My mind IS open. I'm a scientist. But I'm not gullible. Think of it this way. If there was really something to this some engineers would be making MILLIONS of dollars on it. The best the HHO scammers can do is some t-shirted hick posting it on YouTube. There are plenty of highly qualified engineers who could make this work for real... if it were possible. Have them prove it to a group of auto specialists. Until this happens I'll be a skeptic, not one of the dupes.
@Me102288 My point is "How do you make the hydrogen?" That BMW's hydrogen has to come from somewhere. Most industrial hydrogen is created from heating methane -- far more efficient than electrolysis. Electrolysis is at best 70% efficient -- you only get 70% of the energy back that you put in to turn water into 2H2+O2. That's a LOSER if you ask me. You still haven't addressed my previous point: If it worked we'd see thousands of these cars made by real engineers, not backyard hack scammers.
@MetGuy9966 its called electrolysis.,.. splitting hydrogen and oxygen from water.. turns out when you burn it, it always comes back as the same ammount of water.. there's a few other process's but electolysis is the most effecient.. comparing how much energy to refine 1 gallon of gasoline from oil = 6kw (6000 watts)
and a gallon of hydroxy = 280 watts, why would you take it from methane, water is the most massive source of hydrogen in the world..
Well, I agree with your second post about the theoretical Perpetual Motion machine. It might run if you can eliminate all friction. But you could NEVER take advantage of that energy. In the Real World when energy is converted from one form to another there is some loss. And electrolysis is very inefficient. That means there's a LOSS in the system that can't be used to move the car.
@Me102288 LOL An engine like that would be impossible to use. "notta" is right. So many of these ideas fall flat when hit by cold, hard reality. HHO cars are just like that. Maybe some gullible people will buy into it. But serious folks see through the scam.
@MetGuy9966 hydrogen alone is more explosive, and internal Combustion engine runs on flameable gasoline...
truth is combustion engines run on almost anything explosive enough.. well hydrogen is 9x faster burning then gasoline, which means.... BMW beat us to it with theyre BMW Hydrogen 7 :-\
its the same 7 series line, But the internal combustion engine in it is running on hydrogen with 0% gasoline :-\ its liqiud hydrogen tank.. the dif? making it on demand is only one step away
If you understand conservation of energy you'll know that anytime you convert energy from one type to another there is some loss. When this device dissociates water it takes more energy out of the system. The alternator drags harder on the belt to provide the amps. Sure, if you eliminate something else, like a sound system, or AC, you'll get better mileage. But it simply takes MORE energy to 2H2O -> H2+2O2 than when it goes back to H2+2O2->H2O.
@aubreyholman What does that matter? You can't retort with logic or facts, so you cast dispersions on me personally? Weak. Think of this HHO thing this way. Before starting the engine the only source of energy is in that tank of gas. The water does not add any energy to the system. It would be a simple thing for these scammers to submit their vehicle to third-party auditors for evaluation. Have they done that? No.
@MetGuy9966 hmm ok, think of adding pure oxygen into a gasoline mixture, do you understand combustion? it would accelerate the burning of the gasoline. We all know all of the gasoline doesn't burn thus nasty emmision's. We know hydrogen burning's only emmision is WATER.. The engine is producing more then enough power from the alternater to split water (ELECTROLYSIS) into both hydrogen and oxygen.
Think about it. BMW Hydrogen 7 runs on 100% HYDROGEN .. without any accelerent (oxygen)
@Me102288 Your condescending tone does nothing to advance your point of view. If it was really cheaper to run cars on hydrogen we'd see more of them. A good way drive electrolysis is using nuclear power. France makes about 75% of its electrical energy with nukes -- and they have world-class engineers there, too. They would LOVE to manufacture vehicles that run on hydrogen, but why don't they? It doesn't work! Hydrogen is inefficient to make, difficult to contain, tough to transfer.
@MetGuy9966 LOL you think it doesnt work? you know pump gasoline is only 89 "octane" and if it was any higher it would self detonate under compression.
Hydrogen is 130 octane.. think about it hard now, if an internal combustion engine runs on explosive fuels, and hydrogen is more explosive then gas (by 9x in fact) why is it do you think one could not replace the other.
I've had engines that ran off propane, natural gas, nitromethonal (alcohol base fuel) etc.
@Me102288 I never said HHO doesn't work. It's just not efficient enough to be practical. All those fuels can run an engine, but a real engineer will do a "beginning to end" analysis of the actual costs with the fuel, including long term maintenance.
@MetGuy9966 hint, running cars on hydrogen = no gasoline, average gas tank costs $120 to fill.. if you drive a lot, Every WEEK, thats a lot of money.. you think?
In the end run, if you could make gasoline on demand you would save money
we can make hydrogen... hydrogen is 130 octane, gasoline is typically 90 ... dop you understand Internal COMBUSTION engines run on explosive fuels? and do you reallize 130 "octane is more explosive then 90 octane which isnt explosive, its only flammable :-\
@Me102288 $120? My van fills up for half that. Of course gas is expensive. Get your mind around this fact: Making and using hydrogen by electrolysis is at best 70% efficient. That means you only get back 70% of the energy back that you had to put in to make it. The efficiency numbers you quote for gasoline are based on the total energy in the gasoline. The gasoline engine only makes use of 40% of the available energy in the gasoline. Please get your facts straight.
@Me102288 Octane rating has NOTHING to do with efficiency of a fuel. It's simply a measure of the capacity of a fuel to self ignite. High octane does NOT mean a fuel is stronger or cleaner or better for all cars. Low octane is actually better for most engines. The fuel burns slower, and the engine can take better advantage of the expansion.
@MetGuy9966 really the octane rating of fuel is a measure of combustabilty... you'd note drag racing cars use the highest octane fuel they can to get the most power out of a combustion engine they can for that 1/4 mile.
I dont think you get what I meant, 130 octane fuel replacing 89 octane fuel = you need 1/3 of 130 octane fuel to run the same engine at the same horsepower rating.. do you understand? low octane = ITS FLAMMABLE and inefficient at burning, =gasoline.. hydrogen burns 9x faster.
@Me102288 Octane rating has nothing to do with energy per volume of the fuel. Diesel fuel burns slower than gasoline, and has far more energy than gas. High octane might be good for some high performance engines, but for most uses it rather useless, including a normal car. I'm not knocking hydrogen as a fuel about octane rating. It's just inefficient as an energy source, except for some exotic applications. It just takes more energy to make by electrolysis than you can get out in a vehicle.
@Me102288 BTW, your understanding of combustion is apparently lacking. Oxygen is a necessary part of the equation. "...runs on 100% HYDROGEN" is impossible and shows your lack of basic knowledge of chemistry. Start with the Wikipedia article on Hydrogen and continue to Hydrogen Economy.
@MetGuy9966 your understanding of the oil companys trying to keep they're 100 billion dollar business pumping gasoline for whatever they can MAKE people pay for it. You honestly think they want to lose all that income? dunno about you kid, but I'd kill somebody trying to "kick" me outta business, and they got the money and power to do it. This technology is 300 years old.
chemistry? ok hydrogen is the highest btu and octane fuel on the planet, its ONLY emission when burnt is WATER.
@MetGuy9966 ps, I know that you require oxygen, you knowI meant 100% hydrogen in comparison to 100% gasoline....and besides that electrolysis splits water, 2 parts hydrogen one part Oxygen.. Now, do you think this is hydrogen on demand or HYDROXY... on demand. I'm sorry I didn't tell ya before, I hate the people that state "run your car on water" its like saying "run your car on unrefined crude oil" anyway, nasa has used hydrogen as a fuel for years.. (liquid H2 tanks on the shuttle)
@Me102288 OK, we're not too far different in our opinions, then. Sure, some systems run on hydrogen. It's just not the most efficient way to move a vehicle. Didya hear about the plan to use nuclear reactor to drive a rocket?
@MetGuy9966 there is no conversion, do you uderstand how they waste 6kw to refine 1 gallon of gasoline from oil? Yes, I did research and even I thought it was better effeciency then that...
Takes 3 minutes and 280 watts to split the hydrogen and oxygen from water.
Yes a standard alternator drags under a heavy load, 12volts at 5 to 10 amps isnt a heavy load..Wanna see heavy load, look at those BOOM cars with the 1000watt f'in amplifiers and the biggest speakers they can fit..
Sorry, omfg. You're not thinking right on this issue. Think of some basic Physics.
This video shows extra equipment installed in a vehicle that has gasoline as the ONLY source of energy. Burning gas to make hydrogen, then burning that hydrogen is a net LOSS of energy compared to using the gasoline alone.
I believe this equipment is a scam to get money from the gullible.
@MetGuy9966 You aren't using gas to make hydrogen. You are using your system's electrical system. The alternator is constantly putting out electricity regardless of what you have installed in your vehicle. You are just using that output to create a state of electrolysis. It CAN work, if done correctly. You can buy a welder that runs completely off this process so it's not impossible.
@Chickenflossiphy Maybe you believe in the perpetual motion machine, too. How much physics did you take in school?
The alternator is driven by the engine which is powered by GAS. Any electrical power generated is a result of burning gas. The water doesn't provide energy to the system.
The welder works because it's plugged into an electrical outlet. I know the process works. It just can't produce more energy than what comes out of the outlet for the welder, or what's in the gas tank.
@MetGuy9966 I'm not saying your are breaking laws of conservation of energy. I am simply saying the vehicles electrical system already produces extra amounts of electricity to power your accessories. Rather than putting that ALREADY PRESENT energy into something like an AMP for your 12" Kickers or a power inverter for your laptop. You are using it instead to power a device to create a gas useful during the combustion process.
@MetGuy9966 Also, Perpetual Motion would be possible in a zero friction atmosphere, but would always require the initial "push" and would be a completely pointless thing to achieve as it could never be used except maybe to watch it spin. You could power it from Zero Point Energy in a vacuum creating perpetual movement on a nano scale through the constant transfer of energy, but it's always just that, a transfer of energy. So no I don't believe in it or any practicality of it's uses.
@Chickenflossiphy its been done in a vacuum with permanent magnet bearing, 0 friction from magnets 0 friction from air. mind you perpetual motion is useless, because theys no output whatsoever, 0 torque, 0 horsepower :-( Still working on hydrogen in combustion engine but BMW beat me to it, BMW hydrogen 7 uses hydrogen instead of gasole :-\ not sure I"d like driving around in a hydrogen bomb (kidding its liquid hydrogen) uno problemo,no gas stations for 3000 miles.
@MetGuy9966 Sorry, one last thing. Keep your mind open. This could go somewhere someday and I'm not saying it will. I do understand the laws of nature, I am not a stupid individual. The goal is harnessing clean, cheap energy. With a combustible gas on demand that is possible. You could also have a series of batteries all hooked to solar panels that charge while you aren't using the system. Then when you get in you can use that system to create Hydrogen and save a little.
@forfunmx now divide that by 9 because hydrogen alone is 130 octane, puts out 4x the energy then gasoline..
water doesnt explode, but the hydrogen in it does...
second a vehicles engine displacement does NOT tell you the ammount of fuel it uses, it does tell you the volume of space inside all of the cylinders.. to that calculation you'd use 2000 litres of gasoline every 2000rpm? thats 528 GALLONS of fuel. A Jet engine might use that in one hour,,
Because there are non, i fell for this hoax like other thousands, after two weeks of reaserch and having installed a 3ltr per min hho reactor i have no improvement in mileage or performance.
Im only thkfull because i didnt buy any instruction from fraudulent sites...
Now,i have learned over 15 reasons why it will not work. I will only mention 2 for lack of space.
@Me102288 You're mixing your efficiencies A gasoline engine makes use of about 40% of the energy in the fuel. Most of the energy is unused as heat. Hydrogen returns, at best, 70% of the energy it takes to make it by electrolysis. So, if you spend a dollar to make hydrogen you can get 70 cents back to run your car. This might be a good trade off if you're NASA and you can't get to a filling station. But for a vehicle, it's a LOSER.
So, the HHO is produced from electricity from the battery. The battery is charged by the alternator. The alternator gets it's energy from the belt. The belt is moved by the engine. The engine is powered by GASOLINE! Amazing. There's no free lunch.
@MetGuy9966 Hydrogen combustion yeilds more energy than gasoline. It is "more efficient" so to speak just like Diesel is more efficient than gasoline. Also the best solution is to have it connected (if you got room) to a battery which you fill up with an alternative and cheaper energy source. According to wikipedia it's 20% more efficient.
My mind IS open. I'm a scientist. But I'm not gullible. Think of it this way. If there was really something to this some engineers would be making MILLIONS of dollars on it. The best the HHO scammers can do is some t-shirted hick posting it on YouTube. There are plenty of highly qualified engineers who could make this work for real... if it were possible. Have them prove it to a group of auto specialists. Until this happens I'll be a skeptic, not one of the dupes.
MetGuy9966 9 months ago
@MetGuy9966 in relation we know the BMW Hydrogen 7 runs on 100% hydrogen from a liquid hydrogen tank
fact: adding an accelerent to fuel makes it more effiecient burning
fact: hydrogen burns 9x faster the gasoline and is in fact the highest effecient fuel.
fact: Electrolysis produces 2 parts hydrogen 1 part oxygen by spliting water with electricity
fact: HHO devices are exactly that, electrolysis producing the most effecient fuel on the planet.
side fact, burning hydrogen produces water :-\
Me102288 7 months ago
@Me102288 My point is "How do you make the hydrogen?" That BMW's hydrogen has to come from somewhere. Most industrial hydrogen is created from heating methane -- far more efficient than electrolysis. Electrolysis is at best 70% efficient -- you only get 70% of the energy back that you put in to turn water into 2H2+O2. That's a LOSER if you ask me. You still haven't addressed my previous point: If it worked we'd see thousands of these cars made by real engineers, not backyard hack scammers.
MetGuy9966 7 months ago
@MetGuy9966 its called electrolysis.,.. splitting hydrogen and oxygen from water.. turns out when you burn it, it always comes back as the same ammount of water.. there's a few other process's but electolysis is the most effecient.. comparing how much energy to refine 1 gallon of gasoline from oil = 6kw (6000 watts)
and a gallon of hydroxy = 280 watts, why would you take it from methane, water is the most massive source of hydrogen in the world..
Me102288 7 months ago
Well, I agree with your second post about the theoretical Perpetual Motion machine. It might run if you can eliminate all friction. But you could NEVER take advantage of that energy. In the Real World when energy is converted from one form to another there is some loss. And electrolysis is very inefficient. That means there's a LOSS in the system that can't be used to move the car.
MetGuy9966 9 months ago
@MetGuy9966 permanent magnet bearings, no friction, no gravity, no air, no friction.. would that work?
yes its been done in space but as for useable output, "BUZZER" notta, zippo, none :-(
Me102288 7 months ago
@Me102288 LOL An engine like that would be impossible to use. "notta" is right. So many of these ideas fall flat when hit by cold, hard reality. HHO cars are just like that. Maybe some gullible people will buy into it. But serious folks see through the scam.
MetGuy9966 7 months ago
@MetGuy9966 hydrogen alone is more explosive, and internal Combustion engine runs on flameable gasoline...
truth is combustion engines run on almost anything explosive enough.. well hydrogen is 9x faster burning then gasoline, which means.... BMW beat us to it with theyre BMW Hydrogen 7 :-\
its the same 7 series line, But the internal combustion engine in it is running on hydrogen with 0% gasoline :-\ its liqiud hydrogen tank.. the dif? making it on demand is only one step away
Me102288 7 months ago
If you understand conservation of energy you'll know that anytime you convert energy from one type to another there is some loss. When this device dissociates water it takes more energy out of the system. The alternator drags harder on the belt to provide the amps. Sure, if you eliminate something else, like a sound system, or AC, you'll get better mileage. But it simply takes MORE energy to 2H2O -> H2+2O2 than when it goes back to H2+2O2->H2O.
MetGuy9966 9 months ago
@MetGuy9966 How come you don't show your face on your profile? Hmmm... I always get suspicious about Tube Ghosts.
aubreyholman 8 months ago
@aubreyholman What does that matter? You can't retort with logic or facts, so you cast dispersions on me personally? Weak. Think of this HHO thing this way. Before starting the engine the only source of energy is in that tank of gas. The water does not add any energy to the system. It would be a simple thing for these scammers to submit their vehicle to third-party auditors for evaluation. Have they done that? No.
MetGuy9966 8 months ago
@MetGuy9966 hmm ok, think of adding pure oxygen into a gasoline mixture, do you understand combustion? it would accelerate the burning of the gasoline. We all know all of the gasoline doesn't burn thus nasty emmision's. We know hydrogen burning's only emmision is WATER.. The engine is producing more then enough power from the alternater to split water (ELECTROLYSIS) into both hydrogen and oxygen.
Think about it. BMW Hydrogen 7 runs on 100% HYDROGEN .. without any accelerent (oxygen)
Me102288 7 months ago
@Me102288 Your condescending tone does nothing to advance your point of view. If it was really cheaper to run cars on hydrogen we'd see more of them. A good way drive electrolysis is using nuclear power. France makes about 75% of its electrical energy with nukes -- and they have world-class engineers there, too. They would LOVE to manufacture vehicles that run on hydrogen, but why don't they? It doesn't work! Hydrogen is inefficient to make, difficult to contain, tough to transfer.
MetGuy9966 7 months ago
@MetGuy9966 LOL you think it doesnt work? you know pump gasoline is only 89 "octane" and if it was any higher it would self detonate under compression.
Hydrogen is 130 octane.. think about it hard now, if an internal combustion engine runs on explosive fuels, and hydrogen is more explosive then gas (by 9x in fact) why is it do you think one could not replace the other.
I've had engines that ran off propane, natural gas, nitromethonal (alcohol base fuel) etc.
BMW HYDROGEN 7 runs on hydrogen
Me102288 7 months ago
@Me102288 I never said HHO doesn't work. It's just not efficient enough to be practical. All those fuels can run an engine, but a real engineer will do a "beginning to end" analysis of the actual costs with the fuel, including long term maintenance.
MetGuy9966 7 months ago
@MetGuy9966 hint, running cars on hydrogen = no gasoline, average gas tank costs $120 to fill.. if you drive a lot, Every WEEK, thats a lot of money.. you think?
In the end run, if you could make gasoline on demand you would save money
we can make hydrogen... hydrogen is 130 octane, gasoline is typically 90 ... dop you understand Internal COMBUSTION engines run on explosive fuels? and do you reallize 130 "octane is more explosive then 90 octane which isnt explosive, its only flammable :-\
Me102288 7 months ago
@Me102288 $120? My van fills up for half that. Of course gas is expensive. Get your mind around this fact: Making and using hydrogen by electrolysis is at best 70% efficient. That means you only get back 70% of the energy back that you had to put in to make it. The efficiency numbers you quote for gasoline are based on the total energy in the gasoline. The gasoline engine only makes use of 40% of the available energy in the gasoline. Please get your facts straight.
MetGuy9966 7 months ago
@Me102288 Octane rating has NOTHING to do with efficiency of a fuel. It's simply a measure of the capacity of a fuel to self ignite. High octane does NOT mean a fuel is stronger or cleaner or better for all cars. Low octane is actually better for most engines. The fuel burns slower, and the engine can take better advantage of the expansion.
MetGuy9966 7 months ago
@MetGuy9966 really the octane rating of fuel is a measure of combustabilty... you'd note drag racing cars use the highest octane fuel they can to get the most power out of a combustion engine they can for that 1/4 mile.
I dont think you get what I meant, 130 octane fuel replacing 89 octane fuel = you need 1/3 of 130 octane fuel to run the same engine at the same horsepower rating.. do you understand? low octane = ITS FLAMMABLE and inefficient at burning, =gasoline.. hydrogen burns 9x faster.
Me102288 7 months ago
@Me102288 Octane rating has nothing to do with energy per volume of the fuel. Diesel fuel burns slower than gasoline, and has far more energy than gas. High octane might be good for some high performance engines, but for most uses it rather useless, including a normal car. I'm not knocking hydrogen as a fuel about octane rating. It's just inefficient as an energy source, except for some exotic applications. It just takes more energy to make by electrolysis than you can get out in a vehicle.
MetGuy9966 7 months ago
@Me102288 BTW, your understanding of combustion is apparently lacking. Oxygen is a necessary part of the equation. "...runs on 100% HYDROGEN" is impossible and shows your lack of basic knowledge of chemistry. Start with the Wikipedia article on Hydrogen and continue to Hydrogen Economy.
MetGuy9966 7 months ago
@MetGuy9966 your understanding of the oil companys trying to keep they're 100 billion dollar business pumping gasoline for whatever they can MAKE people pay for it. You honestly think they want to lose all that income? dunno about you kid, but I'd kill somebody trying to "kick" me outta business, and they got the money and power to do it. This technology is 300 years old.
chemistry? ok hydrogen is the highest btu and octane fuel on the planet, its ONLY emission when burnt is WATER.
Me102288 7 months ago
@MetGuy9966 ps, I know that you require oxygen, you knowI meant 100% hydrogen in comparison to 100% gasoline....and besides that electrolysis splits water, 2 parts hydrogen one part Oxygen.. Now, do you think this is hydrogen on demand or HYDROXY... on demand. I'm sorry I didn't tell ya before, I hate the people that state "run your car on water" its like saying "run your car on unrefined crude oil" anyway, nasa has used hydrogen as a fuel for years.. (liquid H2 tanks on the shuttle)
Me102288 7 months ago
@Me102288 OK, we're not too far different in our opinions, then. Sure, some systems run on hydrogen. It's just not the most efficient way to move a vehicle. Didya hear about the plan to use nuclear reactor to drive a rocket?
MetGuy9966 7 months ago
@MetGuy9966 there is no conversion, do you uderstand how they waste 6kw to refine 1 gallon of gasoline from oil? Yes, I did research and even I thought it was better effeciency then that...
Takes 3 minutes and 280 watts to split the hydrogen and oxygen from water.
Yes a standard alternator drags under a heavy load, 12volts at 5 to 10 amps isnt a heavy load..Wanna see heavy load, look at those BOOM cars with the 1000watt f'in amplifiers and the biggest speakers they can fit..
Me102288 7 months ago
This is a scam, forget about getting better mileage using HHO.
TheAngryoldfart 1 year ago
@TheAngryoldfart you just need water i don't give a fuck for the mileage its still a prototype
daswada9 11 months ago
Sorry, omfg. You're not thinking right on this issue. Think of some basic Physics.
This video shows extra equipment installed in a vehicle that has gasoline as the ONLY source of energy. Burning gas to make hydrogen, then burning that hydrogen is a net LOSS of energy compared to using the gasoline alone.
I believe this equipment is a scam to get money from the gullible.
MetGuy9966 1 year ago
@MetGuy9966 You aren't using gas to make hydrogen. You are using your system's electrical system. The alternator is constantly putting out electricity regardless of what you have installed in your vehicle. You are just using that output to create a state of electrolysis. It CAN work, if done correctly. You can buy a welder that runs completely off this process so it's not impossible.
Chickenflossiphy 9 months ago
@Chickenflossiphy Maybe you believe in the perpetual motion machine, too. How much physics did you take in school?
The alternator is driven by the engine which is powered by GAS. Any electrical power generated is a result of burning gas. The water doesn't provide energy to the system.
The welder works because it's plugged into an electrical outlet. I know the process works. It just can't produce more energy than what comes out of the outlet for the welder, or what's in the gas tank.
MetGuy9966 9 months ago
@MetGuy9966 I'm not saying your are breaking laws of conservation of energy. I am simply saying the vehicles electrical system already produces extra amounts of electricity to power your accessories. Rather than putting that ALREADY PRESENT energy into something like an AMP for your 12" Kickers or a power inverter for your laptop. You are using it instead to power a device to create a gas useful during the combustion process.
Chickenflossiphy 9 months ago
@MetGuy9966 Also, Perpetual Motion would be possible in a zero friction atmosphere, but would always require the initial "push" and would be a completely pointless thing to achieve as it could never be used except maybe to watch it spin. You could power it from Zero Point Energy in a vacuum creating perpetual movement on a nano scale through the constant transfer of energy, but it's always just that, a transfer of energy. So no I don't believe in it or any practicality of it's uses.
Chickenflossiphy 9 months ago
@Chickenflossiphy its been done in a vacuum with permanent magnet bearing, 0 friction from magnets 0 friction from air. mind you perpetual motion is useless, because theys no output whatsoever, 0 torque, 0 horsepower :-( Still working on hydrogen in combustion engine but BMW beat me to it, BMW hydrogen 7 uses hydrogen instead of gasole :-\ not sure I"d like driving around in a hydrogen bomb (kidding its liquid hydrogen) uno problemo,no gas stations for 3000 miles.
Me102288 7 months ago
@MetGuy9966 Sorry, one last thing. Keep your mind open. This could go somewhere someday and I'm not saying it will. I do understand the laws of nature, I am not a stupid individual. The goal is harnessing clean, cheap energy. With a combustible gas on demand that is possible. You could also have a series of batteries all hooked to solar panels that charge while you aren't using the system. Then when you get in you can use that system to create Hydrogen and save a little.
Chickenflossiphy 9 months ago
1) 4cil 2ltr engine uses 2,000 ltrs of air per minuteat 2000rpm
2ltrs x 2000rpms / 2 = 2000ltrs of air per min
3 or 6 ltrs per min of hho wont do s...
2) hho alone inside an engine contracts (implodes) into h2o (water) doesnt explode like gas therefore 4 stroke engines will not work on hho alone
SPREAD THE WORD!!
if you want to know more just let me know
forfunmx 2 years ago
@forfunmx now divide that by 9 because hydrogen alone is 130 octane, puts out 4x the energy then gasoline..
water doesnt explode, but the hydrogen in it does...
second a vehicles engine displacement does NOT tell you the ammount of fuel it uses, it does tell you the volume of space inside all of the cylinders.. to that calculation you'd use 2000 litres of gasoline every 2000rpm? thats 528 GALLONS of fuel. A Jet engine might use that in one hour,,
Me102288 7 months ago
CAN U FIND ANY VIDS WITH PROVEN RESULTS? NO
Because there are non, i fell for this hoax like other thousands, after two weeks of reaserch and having installed a 3ltr per min hho reactor i have no improvement in mileage or performance.
Im only thkfull because i didnt buy any instruction from fraudulent sites...
Now,i have learned over 15 reasons why it will not work. I will only mention 2 for lack of space.
if u want to know more let me know...
forfunmx 2 years ago
@forfunmx BMW Hydrogen 7 same internal combiustion engine in all bmw's 7 series.. cept the hydrogen 7 runs on hydrogen without ANY gasoline.
You might want to check the effeciencys of fuels, might be suprised gasoline is only 35 to 45 % at best...sad
considering hydrgen is near 80%.. do you no why all the nasty chemicals come outta exaust from gasoline running engines is mostly unburnt fuel?
I know the fraudelent sites everywhere yet I learned from science and places like NASA.
Me102288 7 months ago
@Me102288 You're mixing your efficiencies A gasoline engine makes use of about 40% of the energy in the fuel. Most of the energy is unused as heat. Hydrogen returns, at best, 70% of the energy it takes to make it by electrolysis. So, if you spend a dollar to make hydrogen you can get 70 cents back to run your car. This might be a good trade off if you're NASA and you can't get to a filling station. But for a vehicle, it's a LOSER.
MetGuy9966 7 months ago
its just to give you better mileage not replace gas lol
ganjaking187 2 years ago
@ganjaking187 BMW Hydrogen 7 < replace's gas :-)
Me102288 7 months ago
Another attempt at breaking the laws of thermodynamics. What a complete and utter waste of energy (with and without pun).
a1mint 2 years ago
So, the HHO is produced from electricity from the battery. The battery is charged by the alternator. The alternator gets it's energy from the belt. The belt is moved by the engine. The engine is powered by GASOLINE! Amazing. There's no free lunch.
MetGuy9966 2 years ago
@MetGuy9966 Hydrogen combustion yeilds more energy than gasoline. It is "more efficient" so to speak just like Diesel is more efficient than gasoline. Also the best solution is to have it connected (if you got room) to a battery which you fill up with an alternative and cheaper energy source. According to wikipedia it's 20% more efficient.
omfg4000 1 year ago