Proof! Smack’s new Videos.

[BoyntonStu]

Smack’s new Videos.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/QSRUrBnsV6g&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QSRUrBnsV6g&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3BKo0A59TQk&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3BKo0A59TQk&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSRUrBnsV6g


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BKo0A59TQk


Smack has 2 excellent videos showing HHO boosting a Craftsman 6,300 Watt 11 HP B&S generator.

What has he demonstrated?

Boosting a 375 cc (approximate) B&S Intek engine with 5.6 LPM of HHO will increase the gasoline burn time 20%.

What else do the videos indicate?

Let’s calculate and scale the experiment up to a small car engine: of 2,200 CC.

2,200/375 = 5.9

5.9 x 5.6 LPM = 33 LPM

Conclusion: In order to HHO boost an automobile with a 2,200 CC engine and gain 20% MPG, it would require 33 LPM.

These results are in the ballpark of my previous calculations.

Are there any naysayers out there?

BoyntonStu

[Q-Hack!]

A couple of things to note here...

He doesn't say whether or not his generator is warmed up for the first test. If not, then it will definitely use more gas on the first run which will skew his numbers. Since he is showing a notebook with 12 points of data though I suspect he has accounted for this.

1400 watts @ 5.88 LPM is only 4.2 MMW not his best cell. I hope he doesn't claim the DC amps for his calculation of MMW. It needs to be the wattage of the entire system. He does say that he is using two DC battery chargers to run the cell. Mucho energy loss there.

Other than that it is a great visual of what is needed to get better mileage on a vehicle.

Lets see... for my 3.0 Litre Saturn VUE...

3000 / 375 = 8 * 5.88 = 47 LPM (he corrects his video up from 5.6 to 5.88)

Seeing as how my best cell is only good up to about 7-8 LPM with my alternator, I don't see how this can be done without an external generator... and a bodatious one at that.

Again, I will continue to watch the technology and see where it goes. But for now, I don't see it working for my needs.

Great video!

[cmac0351]

I think most agree that HHO improves fuel burn efficiency, but the question is does it improve it enough to cover the fact that the generator puts an extra strain on the car.

I would like to see smack run the same test, but time it without the HHO running. With less of a load, the generator should consume fuel at a slower rate, right? So would the gas last longer without the load?

[ridelong]

It seems that he is loading a gen, and in one test he is throwing the generated gas into the air, and feeding it back to the motor in the second.

A more informative test (IMHO), would be to run the gen unloaded at the RPM of the loaded gen, and get a time to burn 200 ml. Then do the loaded test with the HHO fed into the motor, and compare the two times.

Russ

[oicu812]

stu 33 litres a minute is do-able, allthough not the way most people here think. trying to generate that much hho on demand on board would take a ridiculous amount of watts. with a $50,000 lithium ion battery pack its possible but at that point why not just build an electric car. seeing as how you can't even get your ac fixed in your car you probebly don't have the scratch to even think about that. one possible solution to this might be producing pure h2 and storing it in metal hydride tanks. again the metal hydride tanks are way to expensive for most people here. pure h2 generators are available also way to expensive for most people here. than if you want to power the h2 generator with renewables like wind or solar it gets really expensive. bmw allready has a car for lease in europe and california that uses metal hydride storage tanks . large amounts of h2 can also be produced using the aluminum naoh reaction. the gas would have to be run through a series of bubblers and filters to get it 99.9% pure and than stored in metal hydride tanks.the point of all this is hydrogen can be used as a fuel, unfortunatly gasoline will have to be around ten bucks a gallon before any of this becomes a reality.

[BoyntonStu]

stu 33 litres a minute is do-able, allthough not the way most people here think. trying to generate that much hho on demand on board would take a ridiculous amount of watts. with a $50,000 lithium ion battery pack its possible but at that point why not just build an electric car. seeing as how you can't even get your ac fixed in your car you probebly don't have the scratch to even think about that. one possible solution to this might be producing pure h2 and storing it in metal hydride tanks. again the metal hydride tanks are way to expensive for most people here. pure h2 generators are available also way to expensive for most people here. than if you want to power the h2 generator with renewables like wind or solar it gets really expensive. bmw allready has a car for lease in europe and california that uses metal hydride storage tanks . large amounts of h2 can also be produced using the aluminum naoh reaction. the gas would have to be run through a series of bubblers and filters to get it 99.9% pure and than stored in metal hydride tanks.the point of all this is hydrogen can be used as a fuel, unfortunatly gasoline will have to be around ten bucks a gallon before any of this becomes a reality.

All of that for a 20% increase!


Bah! Humbug!


BoyntonStu

[BoyntonStu]

http://www.youtube.com/user/zgymnast#play/all/uploads-all/2/0MVR19Ix69k

If you had 200 Amps, he says that his Geo would run on 100% HHO.

In the same video he says that his water cooled generator is producing 5 LPM at 30 PSI.

It doesn't add up.

The question remains:

If you could idle your car on HHO would the gasoline necessary to generate the HHO be more than just using straight gasoline?



BoyntonStu

[cmac0351]

That is what I was saying. It's not like cars are already powering HHO generators and just plugging up the air hose is all we need to do. He needs to test the time without the Briggs generator powering the HHO generator.


It seems that he is loading a gen, and in one test he is throwing the generated gas into the air, and feeding it back to the motor in the second.

A more informative test (IMHO), would be to run the gen unloaded at the RPM of the loaded gen, and get a time to burn 200 ml. Then do the loaded test with the HHO fed into the motor, and compare the two times.

Russ

[oicu812]

All of that for a 20% increase!


Bah! Humbug!


BoyntonStu

your missing the point

you will never run a car on hho only generated by brute force electrolysis on demand...there's other ways to do it. that's where I plan to shift my direction, the generation of hydrogen using a chemical reaction. oil won't last forever.

[HHO BLASTER]

your missing the point

you will never run a car on hho only generated by brute force electrolysis on demand...there's other ways to do it. that's where I plan to shift my direction, the generation of hydrogen using a chemical reaction. oil won't last forever.

We should grow are own oil ALGAE

Good luck, let us know what you find

[Philldpapill]

oicu, I don't think you are getting it. The point isn't so much to run the car on hydrogen alone, but to generate small amounts of hydrogen on demand in order to IMPROVE the current fuel economy of the vehicle. I don't think anyone is implying any sort of overunity here, but instead just raising the efficiency of the combustion, using hydrogen.

[oicu812]

oicu, I don't think you are getting it. The point isn't so much to run the car on hydrogen alone, but to generate small amounts of hydrogen on demand in order to IMPROVE the current fuel economy of the vehicle. I don't think anyone is implying any sort of overunity here, but instead just raising the efficiency of the combustion, using hydrogen.
no phill its you that dosent quite get it. by chemicaly producing h2 from aluminum you still can add the the pure h2 to to your engine improving combustion without taxing your alternator.do you realize daytime running lights reduce your milage by .5 a mile per gallon,what do you think a 30 amp load does? with hho you'll always send your computer into safe mode without tricking the o2 sensors. nobodys talking overunity here, that's impossible and rediculous .just 2 ounces of aluminum yeilds 100 litres of pure h2.there are many ways to do this other than with naoh as a catalist. a 80% mix of aluminum and 20% gallium creates an aluminum alloy that's a solid and produces h2 at an amazing rate with no heat just add tap water. that's right the reaction happens at room temperature and the best part is no gallium is used up in the process. the aluminum is converted to alumina, or aluminium oxide. its the same stuff used in toothpaste,abrasive discs and semi-conductors. it can also be recycleld back into aluminium. the gallium can be used over and over. this process is an economicly sound fuel that has no technical hurdels to stop it. with gas at $3.00 a gallon it works out to 49 cents a pound verses gasoline at 47 cents a pound. how long do you think gas will stay at $3.00 a gallon$. this process is environmently friendly produces no hydrocarbons and is recycleable.

[BennyLava]

Other than that it is a great visual of what is needed to get better mileage on a vehicle.

Lets see... for my 3.0 Litre Saturn VUE...

3000 / 375 = 8 * 5.88 = 47 LPM (he corrects his video up from 5.6 to 5.88)

Seeing as how my best cell is only good up to about 7-8 LPM with my alternator, I don't see how this can be done without an external generator... and a bodatious one at that.

Again, I will continue to watch the technology and see where it goes. But for now, I don't see it working for my needs.

Great video!

How then do you explain the people who have documented their huge gains with only 2 LPM? Im sure you have seen all the youtube videos. Sure, some of the people are incorrect. But there are some who really know what they are doing.


I think most agree that HHO improves fuel burn efficiency, but the question is does it improve it enough to cover the fact that the generator puts an extra strain on the car.

With less of a load, the generator should consume fuel at a slower rate, right? So would the gas last longer without the load?

Well, the strain on the car can kinda be helped with a high amp alternator. As for the gas lasting longer, i can solve that right now. An MSD brand ignition system (a full, aftermarket racing ignition system) will burn a crapload more gas than a factory one. You can get such an ignition system for practically any vehicle. I have a lot of camaro and mustang buddies, they all run MSD ignition systems to burn more fuel and thus increase horsepower. It is an awesome upgrade for those looking to increase MPG as well.

So i think if you did all this stuff, the strain would really be on the battery, and perhaps any wires in line that may be too small. But you might could solve even this with one of those tough Optima red top batteries.

[Philldpapill]

BennyLava, the battery is of no importance, as it is only a temporary power source - not used for steady state. If you are pulling any current from the battery, it's an unsustainable system because that battery will eventually deplete. In reality, you need an alternator that is able to continuously source the current demand for your HHO system.

As for the ignition system... I'm skeptical. Once ignition occurs, a bigger or smaller spark makes no difference. Now, if you are using a different fuel injection system, that's a different animal.

[BennyLava]

Well, the power is there. I mean from the Aftermarket ignition systems. I have felt the before and after effects on 3 separate vehicles. That's why i advocate them so much. So it is doing something. The end results don't lie. They sell a great many MSD ignition systems, they are all over any performance automotive site you go to. While this may be drawing more current, it's worth what you get out of it by a longshot.

[Roland Jacques]

Smack’s new Videos.
Smack has 2 excellent videos showing HHO boosting a Craftsman 6,300 Watt 11 HP B&S generator.

What has he demonstrated?

Boosting a 375 cc (approximate) B&S Intek engine with 5.6 LPM of HHO will increase the gasoline burn time 20%.

What else do the videos indicate?

Let’s calculate and scale the experiment up to a small car engine: of 2,200 CC.

2,200/375 = 5.9

5.9 x 5.6 LPM = 33 LPM

Conclusion: In order to HHO boost an automobile with a 2,200 CC engine and gain 20% MPG, it would require 33 LPM.

These results are in the ballpark of my previous calculations.

Are there any naysayers out there?

BoyntonStu

I think your conclusion is wrong.
I think this test only proves one thing. A very important thing to see proven.

I think it does prove that HHO bosting can produces MPG/GPH gains in I.C.E.s PERIOD.

It does not mean you need the same ratios to achieves the 20% gain.
You would have to factors out a lot of other configuration to come to that conclusion.
IE: You would have to have failed achieving gains by using Less HHO, different engine timing settings, additional carb leaning...

[BoyntonStu]

I disagree.

What if Smack had run a tank of natural gas in parallel to the gasoline, would that be boosting?

Piping 5 LPM of HHO into a 375 cc engine is adding fuel, not catalytic boosting.

Some folks are running small engines on HHO alone.

IMO Smack failed to prove anything positive.


BoyntonStu

[Q-Hack!]

How then do you explain the people who have documented their huge gains with only 2 LPM? Im sure you have seen all the youtube videos. Sure, some of the people are incorrect. But there are some who really know what they are doing.

I don't. While some people may be getting better mileage, I can't seem to make it work, to my satisfaction, on my Saturn VUE. I have tested with and without PWMs, EFIEs and MAP enhancers. I have an EGT and an ODBII Scan guage to tell me just how well any modification are working. While I can get modest gains with an EFIE it raises my EGTs beyond what I feel is safe.



Well, the strain on the car can kinda be helped with a high amp alternator.

Not really. The only thing a higher amp alternator will do for you is allow you to safely run higher current draw. The strain on the engine at 20 amps is the same on both the original alternator as it is on my new 195 amp alternator.




As for the gas lasting longer, i can solve that right now. An MSD brand ignition system (a full, aftermarket racing ignition system) will burn a crapload more gas than a factory one. You can get such an ignition system for practically any vehicle. I have a lot of camaro and mustang buddies, they all run MSD ignition systems to burn more fuel and thus increase horsepower. It is an awesome upgrade for those looking to increase MPG as well.


I can attest to the above. I have been running MSD in all my vehicles for years now.



So i think if you did all this stuff, the strain would really be on the battery, and perhaps any wires in line that may be too small. But you might could solve even this with one of those tough Optima red top batteries.


I run 2 gauge car stereo power wire for all of my high current runs.

The only time you should be draining the battery is if you are not running the engine. All the strain should be on the alternator. Now if you are having trouble starting the vehicle because of all your current draw, then yes, by all means spend the extra on a good Optima red top battery. Otherwise you are just wasting your money.

If I had to estimate, I would guess that 95% of the people out there on youtube dont use an EGT to measure engine temps. So yes, they may be getting better fuel economy with their EFIEs and MAPS and claiming that HHO is the cause of their better fuel economy. However, without posting EGT readings, I will have little faith in the safety of what they are doing.

[BoyntonStu]

I don't. While some people may be getting better mileage, I can't seem to make it work, to my satisfaction, on my Saturn VUE. I have tested with and without PWMs, EFIEs and MAP enhancers. I have an EGT and an ODBII Scan guage to tell me just how well any modification are working. While I can get modest gains with an EFIE it raises my EGTs beyond what I feel is safe.


Not really. The only thing a higher amp alternator will do for you is allow you to safely run higher current draw. The strain on the engine at 20 amps is the same on both the original alternator as it is on my new 195 amp alternator.




I can attest to the above. I have been running MSD in all my vehicles for years now.



I run 2 gauge car stereo power wire for all of my high current runs.

The only time you should be draining the battery is if you are not running the engine. All the strain should be on the alternator. Now if you are having trouble starting the vehicle because of all your current draw, then yes, by all means spend the extra on a good Optima red top battery. Otherwise you are just wasting your money.

If I had to estimate, I would guess that 95% of the people out there on youtube dont use an EGT to measure engine temps. So yes, they may be getting better fuel economy with their EFIEs and MAPS and claiming that HHO is the cause of their better fuel economy. However, without posting EGT readings, I will have little faith in the safety of what they are doing.

Well said!

Amen!


BoyntonStu

[BennyLava]

"Safety" of what they are doing? Im not sure what you mean by that. Do you mean for their engine, or for their health?

As for it not working on your vue, everyone seems to be having problems with newer cars. It seems the newer you go, the harder it gets. I think that you might just have to take direct control over the fuel system (getting an aftermarket computer, or reprogramming the old one) and force the vehicle to lean back to a certain degree. Then, you would supplement with your HHO. But it would have to be very precise. You would have problems till you got just the right amount of HHO. Now that you got me thinking about it, i can't think of a newer vehicle that i have seen it work well on. However, ALL of the ones who claim (and can backup that claim) good gains are on older stuff. like early '90's and below. So i would say it has to be some type of vehicle electronics rejecting it somehow.

I wouldn't put it past the greedy fatcats to have made it that way on purpose. But if they can make it, then we can unmake it.

[Philldpapill]

Fatcats? Really? News Flash: It's not a global conspiracy to keep the little guy down, and keep buying oil. Get off it.

When you lean the fuel mixture, YES, you will get better gas mileage, but it is harmful to the engine. That's WHY those "fatcats" designed it that way. A little extra gas is alot better than premature failure of engine components, wouldn't you agree???

[Roland Jacques]

I disagree.

What if Smack had run a tank of natural gas in parallel to the gasoline, would that be boosting?

Piping 5 LPM of HHO into a 375 cc engine is adding fuel, not catalytic boosting.

Some folks are running small engines on HHO alone.

IMO Smack failed to prove anything positive.


BoyntonStu

I looked at the test again and your right . He did the test WRONG!!! You can't conclude anything from that test the way he did it.

1. He was supposed to have a load other than the HHO cell system. (3000 watts worth of lights or ...)

2. He should ran test #1 with just the designated load (3000 watts ....)

3. He should have run test #2 with the load (3000 Watts) then turned on the the HHO cell system. Adding that additional load.


This test could be simplified a little by using a smaller generator with a direct 10 amp dc output. Then use that 120 watts DC to produce a 0.2 -0.5 LPM HHO (there about) and test it correctly that way.

[HHO BLASTER]

Good point, everything is not what it seems its like a magican

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/un1pNtmYguA&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/un1pNtmYguA&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Q-Hack!]

"Safety" of what they are doing? Im not sure what you mean by that. Do you mean for their engine, or for their health?

Safety of the engine... I couldn't give a rip about personal safety. Half the sh!t I do is against OSHA regulations. :D



As for it not working on your vue, everyone seems to be having problems with newer cars. It seems the newer you go, the harder it gets. I think that you might just have to take direct control over the fuel system (getting an aftermarket computer, or reprogramming the old one) and force the vehicle to lean back to a certain degree. Then, you would supplement with your HHO. But it would have to be very precise. You would have problems till you got just the right amount of HHO. Now that you got me thinking about it, i can't think of a newer vehicle that i have seen it work well on. However, ALL of the ones who claim (and can backup that claim) good gains are on older stuff. like early '90's and below. So i would say it has to be some type of vehicle electronics rejecting it somehow.

I am not convinced that old/new car makes much difference. I have very good control of my fuel levels with the EFIE that I own. It is one of the digital models that I can easily set with a multimeter. It doesn't take much to get the EGTs to climb beyond what I consider safe for the engine. I posted one of my early tests on the forum some place, I see if I'll can find it.

Edit: Here it is. Post #16 http://www.hhoforums.com/showthread.php?t=972&highlight=Temp&page=2

I suppose I could run just the EFIE safely at about .1 or maybe even .2 but the HHO is doing nothing for me. In later tests I was able to get enough HHO to bring the EGTs down a bit, but not enough to merit the load on the engine.

One thing I will say about doing this all on an older car, you can easily adjust the timing which is something I have yet to be able to play with. I have seen several videos where people are having success with HHO by adjusting their timing. If they would ever post EGTs I will take a harder look.

[BennyLava]

Fatcats? Really? News Flash: It's not a global conspiracy to keep the little guy down, and keep buying oil. Get off it.

When you lean the fuel mixture, YES, you will get better gas mileage, but it is harmful to the engine. That's WHY those "fatcats" designed it that way. A little extra gas is alot better than premature failure of engine components, wouldn't you agree???

Well i have been running my '76 chevy v6 so lean it's right on the verge of dying for 2 years now. I have built/rebuilt many chevy engines over the years. So i know it's not going to hurt that motor. No you will not "burn up a piston" like everyone will tell you. There may be ways that damage can occur but it's not set in stone that you're going to kill your engine with it.

[Q-Hack!]

Well i have been running my '76 chevy v6 so lean it's right on the verge of dying for 2 years now. I have built/rebuilt many chevy engines over the years. So i know it's not going to hurt that motor. No you will not "burn up a piston" like everyone will tell you. There may be ways that damage can occur but it's not set in stone that you're going to kill your engine with it.

A '76 Chevy V6 also has a nice steel block where my '03 Saturn VUE is all Aluminum. You may feel safe running lean, I don't.

[BennyLava]

Ya good point i didn't know that was aluminum. I think my block is cast iron but i see what you're saying.