Crawdad

Todd - very cool. What was the approximate cost of the setup, off the top of your head? Can you give some more details about your particular setup?

tc

MISLEADING DATA ALERT!

It's not uncommon for the new Tacos to get 20+ MPG ... data seems fishy at best ...

Is that one tank to one tank? Should be an average of several tanks.

Both highway? Same load in the truck, tire pressure, etc? Winter gas/summer gas?

My point being, there's an awful lot of things, (one of which may indeed be the "terrorist cell") that could explain that mileage difference ...


P.S. Just had a thought ... If this idea REALLY worked so well, why don't we see them in PepBoys next to the "Tornado" and all the other gimmicky power/mileage improvers?

abecedarian

maybe it's possible that the right foot isn't pressing as hard as normal just to see how much mileage the kit gives.
but let's be optimistic.
and this is why I'd prefer chassis dyno tests over the highly variable real world conditions.

Crawdad

That is exactly why I'm so skeptical of the idea. If there was a way for a car to be super efficient at almost no cost and at no risk of harm to the consumer, one of the major motor companies would have jumped on it long ago. Especially now, with the EPA regulations increasing.

It also bothers me that I have not once seen empirical data on the subject from someone who claims to have built a successful model. Not even a simple spreadsheet showing a multi-tank average with and without the hydrogen cell added. All we have are some folks saying "Hey, I did it and it worked!" and then either disappearing or getting pissed off when asked to provide details/evidence/data. That, or we get long tangential arguments about the size of molecules, whether HHO/Brown Gas/whatever really exists. That part doesn't matter at this point! If it can be proven that a viable fuel that can replace or supplement gasoline and increase mileage can be made with water, electricity, and maybe an electrolyte, than all that is needed is the data to show that.

It's obvious that hydrogen is combustible, it's obvious that engines can run on/with hydrogen gas, and it's obvious that hydrogen gas is relatively simple to make.

There are millions to be made from a successful, safe electrolysis-based hydrogen fuel cell. Why has no one jumped on it? If it's easy enough for some average guy to make out of some wires, tubing, a plastic container, and a couple of valves, why hasn't it been done?


(this is the part where the people with tinfoil hats start talking about how the oil companies resort to dirty tactics to suppress these ideas)

abecedarian

Maybe not one of the big car companies, but at least a company like Holley, Edelbrock or Amway.
It bothers me that searching the Innerwebz for plans or schematics is pretty much an infinite list of "buy now" paypal or ebay links. If it worked, I'd be among the first to try spreading the info freely. I'd want the oil industry and car makers turned on end.
but not free- if you're using the alternator to generate electricity for electrolysis, you're consuming some other fuel to do so. The claims of increased mileage may be true, but what about the cost of operation?
It has been done apparently. It's only that no one is doing it in an empirical, scientific sort of way.
I'll keep an open mind about it, and even go so far as to assist in some of the research (from a suggestive yet antagonist position) but I will remain skeptical until I see someone explaining it backed up by thoroughly documented and verifiable evidence and I don't have to pay 99... no, 89... no, 69.00... no, 9.99... in order to see how.

And my offer is still up to host images and schematics for free.

Crawdad

Agreed, it AIN'T free, and that's why I don't think it is a viable option. You don't get something for nothing, there is a tradeoff somewhere.

I am skeptical, but I would absolutely love to eat my words.

abecedarian

Let's just hope the advocates are open minded enough to work with the skeptics.

Red3.slow

I have hope for this idea. While it may not prove to be a huge gain, or a way to power a car alone. But even if this increases mileage 2 or 3 miles per gallon would be a huge thing for at home engineering. Also might explain why this hasn't been picked up in mass production and placed as standard equipment with all new cars.

Adding water and having to worry about switching it on and off is just one more thing that a person buying a new car wont want to deal with to take their mileage from 17 to 19 mpg.


As for delivering the HHO gas to the motor, why not modify an EGR valve to act as a sort of electric cut off valve.

Wombosi

Whoops I guess my earlier post didn't stick to the wall. I got the unit all done except for the chip (got most of the resistors) to deal with the O2 sensor issue. 4 of us got together last night and helped each other work on our hydrogen boosters. Lots of Mountain Dew kept us working till 5:00 am.

Hooked up the unit to a mobile battery jumper and it bubbled pretty well.

My gas mileage as it is right now is decent. In-town driving I get around 17.5 and freeway (70mph) I get 23. So I'm hoping 3mpg increase would put me at a good 26mpg. Again that is just a hope.

Fink

I get over 20 city/hwy regularly with my '07.
Highest I have gotten was 24.5 hwy and 20.8 city.

Fink

abecedarian

I get about 18 around town with my stock 88/4wd/4"lift/22re/5sp/stock gears on 31's and about 24 on the highway @ 70 miles per hour constant.

I'm still offering to host schematics, pdfs, pics or whatever you need.
I'm not understanding the closed mindedness about this concept though.

CyMoN

I am sorry to say I was hoping with the years of experience you have that you where going to actually make one that would produce a higher yield then the gimmick ones being sold online.

to do it right you have to research the stan meyer info and what other people have been doing the little ones are a joke.

I have done a pretty good amount of research on this because I am hopeful that it would work but most people are missing some of the KEY parts of what stan had made.

yes you can make one that will produce HHO that runs off of the ALT but you need to reduce the amps it draws but still increase the output.

I hope it gets you 3 more MPG on a consistent basis but you should aim for 10 to 20 MPG.

the more and more I read all of these threads trying to save on fuel the more I think I might just start distilling my own alcohol and run my truck on that.

please keep us posted of your results because the other 3 have never posted up any data so usually that means it failed.

good luck and I hope it works.

Wombosi

Experience? Haha I've only been working on vehicles for a couple years now. I could try to make one that has extremely high yield, but for now, I'm just experimenting and providing data. Plus I don't want to screw the engine up right off the bat.

The Stan Meyer thing sounds cool, I'll have to look at it. My buddy is building a cheapie comparable to mine for a 4.3 Chevy V6 that has higher hydrogen output (and more under-the-hood space) and is at the same stage of the project.

BTW, nice fog lights CyMoN

BMJ

Here is another link to the PWM for HHO cells. http://www.aquapulser.com/

Looks well made.

flat4whore

wow..

Wombosi

Hey guys, sorry I haven't posted for awhile. My laptop decided to stop working. I have the setup done and I will post some pictures. Abecedarian, let me know how and I will get the pictures to your site. Hoping to get good results from the first tank using the hydrogen unit.

Removing the EGR (temporarily, perhaps) in itself made the engine accelerate smoother in the lower rpm's, and 10k ohms of resistance is a good value for the EGR sensor, as stated by many other Yotatech users. The reason I removed the EGR was to take advantage of the tube that goes directly into the center of the intake manifold. I connected my hydrogen input system directly to it, and blocked off the output from the exhaust manifold.

I modified the O2 sensor system by rigging a switch (same switch to turn the hydrogen unit on and off) to switch between the stock 02 sensor system and the chip that fakes a perfect 14:7 ratio to the computer.

Luckily there's no emissions laws here yet.

Again, most of this will be explained better with the pictures.

Red3.slow

Email me the pictures. Miles.mcdonnell@gmail.com I'll host them for you and post them.

tricking the computer is an excellent idea I may need some more information on this

tc

I see way more negatives than positives to just setting the O2 sensor output to 14.7:1 ... especially here in CO, you'll be running super rich as you go up in altitude or warm weather. If something happens, the FI won't be able to compensate and/or warn you.

abecedarian

as for no emissions laws in Montana, there are laws governing emissions in Montana. If the state has instituted no local laws, federal laws take precedence and modifying the emission control systems are illegal according to federal law.

Wombosi

Thanks, I will send the pictures within the hour.

Good point. I live at 5300 feet most of the year, so I'll be able to tell you how it does. I am visiting Idaho right now where it is 99 deg. F so I will also be able to provide data running at high temperatures.

That gives me an idea. How about putting in a variable resistor(s) to change the sine wave output [fuel ratio] of the chip? It could be a potentiometer adjusted so that the extremes are faked 12:7 and 18:7 ratios. Come late August, I could build a prototype and test it using the equipment in the I&C Lab on the campus.

Thanks for all the great info guys! I'll have some pics posted today.