HHO Generator - Save Gas

oh man I hope you didnt spend $170 bucks on that stuff...

like the $1.59 stainless steel wall plates
http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/wcs...3&productId=100186377&N=10000003+90076+500846

or the $0.79 plastic check valve
http://www.usplastic.com/catalog/va...ory_name=45&product_id=15641&variant_id=64048

you could have researched and probably gotten the same equipment for 1/3 the cost....

 

i was in hopes that ...you built one ...and were posting the Dyno results...

if you will not build one to prove it...Don't work...then why crack on Bob for wanting to build one to see if it...Does...
this is like any other...Maverick adventure...let's get together and help him build the best one that can be built. then we will know...if it works or not.
this thread is like ..."did- didn't"...

we can start with your suggestion for the best price on some of the parts.

http://www.usplastic.com/catalog/var...riant_id=64048


http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/wcs/...3+90076+500846

...:Handshake...

 

Markso - No, I spent about $20 of the plates and valve that I couldn't find locally.

As for the websites, yeah I agree. But, other than Smack Boosters for their plans, I'm gettin my info from people that are already doing this. Again, we'll see...

As for not getting accurate test results with me driving, I already drive for good fuel economy. If I could sneak it onto someone elses car I would... But everyone I know has new cars with no room under the hood. LOL!

My test vehicle is as good as I'm going to get. Again, it's got a good baseline.

Thanks for the support 71'

 

you are welcome Bob...
i'm here to i mean...help...
my thinking is..."if you it long enough something will rise to the top"...

...now le't "get-er-done" and how may i help?

...:Handshake...

 

Looks like lots of posts since last nite when I went to work..

Stirring the pot either 1) Gets someone to produce something 2) makes the "stink" float

 

you are correct....(#2) makes the "stink" float.

...

 

apparently Frank is into speed reading...
see what happens when I go to work....

In my last post you quoted I merely hoped that he didn't spend that much money on something that can easily be gotten locally in case it did not produce the desired results.:16suspect.....
That and I find it really scary that they are using a $.79 plastic check valve to contain an ignition of the "same stuff" the Hindenburg was filled with.

In todays day and age with the $4.07 gas (just filled up here) I say go for it if it shows a noticable improvement then maybe we will all be running one by this time next year

 

Deuterium doesn't have two protons - it has one proton and one neutron.
You need a nuclear reactor to add the neutron to hydrogen or a fusion reactor which will yield more helium than deuterium.
Instead of believing everything I read I try to research things on my own. I learn a lot from ".EDU" sites.
70000 volts won't separate the components - that takes a nuclear reaction (why the use it to make plutonium)

 

The purpose of 1980s water injection was to lower combustion temperatures and reduce detonation using the crappy gas and poorly designed emissions motors of the day. It was not intended to save fuel costs, other than it sometimes allowed you to advance the ignition timing some.

 

I think we need a larger sample size of people using these to reach an accurrate conclusion. He should build one for each of us. :Handshake

 

At first I was of the mind that this was a completely ridiculous concept. It simply takes more energy to separate the water by electrolysis than you get back by burning the hydrogen. Then I read an excerpt from this article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_fuel_enhancement It's not the burning of the hydrogen that increases fuel economy in a hydrogen injection system... it's the ability to run a leaner air-fuel-ratio. The biggest improvement is seen under idle conditions. Let us know how it works out.