• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

Restricting fuel supply for HHO purposes.

So what's the theory behind this in the first place?

You use electrical current (not free, the motor has to work to spin the alternator when it is under a load) to split a very small amount of H and O apart.

You then feed that H and O into the motor, where it makes MORE power somehow (internal combustion engines are pretty inefficient) recombining the H and O?

Or is the theory that the hydrogen has a higher effective octane rating, thus you're burning some extra gasoline (to make the power used to create the hydrogen in the first place) to make the hydrogen, which is more detonation resistant, so you can run a leaner mixture without pinging?

I'm just curious what you feel the scientific theory behind this is. Or if you're basically operating under the 'magic' principle.
 
Do you understand how many liters of air/fuel the motor goes through in a minute?

Try driving it around with your HHO thing disconnected and you'll get the same results. 1 liter of disassociated H and O over a whole minute isn't enough to make any noticeable difference. And to the extent it does make a difference, you're using every slightly more power to break the H and O apart than you get back by letting the motor put them back together again.

But who am I kidding, the confirmation bias withi projects like this is *massive*. You'll think it works, because you want to. And that's fine, really. We all do silly things that make us happy.

2.3l per cycle. thats 4025 per minute @ 3500. I could be off.
 
Well with engineering and mechanical backgrounds as well as having studied it for a long time I would say I understand it very well and know exactly what I need to do.
However I am on a tight budget at the moment hence why I am using a volume knob and a mason jar to make this work.
So far I am using a 6 plate single cell configuration in a mason jar with a switch on the dash with an air fuel ratio gauge. This is all built with scrap material I had laying around.
So far the set up has costed me less than $3 and I am getting 2-2.5 mpg on average better fuel mileage. However my cell is designed to produce about 1lpm when warm and that is enough hydrogen to where I should be able to get at least 30-35mpg. But in order to get that I need to fool the ECU to put less gasoline so that the hydrogen really can go to work. Not bad for a mason jar and some stainless laying around..
Once my budget allows I will be going to a dry cell set up. With proper EFIE/MAF controllers with full 100 amp pulse with power supply.
You don't understand this.
You don't understand how the oxygen sensor works.
You don't understand that you use the same energy splitting the water as you get burning it, minus the efficiency loss.
You are a sucker.
 
Per 4 cycles

I think he took that into account. Takes 2 rotations to complete a cycle.


3500 rpm /2 = 1750 cycles
1750 cycles * 2.3L per cycle = 4025 liters displaced
4025 liters of displacement * .5 to correct for partial vacuum the engine operates under = very roughly 2000 liters of 1 bar air the engine will consume over a minute at cruise.

1 par homebrew HHO for 2000 parts of normal air.

.05% HHO and 99.95% normal air.
 
Last edited:
So if all your theories and math proves that this does not work how come I am showing gains? It might not be a huge gain but I am showing gains. So all in all it is working right..? And if all I am getting is +2 mpg I am still better of than you guys telling me I am stupid.
 
So if all your theories and math proves that this does not work how come I am showing gains? It might not be a huge gain but I am showing gains. So all in all it is working right..? And if all I am getting is +2 mpg I am still better of than you guys telling me I am stupid.

So lets see some data.

Lets see the data.

Seems like a claim to me?

I assume you're tracking this information? Let's see the data.

I don't know but so far we haven't seen ****, so lets see it.

So lets see the data
 
I don't know but so far we haven't seen ****, so lets see it.

What do you want to see? My chicken scratch on a paper for the past 3 months? Any body could jot down what ever they want on a paper so you will still be doubting me then too. Or perhaps a video of my dashboard running thru a tank and the miles adding up? Come drive my car on a tank of gas and see for your self..
 
So if all your theories and math proves that this does not work how come I am showing gains? It might not be a huge gain but I am showing gains. So all in all it is working right..? And if all I am getting is +2 mpg I am still better of than you guys telling me I am stupid.

Because you are ****ing hypermiling.
 
I thought most you guys would be interested in saving money but if I am the only one then oh well.
I doubt that I will see gains of 30+ mpg but in my eyes it is worth a try and if all I am getting is 2 or 3 mpg better then that is at least something. My car gets on average 23.2 mpg without HHO and with I am getting 25.4 on average. This is commuting at 75-80mph between Austin and San Antonio
As well as at least 1/2 tank city driving. I am running a turbo exhaust with no cat and no other mods. I fill up twice a week so I have plenty of miles I have tried and tested this on. So when you are doubting my numbers all i can say is try for your self and get back with me..
 
You installed a turbo exhaust? How does that work?

Did you install this injection system before or after you modified your exhaust?

Also, we have yet to see proof. Pretty easy to doubt when there is no proof.

I used to doubt that the moon landings were faked and the Boston bombing was fake, but then I saw the studio they taped everything in.
 
Back
Top