4,5 KB Mighty Mite anyone know?

[ea5fzo]

hello, how about this generator? seems to have great production, with very low and does not need bubbler is ideal for cars with limited space.
but I see no views here.


http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp3984Q2em1438Q2el2649QQ itemZ260733500137QQsspagenameZSTRKQ3aMEWAXQ3aIT

[b1jetmech]

I too, was wondering about that.

He claims it's the most efficient however it needs electronics to prevent "runaway"(if that's I read into it) but if it's efficient to begin with then why would it need a PWM?

As far as efficiency, I notice when using nickle plates for dry cell the electrolyte doesn't get hot. I believe in part the nickle has a lot less resistance then SS. So the resistance won't heat the plates...then transferring heat to the electrolyte. I built the same cell using SS it got hot after a period of time.

I'm not putting down the builder of the mighty mite but claiming to build the most efficient generator...I do have reservations on that.

[biodynamic]

I am in the process of building my 7th mighty mite. I have bought and tested 5 other generators including several of my own design. The little mites are hands down the most efficent design out there. They preform as advertised. For the price they can not be beat. Fore example on my 1.6 liter full time 4wd, at 5 amps with the minimum amount of electrolite I went from 35mpg to 45mpg only addition a cheap efie. 2 installed on my Dodge 5.9 pick up from 28mpg to 41 mpg,only addition a ccpwm running at 8 amps. The numbers speak for themselves, these mph numbers have over many tanks of fuel.

[ea5fzo]

I too, was wondering about that.

He claims it's the most efficient however it needs electronics to prevent "runaway"(if that's I read into it) but if it's efficient to begin with then why would it need a PWM?

As far as efficiency, I notice when using nickle plates for dry cell the electrolyte doesn't get hot. I believe in part the nickle has a lot less resistance then SS. So the resistance won't heat the plates...then transferring heat to the electrolyte. I built the same cell using SS it got hot after a period of time.

I'm not putting down the builder of the mighty mite but claiming to build the most efficient generator...I do have reservations on that.


yes, yes I think so too, but I think the pwm advised to use high concentrations of KOH electrolyte, as the generator operates at peak performance and may become too hot to moderate gas production is not required pwm (it says the manufacturer).

in my case I have tried many different generations and have not gotten good profits (maximum 8%), my car is 1.3 liters for 2006 turbo diesel (common rail), has no o2 sensor,

[Roland Jacques]

I have bought 2 units form that guy on Ebay. About 2 years ago

I did test the output with a good testing set up. It was 3.5- 3.9 MMW.
Zero Fossil Fuel built and tested one also, he got the same results i did. You can still see his videos on it.

The Guy claimed he measures output with a better meter...:rolleyes: (which is not correct) At that time he was claiming 24 MMW. (he did refund my money and did work with me he did stand by his product:)) I did not test them on a car.

That said i am a NOW a big believer of quality over quantity. I now think the MM may be one of the better electrolyzer for high quality HHO. I wish i would have tested the quality.

[myoldyourgold]

That said i am a NOW a big believer of quality over quantity. I now think the MM may be one of the better electrolyzer for high quality HHO. I wish i would have tested the quality.

Roland, I am not in disagreement about quality (what ever that means) but how are you going to test for "quality"? I have not seen any real good and ready available means of testing. Maybe you can shed some light on that. Quality is to vague of a term in this case for me anyway.

I have not tested this reactor but am very skeptical of anyone who says there reactor is the most efficient with no science to back it up. There is just to much BS out there that is doing only harm to the whole industry.

[Roland Jacques]

Roland, I am not in disagreement about quality (what ever that means) but how are you going to test for "quality"? I have not seen any real good and ready available means of testing. Maybe you can shed some light on that. Quality is to vague of a term in this case for me anyway.

I have not tested this reactor but am very skeptical of anyone who says there reactor is the most efficient with no science to back it up. There is just to much BS out there that is doing only harm to the whole industry.

Good question, I have never tried to test HHO gases quality first hand before. But I would do a "side by side" performance test with my gen-set. it would not be that straight forward on how to read the results... Just thinking about how to run that test is giving me a headache.

I do have a local friend who has a $$$pecial gas analyzer (i forget the name of it) that he modified for testing HHO. I think he runs the test a few different ways to get his conclusion. I have never seen him use it. He works with other energy technologies for the past years.

You have to skeptical for a number of reasons. Quality of gas is a very gray area.

[BioFarmer93]

Roland,
What ever happened to the "explosiometer" that was being talked about in the underground? Do you know if any progress was ever made on that thing? It was an idea that really caught my interest and I was looking forward to its completion, as it seem like a well thought out method for testing gas quality.

[myoldyourgold]

It is completed and sitting on the shelf. I am sure Gary will let us us it. It does require some math skills though. LOL

[Roland Jacques]

Roland,
What ever happened to the "explosiometer" that was being talked about in the underground? Do you know if any progress was ever made on that thing? It was an idea that really caught my interest and I was looking forward to its completion, as it seem like a well thought out method for testing gas quality.
I was not in on that, i didn't spend much time over there but it does sound interesting. Not sure how that "explosiometer" would work. Besides the strength, or concentration, It is said some HHO explodes and other Implodes... So, oh no, here comes that headache again. LOL

[BioFarmer93]

I was not in on that, i didn't spend much time over there but it does sound interesting. Not sure how that "explosiometer" would work. Besides the strength, or concentration, It is said some HHO explodes and other Implodes... So, oh no, here comes that headache again. LOL

You know, I've given that some thought off and on over the years, and I can't help but wonder if some folks aren't comparing apples to oranges there... As in maybe some tests were done with air present (nitrogen=explode) and others were done with straight HHO (explode & immediate implode). It seems like it would be a great test to try with a sturdy steel detonation chamber, a high point recording pressure gauge and vacuum gauge on a one way valve (a sturdy one;) )

[BioFarmer93]

It is completed and sitting on the shelf. I am sure Gary will let us us it. It does require some math skills though. LOL

Dang! That lets me out... Maybe Nick will come in from the cold and run it for us...

[b1jetmech]

I am in the process of building my 7th mighty mite. I have bought and tested 5 other generators including several of my own design. The little mites are hands down the most efficent design out there. They preform as advertised. For the price they can not be beat. Fore example on my 1.6 liter full time 4wd, at 5 amps with the minimum amount of electrolite I went from 35mpg to 45mpg only addition a cheap efie. 2 installed on my Dodge 5.9 pick up from 28mpg to 41 mpg,only addition a ccpwm running at 8 amps. The numbers speak for themselves, these mph numbers have over many tanks of fuel.

How can your cummins get 28 mpg baseline?

I had a 4BT in a 93' Suburban and the best I could ever get on highway is 26 mpg.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uV903Ai7Uhg

[BioFarmer93]

LOL! maybe because you were working that poor little 4bt to death dragging that 6000lb land yacht around!:eek:;):D

[b1jetmech]

LOL! maybe because you were working that poor little 4bt to death dragging that 6000lb land yacht around!:eek:;):D


Oh no! That little 239 cu in. 4BT had the same torque the 350 it replaced. Also...had the same acceleration also(to my surprise)

If I did another cummins swap it will be a 6BT due to the fact it smoother.

After driving this thing for a while, the City girls wouldn't find you attractive. At idle, the 4bt's idle causes your teeth to chatter to the breaking point... ;)

[BioFarmer93]

Oh no! That little 239 cu in. 4BT had the same torque the 350 it replaced. Also...had the same acceleration also(to my surprise)

If I did another cummins swap it will be a 6BT due to the fact it smoother.

After driving this thing for a while, the City girls wouldn't find you attractive. At idle, the 4bt's idle causes your teeth to chatter to the breaking point... ;)

Just yankin' your chain about the 4bt- their torque is darn near legendary.. As for the vibration that would rattle your teeth, hmmm.. I might know a city girl or two that could appreciate a fine ride like that ;)

[b1jetmech]

Just yankin' your chain about the 4bt- their torque is darn near legendary.. As for the vibration that would rattle your teeth, hmmm.. I might know a city girl or two that could appreciate a fine ride like that ;)

Ditto man! LOL!

You know, my Suburban doesn't weight as much as you think once I step out of it...I myself weigh an eighth of ton!