I looked at that website some time ago and I didn’t think it was vary good. It didn’t appear to be written by a scientist or engineer. Of course Wikipedia always has the problem that someone can always edit what someone else writes.
No, the results are there, and the thermodynamic theory goes back to 1970 and before. See my post immediately above. Both consistently show a gain of only a few percent in diesels. Furthermore, I’ll posit that the gain in gasoline spark-ignition (SI) engines should be even less, though I can’t confirm this because after reading through some of the diesel reports I got bored and stopped looking. The reason is that at any given compression ratio, diesel (DI) engines are less efficient than SI engines. Diesel gains its efficiency through the much higher compression ratio. Further, the ignition phase in SI engines is already more efficient than in DI engines, so DI has more room for improvement. So, 3% in DI may translate to 1-2% in SI. Basically no real-world driver could measure the difference. I think that’s the real reason these haven’t been adopted by car manufacturers: for 1-2% they simply aren’t worth the hassle.
why not try it on something from THIS century? 
Water for Fuel = Medieval Alchemy.
Century 21 version.
I’d love to hear your results.
Go right ahead, bscar. The computerized oxygen sensor on your late-model car might give you a problem, though. :o
You’ll have to figure out for yourself where to insert the HHO tube, too. ;*
That’s why, as sderekh has acknowledged, “water for fuel” was an ill-advised title for this forum. The real topic is HHO-enhanced gasoline.
Only you can waste your time, MikeInNH. Only you can be constructive with it.
A message for the whole country from here in the Big Easy, my beloved city:
Make Levees Not War.
Be constructive not destructive.
See for yourself if HHO enhances the burn of gasoline.
Don’t piss on possibilities.
Be well.
Only you can waste your time, MikeInNH. Only you can be constructive with it.
If I spend 1 MINUTE working on it…it’s a waste of my time.
See for yourself if HHO enhances the burn of gasoline.
I will when you can show me a VERIFIABLE SCIENTIFIC STUDY that says it has a snow-ball-chance-in-h*ll of working.
Don’t piss on possibilities.
WHAT possibilities??? There is no evidence that it works…or has a chance of working. NONE. Why waste my time on something I believe is NOT going to work. After you fail at this…why not try Cold Fusion next?? There are potentially far more benefits. There’s no scientific evidence that it can work…but go ahead…that seems the way you like to approach a problem.
MikeInNH, stop living in your head and wake up to the world. DO something!
It’s a simple experiment. Take an old car with a carburetor. See how she runs. Take a rag and put it to the exhaust pipe. Notice dirty emissions. Turn off the car. Using the car battery, set up a simple water electrolyzer. Conduct the bubbling stream of HHO gas produced by the electrolyzer through a rubber tube to the base of the carburetor. Start the car. See how she runs. Compare. Check emissions with rag. Compare. Decide from the results whether to conduct further tests.
I’ll be doing this shortly. Clearly you won’t trust my results unless I say it failed. Conduct your own experiment.
I’ll be doing this shortly. Clearly you won’t trust my results unless I say it failed. Conduct your own experiment.
You call that a VALID experiment?? Sorry, but I don’t. But go ahead…Let us know how it works.
Why would I waste my time sharing results with someone who’ll only accept failure because he insists HHO-enhanced gasoline is the same as water for fuel, a known scientific impossibility? Wake up, get real, design, conduct and evaluate your own exper-r-riments, Dr. No.
This thread needs to disappear faster than a pack of smokes at an AA meeting!
You should never quote Wikipedia as a source if you want to be taken seriously. Honestly, it really makes you look bad to quote a source that can be changed on a whim and is not subject to verification of facts.
And of course you’ll be MATURE enough to tell everyone that didn’t work right???
I believe we can use the diatomic mass of nuclear fission to power the subatomic particles of unspent petrocarbonic energy in the catalytic converter by using the unturned carbeurator jets ONE turn counter, counter clockwise, every other thursday.
does anyone have any supporting ideas, thoughts or points of view to back up my theory?
thanks for your help, guidance and knowledge.
Jeremy, (my name too), you should look into the way Wikipedia is administered. It’s imperfect, but a useful resource.
You can’t believe everything you read anywhere. Anything in words is inexact. Experience is the closest you’ll get to knowing the truth.
A RAG STUFFED IN THE TAILPIPE to measure emissions??? Surely you jest!
I’ll just wait for my Mr. Fusion to arrive from Emmett Brown Enterprises, thanks.
You’re on your own, binky.
YES SIR ,the human body needs water for fuel.
and I repair cars daily,with the Fisher Price tools I had as a kid.
everyone on this site should FLAG your post to death.
I also use helium to fill my tires,you know lightens the load a little,and MAN the fuel milage ,whew! I never have to FILL up but once a year.