Thread: Hho Gas Is It True

Tweet

I have been reading a lot about alternate Fuels for the automobile.Is HHO the same as a Hydrogen fuel cell? I see ads that want to sell you the manual on how to convert your car to the HHO system.

Am I going for a ride if I order this manual? I know there are water systems being used to increase performance,but this HHO thing seems to be for increasing mileage.

Sitting in Austin with time on my hands.

Lets see, hho is h2o which is water wich does not burn in its normal states. So therefore, they must be talking about steam engines

If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is!!!! Some of the old sayings just never go out of date......

I dunno about when they actually made it profitable to produce hydrogen fuel. Last i heard they didn't. A guy I know who has old T-Birds worked for a big think tank outfit that was attempting, as of last year, to work out feasible ways to scientifically produce commercially viable hydrogen fuel.

I say commercially viable because although, yeah we can produce hydrogen fuel to run vehicles, it took $1.10 worth of energy to produce $1.00 of fuel! It is not like refining petroleum.

So I really don't know why there is this happiness for a fuel that losses money to produce. Don't we have a enough governnment waste?

Sure they may have some breakthrough that will cut production cost but who knows when.

Originally Posted by 61bone

Lets see, hho is h2o which is water wich does not burn in its normal states. So therefore, they must be talking about steam engines

H2O is water, HHO represents the elemental constituents of water mixed to produce a highly combustible and clean gas... same stuff used for the space shuttle. I think the apparatus in the film simply separates the gases (two parts H2 to one part O2) and recombines them at the torch, while some of the torches use an additional spark at the nozzle to separate the H and O molecules for a hotter flame when they recombine.

The controversy to all this is that this is NOT free energy as many would try to lead us to believe... it takes more energy to separate water into its constituent elements via electrolysis than can be produced by combustion of the gases.... mother nature is funny about not giving out free lunches.

To learn more about the technology look here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HHO

Two cents,

-Chris

Chris,I checked that site out earlier.It appears that that this HHO thing is not something that just came up.It did appear looking at the patents (some pretty current)that some Industries are taking a second look at the theory.

Lord knows we need something to replace this fuel crunch we are in. I can't afford to drive the coupe around much as I am on fixed income and It only get's 8 MPG at best.

What he was doing was fractioning the water and hydrogen. Don't know for sure but I think he was combining electrolysis with electrically exciting the molecules to their critical frequency; this to me in theory might amplify the fractioning process.

Another way to harvest hydrogen is using an electric arc to fraction the molecules. This is usually done with a generator so the process is not free by any means.

Unless of course you maybe used wind or ocean currents or waves as the energy source for your generator. Hmm ...

Kitz

Originally Posted by kitz

What he was doing was fractioning the water and hydrogen. Don't know for sure but I think he was combining electrolysis with electrically exciting the molecules to their critical frequency; this to me in theory might amplify the fractioning process.

Another way to harvest hydrogen is using an electric arc to fraction the molecules. This is usually done with a generator so the process is not free by any means.

Unless of course you maybe used wind or ocean currents or waves as the energy source for your generator. Hmm ...

Kitz

I've been thinking about this one quite a few years... geothermal or hydroelectric (or as you suggest wind or ocean currents) to generate the electricity to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen.... But then you have to transport and handle these highly volatile gases (imagine millions of Hindenburgs on the highway ), while it would be much safer to deal with the water directly (i.e. split it as you use it)...

I guess it comes down to whether you can generate enough energy to split hydrogen and oxygen using a self driven alternator as Denny suggested... I may be wrong but I'm pretty sure the laws of nature (e.g. thermodynamics) will not allow this... at best you could almost generate enough combustion energy to drive the alternator to make almost enough fuel to keep generating the fuel.

Anyhow, there was a section I overlooked in the wiki that deals with using HHO to make gasoline/diesel engines run more efficiently by allowing a leaner afr... this appears to be practical and could be what we'll see for the next hybrids(?)

Neat stuff, hopefully we can arrive at a decent solution in the near future... especially to support abundant HP! What about the "Mr. Fusion" from Back to the Future

-Chris

Don wrote:
QUOTE]Lord knows we need something to replace this fuel crunch we are in. I can't afford to drive the coupe around much as I am on fixed income and It only get's 8 MPG at best[/QUOTE]

When it comes to experimental motion creators particularly those that can have explosive results, I might just attempt to put a square rigged mast and sail on my roof for motoring down the highway. Not to good on windless days, and tacking could be a bitch, if not on an multi-lane interstate, but certainly better than singeing the hair on my butty-butt-butt with something a little too radiical and a whole lot unsafe.


Oh, and Don, it might be time to put add FI, and a OD trans. That should give you a little boost in the mpg. If you already got those parts, then you need to find out why you ain't averaging about 20 mpg.

Bob,I have the 700R4 transmission,750 cfm holley,tires are 27 in . Dia.,and 3:70 rear end posi.
The car runs really well and shows no sign of running to rich.I haven't had any experience with FI and would not know what brand is better over the other.I like the 20 mpg vs 8 mpg.though.

Are you running FI?

I agree with you, Denny; they're missing the point, I think. Do you remember the Fish/Kendig VV carb, back in the late fifties/early sixties? It was proven to be very effective, and in so being, threatened the profitability of the oil companies - it more or less vanished, as did it's inventors; and so it has gone with anything that threatens the moneymaking power of a select group in this world. To all of you who scoff, I suggest that you google "Suppressed Technologies"; some interesting and alarming stuff, there. Or, perhaps, invent some remarkably efficient and highly technologically advanced fuel or energy saving device that would seriously change the status quo, and see what happens - got the guts? I don't.

Ya know what??? I doubt better fuel economy would do a thing to resolve any of the present problems....... They'd just rob the public blind on something else.
I don't go in much for all the conspiracy theory stuff, but I do know for a fact that supply and demand economics can and are be manipulated and that big business and big government are hand in hand.... Probably gone too far to change anything now and it's a cinch the system won't ever do one dang thing to change itself... Guess I'm curious to see which happens first, a total collapse or a new revolution????? Should we have a poll, maybe?????

my truck only gets 8 mpg thats why i wanna stuff one of these new LS styled truck motor in my truck. arent the bellhousings the same? and i know the older ones werent drive by wire which is good!

There many sources of motive power that actually work. The guy in France that built a very reliable car powered by compressed air is better than hydrogen or any processed fuel! He is even trying to improve an on-board compressor that runs off of compressed air to compress more air in a near perpetual motion cycle. The tank for the storage air is partially filled as other air goes to run the engine.

Originally Posted by Twitch

There many sources of motive power that actually work. The guy in France that built a very reliable car powered by compressed air is better than hydrogen or any processed fuel! He is even trying to improve an on-board compressor that runs off of compressed air to compress more air in a near perpetual motion cycle. The tank for the storage air is partially filled as other air goes to run the engine.

It takes energy to compress air and it is not efficient as the heat created and released during the cycle is not conserved. IMO any belief in a perpetual motion machine is total BS; I have seen many that make claim and none that actually even come close. Physics is physics.

Kitz