PDA

View Full Version : The Smack Man sells out



biggy boy
10-05-2009, 07:44 AM
Looks like the Smack has stopped giving out how he does his builds, at least for the latest HHO Generator He's flogging.
He's got the new Titanium cell stack by SafeHHO for sale on his site.
But NO instructions or plans on how to make it!
Ask him a question and he tells you to buy the new cell stack ???
I like how he is using the fear of Hexavalent Chromium to sell more Gens?
Didn't seem to stop him from promoting his own designs made with stainless steel, before he knew about the SafeHHO Gen!

http://smacksboosters.110mb.com/

IM2L844
10-05-2009, 08:56 AM
All this hexavalent chromium B.S. is nonsense!!

Because I couldn't find any data specific to hexavalent chromium being present in used electrolyte from electrolysis methods employing stainless steel plates as electrodes, I submitted a query directly to The Environmental Protection Agency. Their researchers reassured me that they couldn't find any either. I've diligently looked high and low and have come to the conclusion that no empirical data exists to support the claim that used electrolyte contains any hexavalent chromium. All I could find was pure supposition.

If anyone can provide me with any concrete scientific data that specifically shows legitimate reasons to be concerned about used electrolyte containing any significant amounts of hexavalent chromium, I will take it all back. Otherwise, everyone should just shut-up and stop perpetuating yet another myth connected with HHO.

Helz_McFugly
10-05-2009, 09:14 AM
Im guessing his return discount will be a 1/4, if not less then what they paid for the SS smack cell. and being that his largest plate cell was $200. pfft

What a deal. this 5"x9" 7 or 8 plate e-lyzer is ONLY $500. And it even comes with a cute lil bubbler. I mean its Developed by a team of gifted engineers. how could you pass this up. Its Titanium Substrate Technology is the most sought after technology in the entire HHO industry. :p

http://safehho.com/newgeneratorbig.png

IM2L844
10-05-2009, 09:42 AM
From the SafeHHO website:
The more surface area you are attempting to send electricity through, the more heat, power loss, power consumption, and wasted energy you will have. Our units are comprised of only 3 small plates that produce over 20x more Oxy-Hydrogen gas than the same surface area of any stainless design.. GUARANTEED!Pure nonsense!

I sent an e-mail to them asking for some specific efficiency & perfomance data on their products more than a week ago and haven't received a response yet. I don't really expect one because this 20 times more claim is total B.S. that simply can't be substantiated.

biggy boy
10-05-2009, 12:04 PM
From the SafeHHO website:Pure nonsense!

I sent an e-mail to them asking for some specific efficiency & perfomance data on their products more than a week ago and haven't received a response yet. I don't really expect one because this 20 times more claim is total B.S. that simply can't be substantiated.

What would your estimates be for HHO production increase, of plates coated with Titanium verses plain stainless? 10%, 50% or more?


Glen

IM2L844
10-05-2009, 04:34 PM
There may be some increase in electrical efficiency due to reduced resistance, but that wouldn't affect production at all as far as the ratio of amps input to volume of HHO output. There is a hard and fast limit to the amount of HHO that can be produced by a given amount of current regardless of the materials used or the size of the plates. If they are just using 3 plates, as they claim, that translates to 2 cells and the upper boundry for 2 cells at 77 degrees F and 1 atm. pressure is 22.8 milliliters per minute per amp. If they are producing more than that, you can be reasonably certain that the excess volume consists of water vapor and atomized electrolyte or possibly some other vaporized elements that were present in the electrolyte, but it's not Oxyhydrogen gas. I am positive their unit is not producing 456 milliters (20 x 22.8) per minute with one amp. "GUARANTEED!"

biggy boy
10-05-2009, 04:53 PM
There may be some increase in electrical efficiency due to reduced resistance, but that wouldn't affect production at all as far as the ratio of amps input to volume of HHO output. There is a hard and fast limit to the amount of HHO that can be produced by a given amount of current regardless of the materials used or the size of the plates. If they are just using 3 plates, as they claim, that translates to 2 cells and the upper boundry for 2 cells at 77 degrees F and 1 atm. pressure is 22.8 milliliters per minute per amp. If they are producing more than that, you can be reasonably certain that the excess volume consists of water vapor and atomized electrolyte or possibly some other vaporized elements that were present in the electrolyte, but it's not Oxyhydrogen gas. I am positive their unit is not producing 456 milliters (20 x 22.8) per minute with one amp. "GUARANTEED!"

OK I get you. Its more the plate count your calling BS then the coating,
In regards to their claimed output.

Philldpapill
10-05-2009, 05:57 PM
Smack sold out a long time ago. He would spout some of the most ridiculous things in order to further his gens(e.g. "magnetic field alignment aiding in HHO production"). By the way that he would try to smash ANY dissent about how the thing really worked, I figured he was trying to make a buck off of HHO.

This verifies it.

Helz_McFugly
10-05-2009, 05:58 PM
oh good lord, so that thing i posted up there is only 3 plates and not 7 or 8? Ha thats even a better deal for $500.

IM2L844
10-05-2009, 07:03 PM
OK I get you. Its more the plate count your calling BS then the coating,
In regards to their claimed output.What I am calling B.S. is the claim that ANY configuration, material, coating, method of plate preperation or anything else claimed as being insturmental in allowing anyone to exceed the upper boundries defined and dictated by one of the fundemental laws of nature. The burden of proof does not lie with the skeptics. It's logically impossible to prove a negative (that something hasn't been done). The onus is on the claimants to prove that it has been done and can repeatedly be done.

Now, there are hints that they are using a mixed metal oxide (MMO) coating. This is more than likely a paintable or dippable solution of 70% Iridium Dioxide (part of the platinum family) and 30% Tantalum Pentoxide. This coating on Titanium has shown the ability to aid in the evolution of oxygen during electrolysis, but that is not going to get anyone close to 20 times the HHO production you get with stainless steel.

jerrygoldsmith
10-05-2009, 07:42 PM
There's already a thread somewhere here talking about Smack selling out :) Glad to see its not just me who thinks this!


If you go to that 'watergas' yahoo group, its totally hijacked by Smack and his 'infomercials'. Anyone who contradicts him he throws his geek-penis on the table, proclaims it largest, and brags he MUST be right because he's Smack and he invented the whole damn thing. In 2 days I got 300 posts in my email subscription, about 30% were him talking about some dang thing or another Titanium this, and Metaphysics that.....

How many times can he try to invent the wheel? HHO generation is not a magic process that can be boosted 2000% by reassembling the exact same contraptions everyone else is building. I imagine Mr. Popeil hawking his new Super-Shredder-Blender-Baker. Its exactly the same as all of his others, but THIS ONE HAS RACING STRIPES!

Helz_McFugly
10-05-2009, 08:11 PM
The burden of proof does not lie with the skeptics. It's logically impossible to prove a negative (that something hasn't been done). The onus is on the claimants to prove that it has been done and can repeatedly be done.

just like you cant disprove God, Orks, bridge trolls, pixies, ghost, unicorns.


as far a Smack goes "Its works cuz I say it does fool" quote from smack

lhazleton
10-12-2009, 09:42 PM
What I am calling B.S. is the claim that ANY configuration, material, coating, method of plate preperation or anything else claimed as being insturmental in allowing anyone to exceed the upper boundries defined and dictated by one of the fundemental laws of nature. The burden of proof does not lie with the skeptics. It's logically impossible to prove a negative (that something hasn't been done). The onus is on the claimants to prove that it has been done and can repeatedly be done.

Now, there are hints that they are using a mixed metal oxide (MMO) coating. This is more than likely a paintable or dippable solution of 70% Iridium Dioxide (part of the platinum family) and 30% Tantalum Pentoxide. This coating on Titanium has shown the ability to aid in the evolution of oxygen during electrolysis, but that is not going to get anyone close to 20 times the HHO production you get with stainless steel.

But Nick, if Smack say's it true, then IT MUST BE! Right?:confused:

Helz_McFugly
10-12-2009, 10:07 PM
thats umm right fool, better umm recognize

rcflyn
10-12-2009, 10:26 PM
isn't that "recAnize"?????
Sorry... couldn't help myself....


thats umm right fool, better umm recognize

Stevo
10-12-2009, 11:02 PM
Smack, cut the horse****! Get out if you can't tell the 100% truth!! Dang, I'm so darn angry!!! Yeeeeehaaw there's my fanciest horse and all that Texan shyte...