A friend of mine who wants to start a business building these contraptions for vehicles. Him and I installed one on my 1993 Ford F-150 300 cc straight six. Before installing the contraption, I only got good gas mileage if I drove 55 mph. When I drive at today’s speeds, I only get 12.3 MPG. With the contraption, I am getting 15.113 MPG without altering the O2 sensor. I will try disabling the O2 sensor next to see what my results will be.
You’re on the right track. Start your business and rake in the money. Your gadget need not actually live up to its claims for you to be successful. And if you yourself actually believe it works, then you can sell with a clear conscience.
A 300 cc straight six, eh? Nice.
Good luck with your scam. Sorry, i meant to say “contraption.”
April Fool’s. What a crock!
I’m quite literally dessicated with mortification. Could I have been wrong all along about these sca…earth shaking inventions?
Scam is right. Anybody who claims to be able to measure MPG to three decimal places is automatically wrong, in my ever so humble opinion. I wish people would learn Robert Heinlein’s formulation of the second law of Thermodynamics: TANSTAAFL - “There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch”. In this case, the best you could possibly hope for is to recoup all of the energy used to separate the water into H-OH when you burn it back to water. And since nothing is 100% efficient, you will get back less energy than you put in. Not to mention that a piston engine only uses the part of the burning energy that goes into expanding the gases, wasting much of the heat generated by the burning and further reducing the efficiency. Oh well.
After seeing the responses in “Water for Fuel” and seeing the responses to today’s topic I knew you nay sayers would show up. It is pointless to “discuss” anything with people who do not have one installed on their 15 year old gas guzzler and have been tracking both the “before” MPG control and the “after” MPG improvements. Install one on your fuel inefficient vehicle and see if you see a modest 2.8 MPG improvement like I did. If you don’t have one installed or are not studying a vehicle with one installed, you can’t possibly think I would take any of you nay sayers responses seriously. You nay sayers just sit back and continue to do nothing productive. The rest of us are moving forward.
I am here to talk to those who are interested in installing one and those that have one installed so that we can all help each other improve the contraption.
Whaa…??? You mean I’ve been badmouthing these devices for the past 10 years and they actually work ???
Oh, how I have wronged. I’m just going to prostrate myself in the fast lane of I95 for 30 minutes as repentence before signing up for one.
as cuba gooding said; ‘show me the money’
when you can document the results, so we can ALL SEE them. and have a blind comparison done, again documented; then show the results here so we can look for ourselves.
sorry, you ‘saying it is so’ doesn’t ‘make it so.’ i don’t mean to sound disrespectful, but you are going against a HUGE amount of past history and research. if you can show at least some proof then that would sway alot of skeptics (yes i am one too)
but hey, if you like it, by all means go ahead and use it.
some terms you should be acquainted with in your quest for acceptance:
blind test. double blind test. independent lab test. other accepted judgment groups approval(CR, Good housekeeping seal).
and thats for a start.
The second law of thermodynamics tells us that this loses energy: the engine turns the alternator which
generates electricity which splits water into hydrogen and oxygen (not hydrogen and hydrogen
oxide, which would yield even less energy), then it injects both into the fuel (probably at or just before
the carburetor), which produces a fuel that probably burns better but not as much better as the load
the device places on the engine through the alternator; every step results in a loss of
energy to heat.
Tanis Judique was a character in Sinclair Lewis’s ‘Babbitt’
How come it is that back yard DIYers by the hundreds can engineer, install, and use with success a product that thousands of automotive engineers, decades of work, and billions of dollars cannot.
Since you claim to be in the know, tell us what is going to happen when you disable the O2 sensor and I am not referring to this contraption in any way nor a Check Engine Light.
(Your truck must be in pretty sad shape to only get 12+ MPG. A neighbor lady whose Ford conversion van I used to service (she no longer owns it) had a 300 straight 6 with a lot more weight to pull/worse aerodynamics and she got about 15 MPG on that one.)
I chose the troubleshooting guide because this is the only means I have for making improvements to the contraption this website taught my friend to build to improve gas mileage. 12 volts is used to apply electricity to a solution in a jar, which causes a chemical reaction, instant bubbles. The bubbles are HHO. These bubbles rise to the top of the solution water level and escape into the top of the jar. The resulting gas (now richer with HHO) is sucked into my intake (after going through a one way check valve)via a vacuum hose. I have not detected any heat (using touch) from the bottle. The only heat I feel is from the engine. When my friend demonstrated it to me, it was outside of my truck and on his kitchen table. There was no heat. The engine is working no harder than if someone was to install any other automotive entertainment device designed to work on 12V DC.
I hope there are others out there that are using a version of this contraption so that we can compare notes through their own experiences.
I don’t normally respond to these posts but for some odd reason I feel compelled…
We made a similar device when I was about 10 years old using our old toy train transformer. We used the gas to make mischief. Even at 10 I could see the result of the process did not yield very much gas. See those small bubbles? Ever try measuring the volume of gas being produced? It’s easy to do, just fill a known size of bottle with the salt water solution and up end it over your electrode (I’ll leave it up to you to figure out which one is producing hydrogen). The gas will displace the water. Time the process (I hope you’re patient). What is your measured liters per minute being produced?
Now check your engine displacement. How many liters are displaced per minute at 2000 rpms? What is the ratio of your gas volume to the amount consumed by the engine?
The ratio of air to gasoline is preferred to be around 14:1. Is your hydrogen generation even approaching two orders of magnitude lower than that?
If you bother to do this exercise, the next step is to calculate the energy being added by the miniscule amount of hydrogen gas being introduced…