabbed this cheap galvanized wire, its not a good thing to use but this was just something to use for the hell of it.
well, From what Ive read, it is plumbed into the intake providing a hydrogen mix into the combustion, making it burn more efficiantly. Kinda like hooking up a bottle of Mapp gas to the intake, but HHO in a low tech homemade sort of way.
There is a slight problem. More energy is required to split the water to its gases than is gained from burning them. It is a known fact. How that translates in a vehicle may vary but I have heard of many so called "success" stories which were complete BS, no offense to your relatives. On older cars with little electronic engine management systems it may work.
Yea, I'm going about this looking at it like its total BS. So, if it actually works...I'll be amazed. I have always thought these HHO upgrades in vehicles where just a 'get rich quick scam', but who knows.
I am going to fill up w/ gas in a day or 2, I'll figure my current mileage then. I going to build another one out of stainless steal and make a dedicated build thread. I'll post my results.
christopher, from what i have found and tested it does not require more engery to make the gas. i dont remember the exact number but you do come out on top with the amount of gas produced.
Canaan, iv built a few of these just to test myself. With a fuel injected motor and o2 sensors you will have some problems. the o2 sensor will see more oxygen in the exhaust so it thinks the engine is lean, adding more fuel. you will actually get slightly worse fuel mileage with the HHO. They sell oxygen sensor spacers which supposedly counteract with the extra o2 so you get better mileage.
This works good on my truck i dont have any mileage reports due to no odometer, but my motor is carbed.
My friends truck is FI and i built him an HHO generator and he did infact prove the point you will actually get worse milage. he bought the o2 spacers of ebay and im going to put them in this week so well see how it works out. Personally i wouldnt trust it on my own but he insists on it.
I wouldnt bother with this on a FI motor unless you can go threw and reprogram the ecm values.
The wiki artical makes since. However it sounds like they are using it to only measure the amount of hydrogen produced. Well it also produced oxygen and its both the atoms that help increase the combustion efficiency. If you have 1% browns gas added to the normal intake air it will give you good results. And the amount of HP it takes to create power from the alt does not have a negative effect on your power or mileage because the gas more then makes up for it. Most of these systems dont need more then 10 to 15 amps to operate well.
Read the wiki again and you will see that even with oxygen accounted for the maximum theorized efficiency is 94%. Then when you account for loss of energy in the process of operating the alt, let alone the energy losses from combustion of the gas to power the alt you get a much lower efficiency. I don't know about you but that means you have a net loss of energy. Any time you force any thing in the universe to push in a direction that is opposite of what is "natural" it requires energy. It is called the second law of Thermodynamics.
Christoper, I was thinking about it and an internal combustion engine is not 100% efficient, I dont have time to search for the actual numbers but i believe its in the 70% area + o - 10%. The browns gas helps the combustion process so it harnesses some of the wasted energy, which would make up for the generators inefficacy.
It is more on the order of like 30%. Most HHO systems that I have seen rely on the onboard electrical production system to supply the electricity for splitting the water. Even if the combustion engine was 100% efficient, a system leeching off if it that is 99% efficient will bring down the overall efficiency of the system down. If you are producing the gas outside of the system like in a plant or at home in a tank then the car system's efficiency will go up, but your overall energy usage will go up.
Regardless of the theories this is a cheap experiment and building it will prove whether it increases the gas mileage or not which is the goal here. Besides canaan already mentioned someone he knows usng this and increasing gas mileage.
No I did not see it. But the fact hes building it still gives us the chance to see if it will work. Not trying which seems to be your stance wouldnt at all which is my point. And if your comment on scientific fact is saying that the system wont increase the gas mileage I know a guy who is using this same type of system and got like 4 mpg more out of one vehicle but the next vehicle they tried it on didnt improve at all.
What was that car getting beforehand? What kind of car was it? Did the person drive using the same driving habits or did they change when the system was added? Were the same car accessories on like the AC or the radio? Were the windows opened when driving? Going from one tank to another can have a difference of more than 5 MPG depending on where you drove to and what kind of roads they were on. No matter how you dress them up, ambiguous claims are ambiguous claims.
Its clear to me that no matter what someone says your going to refute it so im not going bother answering your questions. Christopher you seem like an intelligent person but you seem to let your ego "an inflated feeling of pride in your superiority to others" get the best of you.
Sorry sean but that would be far from the truth. I am questioning the validity of these "claims" made because they don't make any sense when thought about in a more scientific manner. The claims always start with an ambiguous feat then when dug deeper into the feat it ends up being BS. matt said he had friends that claimed it worked, I showed him it couldn't. HHO systems have been talked to death on auto forums all concluding that it is a bunch of BS. Sorry if you don't think that way but blaming me for pointing these things out doesn't help.