Is HHO the way to go? - Page 13 - Fuelly Forums

Android Users - Coming Soon! - Migrating from aCar 4.8 to 5.0

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 06-15-2008, 08:36 PM   #121
Registered Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 41
Country: United States
today

I was driving today with the fuel cell turn on / turn off thing....mpg seemed to go up a bit....won't know for a few more gas ups....


Quote:
Originally Posted by shupack View Post
I was wondering about that, maybe a regulator attached to the throttle that controlls voltage/throttle position? my other thought was a rising rate fuel pressure regulator (designed for forced induction use, works off of manifold pressure/vacuum) that will allow more H2 with lower manifold vacuum (higher load). perhaps a combination of both.

possibly use a rising rate regulator for the fuel, set it up for lean at cruise, full pressure under load instead of full pressure at cruise and even higher pressure under load.
__________________

cugir321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 02:34 AM   #122
Registered Member
 
ZugyNA's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 587
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by cugir321 View Post
Look at my garage figures / gas log !!! My mpg went up with "hydrogen cell off"!!! I'm starting to feel the hype of water to gas is a scam...at least somewhat...maybe a sliver better with a EFIE unit but nothing like the stupid ad's promote!
4x4s are probably the most difficult to see mpg gains from? Concentrate on the best drivetrain lubes? Plenty of wind resistance. Also one guy testing HHO found a minor gain at higher amps and maybe 15% running under 10 amps. Adjust ignit timing?

Check this?

http://www.fuel-saver.org/Forum/showthread.php?tid=521
__________________

__________________
Leading the perpetually ignorant and uninformed into the light of scientific knowledge. Did I really say that?

a new policy....I intend to ignore the nescient...a waste of time and energy.
ZugyNA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 05:53 AM   #123
Registered Member
 
quadancer@bellsouth.net's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 63
[/IMG]
Zug: I borrowed an idea from a video and experimented on the bench. My unit will be full of water (or very close to) and the bubbler will simply be higher yet. I found that the center of the bubbler put at the water level was sufficient to eliminate most of the water spurting. I deem it necessary to run a dryer in the line after that.
Cugir: I would have thought the opposite. Most gains with HHO come on the smaller motors, and I'd believe that the percentage of HHO to A/F is higher there, as opposed to a v-8. Oddly, some guys have noticed their greater mpg went down when they increased the amps and output, but I think this is a MAP, MAF, or oxygen sensor issue, and possibly limitations built into certain computers (the field range of voltage). It appears that HHO technology used as an additive has many variables we're not even sure of at this point.
I'd be real careful if putting any controls of any kind on the throttle. I learned long ago that gas, steering and brakes are 3 things you don't shortcut on. I'm sure you know that.
I don't believe for a minute that you can have too much HHO, since there are guys running six packs on their pickups successfully. Or so many claim. I'd think it's just a matter of gettng the engine to respond to or use it properly. I'll bet my initial test of my pickup will not show much; I'm not putting electronics on it at first, as I want to see what happens item by item, tank by tankfull.
__________________
$1000.00 in parts can save you HUNDREDS in gas!
quadancer@bellsouth.net is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 06:05 AM   #124
Registered Member
 
quadancer@bellsouth.net's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 63
Perhaps efficiency has something to do with it.
Our little Seo gets about 27mpg with 100 hp. Efficiency is 2.7/hp.
My Silverado gets about 16mpg with 300hp. Efficiency is .0053/hp?
Let me divide that the other way:
Car: 100/27=3.7
Truck: 300/16=18.75 - There, that's more like it. No, wait, I was right the first time: the car is more efficient than the truck. So the amount of HHO is significantly greater to the amount of WASTED gas from the car, as it is much less waste than the truck. For the truck to match the car, it would need to get 81mpg from the factory.
...and I STILL can't pull a load of lumber with the car...
__________________
$1000.00 in parts can save you HUNDREDS in gas!
quadancer@bellsouth.net is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 07:07 AM   #125
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 6
Country: United States
I've just built and installed the HHO generator described on the hho water 4 gas website. So far the results seem positive. I've noticed roughly 10% increase in fuel efficiency over half a tank of gas. I'm running a relatively tame amount of HHO, using about 1 amp of 12 vdc to generate the gas. If I add some more baking soda to the water, the current increases, but I wanted to start small. I'll let you know how it pans out, but it definately seems to have some merit.

Joe
__________________
J. Hartley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 06:02 PM   #126
Registered Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 41
Country: United States
efie

I got the EFIE board from fuelsaver-mpg today. I used to be an electronics tech in the navy...did a lot of soldering, sold hot air rework equipment to solder surface mount parts. I have to say....I'm not real happy with the way the board looked. Most of it was fine. They weren't careful aligning the "LM2940s" chip. It's slightly over a run. Not seated completely over the pad.

I had my unit running at 15-25 amps. It's too hot. It works but you end up with steam and high heat. High heat will loosen your bolts, even with lock washers. 5-15 amps seems to be better...no heat problems, no steam. I get a decent stream of bubbles. I have 1/2 id tubing so it's not a stream like small id tubing. The bubbler caught any steam but I still don't like that much water leaving the unit. I have about 3 ft of tubing between my fc and the bubbler. The bubbler is a windshield wiper container. where are you injecting the hydrogen? I tried it in both ccv and manifold line...I think the manifold is best.

My motor is a 4 cyl. I have a switch on the dash....it's not a problem turning it on and off on major accelerations. I have a feeling this is going to work. If I stay at my mpg presently it will be wonderful. 20c/22/h mpg is very good for a 100k 1992 wrangler and I haven't added the efie yet. My goal is 25mpg. I won't add the efie until I get a decent feel for the on/off thing in mpg. It is interesting to see the oil pressure rise after 5 or so seconds of the unit on.


Quote:
Originally Posted by quadancer@bellsouth.net View Post
[/IMG]
Zug: I borrowed an idea from a video and experimented on the bench. My unit will be full of water (or very close to) and the bubbler will simply be higher yet. I found that the center of the bubbler put at the water level was sufficient to eliminate most of the water spurting. I deem it necessary to run a dryer in the line after that.
Cugir: I would have thought the opposite. Most gains with HHO come on the smaller motors, and I'd believe that the percentage of HHO to A/F is higher there, as opposed to a v-8. Oddly, some guys have noticed their greater mpg went down when they increased the amps and output, but I think this is a MAP, MAF, or oxygen sensor issue, and possibly limitations built into certain computers (the field range of voltage). It appears that HHO technology used as an additive has many variables we're not even sure of at this point.
I'd be real careful if putting any controls of any kind on the throttle. I learned long ago that gas, steering and brakes are 3 things you don't shortcut on. I'm sure you know that.
I don't believe for a minute that you can have too much HHO, since there are guys running six packs on their pickups successfully. Or so many claim. I'd think it's just a matter of gettng the engine to respond to or use it properly. I'll bet my initial test of my pickup will not show much; I'm not putting electronics on it at first, as I want to see what happens item by item, tank by tankfull.
cugir321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 08:03 PM   #127
Registered Member
 
quadancer@bellsouth.net's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 63
Today I road tested the modified Smack unit in the 6x6x4 electrical box.
Readings were as follows when I got home and idled in the drive for 45 minutes.
Amps/Case Temp/Bubbler Temp/Voltage/Output
10 85 75 14.2 L/min
12 133 121 14 -
12 141 134 14 .74
15 151 135 14 .85
15 156 137 14 .88
15 161 141 14 .94
15 163 143 13.8 .99
15 166 148 13.8 1.01
15 169 152 13.8 1.21
15 171 155 13.8 1.03
16 172 158 13.8 1.09
17 174 160 13.8 1.01
17 177 163 13.8 .88 shut down.
As you can see, production decreased over 170 degrees f. case
temperature. I found at shutdown that the lid had warped between
the screws and was leaking.
I did put in the float tank, supply tank on under the hood, and hooked them up to the jenny, but didn't put water in them until after the test, which is how I found the leaking. The float idea ...I dunno, it seems to want to overfill, even though it's lower than the jenny. It worked on the bench tho.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Warped.JPG
Views:	93
Size:	45.2 KB
ID:	1158   Click image for larger version

Name:	H20 Tank.JPG
Views:	100
Size:	30.8 KB
ID:	1159  
__________________
$1000.00 in parts can save you HUNDREDS in gas!
quadancer@bellsouth.net is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2008, 03:55 AM   #128
Registered Member
 
ZugyNA's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 587
Country: United States
Just guessing...but I think the upper temp limit for good gas production might be around 130-140F. Could be that under higher heat and amps...that more steam or water vapor is produced instead of HHO

I think the smack says 150F or so is his designs upper limit.

When I start to test again...I'll probably shut it off it I see cell temps above 140F or so.
__________________
Leading the perpetually ignorant and uninformed into the light of scientific knowledge. Did I really say that?

a new policy....I intend to ignore the nescient...a waste of time and energy.
ZugyNA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2008, 05:03 AM   #129
Registered Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 41
Country: United States
Here's a picture of the board.

Notice the three legged chip....designation LM2940s. The chip is over a run...it does not sit completely over the pad. This is not a good thing. I'm not real happy with their work.

I got the EFIE board from fuelsaver-mpg today. Most of it was fine. One problem is too much. It only takes one short to cause problems. Will it work? Probably. The run is coated so it should. Could it short...maybe. Do you want a maybe problem attached to your cars ECU?
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	efie1.JPG
Views:	125
Size:	44.9 KB
ID:	1160  
cugir321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2008, 07:46 PM   #130
Registered Member
 
GasSavers_Russ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 41
Country: United States
Its well worth looking in to but as said in the last post A BUBBLE IS A MUST

believe me its not worth doing anything without i have had a reactor go up on me and its not nice,


Its easy to make it with a Bottle


have the in hose (FROM REACTOR) going in through the lid right down to the bottom and the out (To torch car) at the top, half fill the bottle with water and tighten the lid,

This stops any explosions from getting back through to the reactor and protects yourself, if anything now you will pop your lid on the bottle, and not risk yourself, (NOTE) glass jars should not be used,

You can also acheve the same afect useing a tub tightly packed with wire wool sealed at both ends with taped holes,

if there is any more info you would like about this please feel free to Email me,


Never Give up


Russ . . .
__________________

__________________
I also have information on my HH-O Forums
GasSavers_Russ is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.