Not worthy installing a HHO system.

[viperjet]

Virgin to HHO, please forgive for my unintelligent

I read some report that it takes 1,000 times as much energy as is available from a car battery to produce enough Hydrogen. Therefore it is not worthy installing a HHO system.

Moreover because there are all sorts of losses involved in the generation of the electricity, the delivery of it to the electrolysis cell and then the combustion process, we actually recover far less energy from burning the hydrogen than it took to create it.

So, once those losses are taken into account, HHO devices will actually cause your car to use *more* fuel - that extra fuel doing nothing more than heating the water in that electrolysis cell and the wires that lead to it.

Hope some expert can explain to me about "HHO is a Scam" is not real !!

[H2OPWR]

Virgin to HHO, please forgive for my unintelligent

I read some report that it takes 1,000 times as much energy as is available from a car battery to produce enough Hydrogen. Therefore it is not worthy installing a HHO system.

Moreover because there are all sorts of losses involved in the generation of the electricity, the delivery of it to the electrolysis cell and then the combustion process, we actually recover far less energy from burning the hydrogen than it took to create it.

So, once those losses are taken into account, HHO devices will actually cause your car to use *more* fuel - that extra fuel doing nothing more than heating the water in that electrolysis cell and the wires that lead to it.

Hope some expert can explain to me about "HHO is a Scam" is not real !!

No one here is expecting to run a car off just HHO. That is your first misunderstanding. That is not possible with known technology. Your second problem is looking at HHO as a fuel. HHO is NOT a fuel. It is simply an energy carrier just like a match. It costs more and takes more energy to make a match than the match will return with the energy created by lighting it. But take that match and light a dead tree. You will get much more energy from the burning tree than was needed to create the match. Now you might say sure but the tree is now gone. Do not forget that the seeds from the tree grew many more so the cycle can continue as long as we do not burn more trees than nature can grow.

That is the same cycle we are in with fossil fuel. We are burning much more fossil fuel than nature can provide. For tens of millions of years the earth has been making fossil fuel from spent carbon based life. Just like the burning tree. Now we are consuming it much faster than nature can make it. All the while we are causing unatural problems with our planet while fueling our desires. Just like overfeeding a plant with nitrogen. The plant will happily use the nitrogen while killing itself.

HHO is a fast burning clean fuel. Adding just a little can and does make the fossil fuel burn more quickly and completely just like lighter fluid on charcoal does. The quicker more complete burn causes us to use more of the fuel to create useable power and waste less as heat and burn less in the cataletic convertor. Our problem is getting the onboard electronics to accept the better burn and not just add more fuel.

I have been on this forum as long or longer than any active member here. I spend thousands of dollars of my own hard earned money on research to improve this ignored technology to try and make a difference. Some day sometime in the future probably long after I am gone maybe some of my efforts will help my children or grandcheldren. That is enough for me to continue.

If I were you I would do more research before I used the word SCAM. I do not know of anyone here that is part of any effort to scam any money from anyone.

Sincerely
Larry

[viperjet]

Thanks all for the Clarification, why this system is call a "Scam".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kv9vMzXJbho
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XK5UVpWpq0w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6SB2Nq_NMo

[b1jetmech]

Thanks all for the Clarification, why this system is call a "Scam".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kv9vMzXJbho
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XK5UVpWpq0w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6SB2Nq_NMo

A couple things viper.

I for one would not trust either...Dennis Lee and Dateline NBC.

Here's why, Back in the early 90's NBC was caught with their pants down for misrepresenting GM's exploding gas tanks on their trucks. It was claimed when a vehicle collided into the side of a GM truck the fuel tank would explode on impact. This really sank GM's reputation.

One day, video and photo's appeared at the NBC studio site that showed a fixed situation to purposely cause a GM truck to explode from side impact.

What NBC have done was placed large "D" size rocket motors underneath the truck with the nozzles pointed outward of the side of the truck (these are rocket motors for the hobby rockets). The gas cap was intentionally left loose so it would fall off on impact.

When time came/GMC truck, right before impact of the truck the rockets motors were discharged and collision took place the loose gas cap would come off causing the fuel from the full tank of gas to gush out, down the lit rockets motors which in turn cause it explode the fuel...a perfect storm.

Once the public found out about this NBC prop to make GM look bad, they lost a lot of credibility. Fortunately today, there are good competition of media sources to get our news where the three alphabet news don't have the monopoly anymore.

Here from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dateline_NBC

General Motors v. NBC

Dateline NBC aired an investigative report on Tuesday, November 17, 1992, titled “Waiting to Explode.” The 60 minute program was about General Motors pickup trucks allegedly exploding upon impact during accidents due to the poor design of fuel tanks. Dateline's film showed a sample of a low speed accident with the fuel tank exploding. In reality, Dateline NBC producers had rigged the truck’s fuel tank with remotely controlled explosives. The program did not disclose the fact that the accident was staged. GM investigators studied the film, and discovered that smoke actually came out of the fuel tank 6 frames before impact. GM subsequently filed an anti-defamation/libel lawsuit against NBC after conducting an extensive investigation. On Monday, February 8, 1993 GM conducted a highly publicized point-by-point rebuttal in the Product Exhibit Hall of the General Motors Building in Detroit that lasted nearly two hours after announcing the lawsuit.[2] The lawsuit was settled the same week by NBC, and Jane Pauley read a 3 minute 30 second on-air apology to viewers.

The law suit and subsequent settlement was arguably the most devastating blow for NBC in a series of reputation damaging incidents during the 1990s and early 2000s. Within NBC, Michael Gartner, who resigned shortly after the incident, was the source for much of the blame. Then-NBC News President Reuven Frank stated Gartner was hired in 1988, despite no TV news background, in an attempt to satisfy parent-company General Electric by replacing current journalists with cheaper, less experienced reporters and producers.[3]

The following Dateline NBC producers were dismissed: Jeff Diamond, executive producer; David Rummel, senior producer; and Robert Read, producer of the report on the pickups. Michele Gillen, the reporter involved in the segment, was transferred to Miami station WTVJ. Michael G. Gartner, president of the news division, resigned under pressure.

So you take it for what it's worth about Dateline's credibility. Also notice dateline can copy and paste, edit footage to really twist the reality of the subject.

And Dennis lee...well the just a couple of footage we saw pretty much tells me he's a snake oil salesman. He would make a good politician.


You have to understand today is difficult to tune cars to run on HHO. They have a computer on board who's sole purpose to meet a certain air fuel ratio. Injest some HHO and the computer will think it's running lean when it's actually burning all the fuel in the cylinder.

If your serious about wanting to learn this you have to have an open mind unlike all those nay sayers who commented on those dateline videos. I bet around 95% of them have never tried an HHO unit let alone build one. Their scientific reasoning is what's spoon fed by other nay sayers on paper.

So what will it be?

Chase

[b1jetmech]

How did you come up with your name Viper jet? was it from this site:

http://www.viper-aircraft.com/home_f.html