Vacuum based unit

[fu89]

Hey guys, I recently decided to go for a negative pressure (vacuum) setup on my '06 Toyota Tacoma 4.0L. It seems as if all the rules change once you put your ordinary HHO system under vacuum; I was running a 10 plate setup with 1/4 tsp of baking soda in 1/2 gallon of tap water when I was running as a pressure system and once I hooked it up to my vacuum line everything changed. I blew about 4 30amp fuses until I removed 7 of my plates but the kicker is, now I have three 4.5 X 4.5 plates (2 gang SS blank light switch plates) and 1 1/4 tsp of baking soda and the unit stays cold and I'm producing enough HHO to get water from my tailpipe. The unit bubbles with a fury and does not seem to get hot, even after a 70 mile trip. Theres a hitch though, I'm not really seeing much gain and I'm not sure if I have the AFR O2 sensors in this truck. I know I'm producing HHO because at idle, after about 5 minutes I start getting smoke from the exhaust which tells me that the O2 sensors are sending a lean indication to my computer which in turn richens my mixture. Has anyone else tried this type of system and do you have any ideas on why I'm not getting mpg gains?

[BoyntonStu]

Hey guys, I recently decided to go for a negative pressure (vacuum) setup on my '06 Toyota Tacoma 4.0L. It seems as if all the rules change once you put your ordinary HHO system under vacuum; I was running a 10 plate setup with 1/4 tsp of baking soda in 1/2 gallon of tap water when I was running as a pressure system and once I hooked it up to my vacuum line everything changed. I blew about 4 30amp fuses until I removed 7 of my plates but the kicker is, now I have three 4.5 X 4.5 plates (2 gang SS blank light switch plates) and 1 1/4 tsp of baking soda and the unit stays cold and I'm producing enough HHO to get water from my tailpipe. The unit bubbles with a fury and does not seem to get hot, even after a 70 mile trip. Theres a hitch though, I'm not really seeing much gain and I'm not sure if I have the AFR O2 sensors in this truck. I know I'm producing HHO because at idle, after about 5 minutes I start getting smoke from the exhaust which tells me that the O2 sensors are sending a lean indication to my computer which in turn richens my mixture. Has anyone else tried this type of system and do you have any ideas on why I'm not getting mpg gains?

Water boils at a lower temperature in a vacuum.

As water boils in vacuum, the temperature is lowered.

Adding Hydroxy with no ECU adjustments will reduce MPG.

Read Smith03Jetta threads to learn the secret.

I hope that this helps.

BoyntonStu

[fu89]

Ok, will do. Thank you.

[fu89]

I guess an EFIE is next...any suggestion on who may sell a good quality unit?

[mario brito]

Adding Hydroxy with no ECU adjustments will reduce MPG.
BoyntonStu

sorry, but not true. no O2, ECU, MAF or any other changes on my car, and i'm getting more then 20% gains.

thanks

[BoyntonStu]

sorry, but not true. no O2, ECU, MAF or any other changes on my car, and i'm getting more then 20% gains.

thanks

"sorry, but not true." Perhaps in your car.

You have no evidence that by just adding Hydroxy, MPG will increase for another person's car.

Please read Smith03Jetta's thread.

I hope that this helps.

BoyntonStu

[mario brito]

"sorry, but not true." Perhaps in your car.

You have no evidence that by just adding Hydroxy, MPG will increase for another person's car.

Please read Smith03Jetta's thread.

I hope that this helps.

BoyntonStu

i do have an evidence and it's parked in front of my window right now.

what i said is that it can work, not that it works with all cars. what you said is that it can't work, witch imply's that it won't work on any car. and that's not true.

i read EVERY Mr. Smith's posts.

thanks

[BoyntonStu]

i do have an evidence and it's parked in front of my window right now.

what i said is that it can work, not that it works with all cars. what you said is that it can't work, witch imply's that it won't work on any car. and that's not true.

i read EVERY Mr. Smith's posts.

thanks


Is that another person's car?

I think that it wonderful that you have such great success in improving your MPG by more than 20% by just adding Hydroxy.

Please give us all the cell and MPG testing details.

We are all envious of your progress.

BoyntonStu

[Phantom240]

"sorry, but not true." Perhaps in your car.

You have no evidence that by just adding Hydroxy, MPG will increase for another person's car.

Please read Smith03Jetta's thread.

I hope that this helps.

BoyntonStu
You have no evidence that just by adding hydroxy (which is "Brown's Gas" or more correctly, Oxyhydrogen) you lower fuel economy, Mr. Knowitall.


Back to the topic at hand, what color is the smoke? If its white, it is most likely just steam created from the combustion process with your HHO generator working. If its black, then that would indicate running rich.

[BoyntonStu]

You have no evidence that just by adding hydroxy (which is "Brown's Gas" or more correctly, Oxyhydrogen) you lower fuel economy, Mr. Knowitall.


Back to the topic at hand, what color is the smoke? If its white, it is most likely just steam created from the combustion process with your HHO generator working. If its black, then that would indicate running rich.

Who do you trust?

I trust Smith03Jetta.

I trust his hard earned data and not other people's words.

BoyntonStu

I offer you Smith03Jetta:

"I will go out on a limb here and suggest that HHO does not MAKE you get better gas mileage. What is my rational?

Here's how to get better gas mileage. This method is based on a modern fuel injected engine with knock sensors and the ability to retard timing to avoid detonation.

1. Electronically Lean out the Fuel flow to the engine (Regardless of the method used, EFIE, MAF, MAP, Laptop managment. The engine will start burning lean so the engine will automatically retard the timing to avoid lean valve pinging / Detonation. This will result in better gas mileage at reduced engine power. This is not a good condition for an engine to run in for very long. Engine damage can result.

2. Now add 1 liter of HHO/minute to the 2.0 liter engine. The HHO corrects the lean condition that is causing the engine knocking. The engine smooths out and the engine timing resets to the correct position automatically.

3. You now have reduced dependency on Gasoline. You can run your engine intentionally lean and use HHO as a bandaid to keep down the pinging. Higher Octane rating reduces pinging.

If you don't agree with my suggestions, pump some 87 octane in a vehicle that requires 91 or 93 octane and after a few miles stomp on the gas. You will hear valve noise. The lower octane rating lets the fuel burn quicker (Same effect with less fuel in the cylinder. It burns up quicker) The Higher Octane rating extends the burn time so the engine runs smoother and does not knock, ping, detonate. The HHO acts as an octane booster for ultra-lean fuel/air mixtures.

>>>>>>>!!!!!!

I think lots of people including myself have been operating under a misconception. What is that misconception? "HHO IMPROVES YOUR GAS MILEAGE!" <<<<<<<<!!!!!

I don't believe it for a minute.

On a modern computer controlled vehicle adding HHO will instantly decrease your gas mileage. It is a fact. I've observed it on both of my vehicles. They are both VWs. Both have advanced computer controls. Drive by wire systems.

After introducing the HHO and recording the resulting lower gas mileage results, you are then tasked with leaning out the gasoline to reach the same point you started at. It is then up to you how much leaner you wish to make the fuel mixture to get a measurable MPG improvement.

WHY DO I SAY WHAT I'm SAYING?

I did some risky testing over the last few days to see what would happen. First I set my Computer settings back to STOCK on both my test vehicles. I then did MPG tests on BOTH without HHO. I then did test runs with STOCK computer settings + HHO. On both cars I noticed a reduction in gas mileage. That tells me that without a doubt that HHO does not improve gas mileage on modern computer controlled cars.

I then leaned out my fuel mixture about 15% while Running HHO. This resulted in bringing my Gas mileage back to normal levels. My recorded MPG increases were noticed after I decreased my fuel adaptation channel to -19.5% (I leaned my fuel out another 4.5%). This resulted in an increase in Gas mileage to around 32 mpg in my car from 26 with HHO and no fuel setting mods.

I am now reducing my fuel mixture even further to see what the MAX gas mileage result I'm capable of achieving on my car. The Adaptation Channels on my primary Fuel System stops at -25%. That's as far as I can go lean without purchasing some expensive software. I'm running my car this lean intentionally for a couple days so I can get some accurate gas mileage readings.

Here are some numbers on my Jetta and Touareg. I'll give you what I've got.

Jetta 2.0 liter engine:
Stock with no HHO or mods = 24-25 mpg
O2 Extender + .4 liters HHO = 27.5 mpg
O2 Extender + MAF Enhancer + HHO = 29.5
O2 Extender + .7 liters HHO = 27.5 mpg
O2 Extender + .7 liters HHO + MAF Enhancer = 32 mpg
O2 Extender + .920 liters HHO + (-19.5% lean fuel mod) = 32 mpg (No MAF Enhancer)
O2 Extender + .920 liters HHO + (-25% lean fuel mod) = To be determined...

Touareg 3.2 liter engine:
Stock with no HHO or Mods = 19.5 mpg
Stock with 1.5 liters HHO = 12 to 14 mpg. (Decrease)
Stock with 1.5 liters HHO + (-19.5% lean fuel mod) = 19.5 - 19.8 mpg.
Stock with 1.5 liters HHO + (-25% lean fuel mod) = "I don't know yet. I haven't tested it."

The reason why I removed the MAF Enhancer is I don't want to have to twist knobs and flip switches all the time to get better gas mileage. It's annoying and can cause my engine to go into detonation if I adjust the signal voltage too low.
__________________
Mr. Smith

[mario brito]

Is that another person's car?

I think that it wonderful that you have such great success in improving your MPG by more than 20% by just adding Hydroxy.

Please give us all the cell and MPG testing details.

We are all envious of your progress.

BoyntonStu

i can only assume that you're calling me a liar. and i will not admit that !

don't get me digging some posts where you talk about HHO cell's that you have build before and suddently today we have picture of a rock sealing you cell...

and i'll give you more, not only i got from 100-105 Km to 120-126 km with the same fuel amount, i got that with only 100ml/minute !

the car, as i said before, is a Renault Clio 1996 Oasis 1.2L V4 petrol 60HP with around 200.000 KM.

Stock : 7 L / 100-105 KM
With HHO 100ml / minute : 7 L / 120-126 KM
Fuel amount every gas fill up : 7 Liters ( 10 Euros )
Fuel : petrol 95 octanes.
Driving : mostly city.
Shift : 5-speed manual
Normal RPM : 2000-3500 ( usually around 2500 )
Normal Speed : 60 - 100 Km/Hour
Power Change : can't tell any difference, so i'll assume none.
Intake Point : just before butterfly, after some sensors in the air intake.
Test Time : a few weeks.
number of gas fill's up : around 10

do you want the car's color also ? white.

now, get your rock back to your garden, build a decent cell, test it, and stop being an ass !

[1973dodger]

i can only assume that you're calling me a liar. and i will not admit that !

don't get me digging some posts where you talk about HHO cell's that you have build before and suddently today we have picture of a rock sealing you cell...

and i'll give you more, not only i got from 100-105 Km to 120-126 km with the same fuel amount, i got that with only 100ml/minute !

the car, as i said before, is a Renault Clio 1996 Oasis 1.2L V4 petrol 60HP with around 200.000 KM.

Stock : 7 L / 100-105 KM
With HHO 100ml / minute : 7 L / 120-126 KM
Fuel amount every gas fill up : 7 Liters ( 10 Euros )
Fuel : petrol 95 octanes.
Driving : mostly city.
Shift : 5-speed manual
Normal RPM : 2000-3500 ( usually around 2500 )
Normal Speed : 60 - 100 Km/Hour
Power Change : can't tell any difference, so i'll assume none.
Intake Point : just before butterfly, after some sensors in the air intake.
Test Time : a few weeks.
number of gas fill's up : around 10

do you want the car's color also ? white.

now, get your rock back to your garden, build a decent cell, test it, and stop being an ass !

Bravo, Mario.

[Phantom240]

Who do you trust?

I trust Smith03Jetta.

I want his nuts.

BoyntonStu

Blah blah blah

Believe who you want, but results speak louder than assumptions.

[mario brito]

i too believe Mr. Smith and have great respect for him, his work, and specially the way he presents his info, either good or bad.
he's done a wonderfull job, and we all should be very gratefull to have him on this forum.

one thing that we should take into account, is that he's "playing" with some of the most advanced engines in the market, with very "intelligent" ECU's. and that's a great challenge.

and my point is :

i will not assume that i can get 100% gain, just because someone did it on his car, and also will not assume that i cannot get a decent gain, because another person didn't. every case is special. some will get good results, some will not, period.

there's a detail that will probably give us some important info in the future :

my girlfriend and my mother both have the same car i do ( just different configurations like color, driving assist, etc ) with the exactly same engine !
as soon as i can get this unit working as i want, i'll install some twin cell's on those cars and post the results. i believe this will be very important to finally understand how HHO behave's.

thanks

[timetowinarace]

In the beginning of the 'hho revolution' people were building ineffeciant booster and tossing them on their cars. Many had some interesting MPG gains. More people got involved and hho output became the norm with people designing, building and testing units for higher output. THEN they put them on their cars. Many were disapointed with MPG losses. A few of these people reduced hho output and recieved a surprizing MPG gain. Others started messing with sensors and computers.

The trend on this forum is to design and build the highest output booster. Then put it on a vehicle and fight the sensors/ECU. This is a curiosity for me because most people seem to want modest gains in fuel economy. No one wants to try and run mostly on hho.

The reason for this story?

My opinion, witch means squat really, is that most booster builders may be better off building a decent booster, reducing amps by reducing catylist, thus reducing production, install the unit on the vehicle of choice, and see what the results are with the low hho output. If there is a gain or even if MPG,s stay the same, increase the output slightly. If more gain, increase output again. Do this untill MPG's drop, then go back to previous output levels. Only then does the builder have a baseline to go by for that particular vehicle to decide if sensor/ECU modifacations are neccissary. If modifications are neccissary, try one at a time, such as O2 sencor with the baseline of how much hho can be used with out the mod and go from there. Rather, I see the oppisite happening where the builder will throw as much hho into the intake and then try to make the vehicle run on it. Just doesn't make sence to me. Not all vehicles need sencor/ECU mods and if they do, how do you know, if you haven't established a baseline for that vehicle?

The experiments by Smith are very usefull and extremely important. I don't see that they should pertain to every hho boosted vehicle.

[BoyntonStu]

In the beginning of the 'hho revolution' people were building ineffeciant booster and tossing them on their cars. Many had some interesting MPG gains. More people got involved and hho output became the norm with people designing, building and testing units for higher output. THEN they put them on their cars. Many were disapointed with MPG losses. A few of these people reduced hho output and recieved a surprizing MPG gain. Others started messing with sensors and computers.

The trend on this forum is to design and build the highest output booster. Then put it on a vehicle and fight the sensors/ECU. This is a curiosity for me because most people seem to want modest gains in fuel economy. No one wants to try and run mostly on hho.

The reason for this story?

My opinion, witch means squat really, is that most booster builders may be better off building a decent booster, reducing amps by reducing catylist, thus reducing production, install the unit on the vehicle of choice, and see what the results are with the low hho output. If there is a gain or even if MPG,s stay the same, increase the output slightly. If more gain, increase output again. Do this untill MPG's drop, then go back to previous output levels. Only then does the builder have a baseline to go by for that particular vehicle to decide if sensor/ECU modifacations are neccissary. If modifications are neccissary, try one at a time, such as O2 sencor with the baseline of how much hho can be used with out the mod and go from there. Rather, I see the oppisite happening where the builder will throw as much hho into the intake and then try to make the vehicle run on it. Just doesn't make sence to me. Not all vehicles need sencor/ECU mods and if they do, how do you know, if you haven't established a baseline for that vehicle?

The experiments by Smith are very usefull and extremely important. I don't see that they should pertain to every hho boosted vehicle.

Excellent post.

Did you see the video that I posted above?

BoyntonStu

[timetowinarace]

Excellent post.

Did you see the video that I posted above?

BoyntonStu

No, I'll take a look.

edit

I didn't see a video posted in this thread.

[BoyntonStu]

No, I'll take a look.

edit

I didn't see a video posted in this thread.

Sorry,

Adding Hydroxy will LOWER MPG unless MAP/MAF enhanced.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvpAJ...eature=related

Great set of videos!!

Conclusion:

Hydroxy works IF it is implemented correctly.

BoyntonStu

[mario brito]

Link not working :(

Thanks

[BoyntonStu]

Link not working :(

Thanks

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

Try this.

BoyntonStu

[timetowinarace]

Sorry,

Adding Hydroxy will LOWER MPG unless MAP/MAF enhanced.

I would change that comment to: Adding too much Hydroxy will LOWER MPG unless MAP/MAF enhanced.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvpAJ...eature=related

Great set of videos!!

Conclusion:

Hydroxy works IF it is implemented correctly.

BoyntonStu

Again, many on this forum are putting too much emphasis on the Smith experiments. While they are credible and a good source of information and may even be neccisary for some auto's, they should not be viewed as the 'rule'.

If it is the rule, then our attention should turn to running older engines without computer control on pure hydrogen as this would be more cost effective. Spending untold amounts of time and money with electronics modifacations defeats the purpose of saving money on fuel. It also is not for the garage tinkerer as these can get quite involved.

On this broad statement (Adding Hydroxy will LOWER MPG unless MAP/MAF enhanced.) we will have to disagree.

[Cadillac]

Mario, does your Renault have the 1.2L with direct injection? If your not sure does it say DIet on the engine any where? I thought that they went to this version in 96' but can not remember off the top of my head.

I can not speak for the DI systems on the Renault (Nissan) but I know the Cadillac (Holden V6s) system. These feature what is termed as "ultra lean burns" and would react differently to HHO (really any additive) in comparison to mainstream fuel injection engine.

Could explain the differance in results here.

[mario brito]

Mario, does your Renault have the 1.2L with direct injection? If your not sure does it say DIet on the engine any where? I thought that they went to this version in 96' but can not remember off the top of my head.

I can not speak for the DI systems on the Renault (Nissan) but I know the Cadillac (Holden V6s) system. These feature what is termed as "ultra lean burns" and would react differently to HHO (really any additive) in comparison to mainstream fuel injection engine.

Could explain the differance in results here.

Yes, it's a direct injection engine :

Mine is a Clio Fase I :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_Clio

There's a few things I believe that can make a great difference :

Engine Size - My car only has 1.2L ! So, 100ml HHO / minute will repesent a bigger % in the Fuel/Air/HHO mixture.

Normal RPM usage - 99.9% of cars in Portugal has manual shifting. We don't like automatic. That allow's us to use lower RPM all the time. I usually drive around 2500 RPM. Once again, in low RPM's the 100ml HHO will represent bigger % in the air mixture.

Gasoline type - I know that our petrol is different then your's. Don't know why exactly, but it's different. I usually put 95 octane's petrol. We also have 98 octane's. We don't have or use anything like your's E85.

This are just a "guess". I don't have hard data on this facts.

Could you please explain the "Ultra Lean Burn" engine's ?

Thanks

[mario brito]

One more thing :

When I switch on the cell, the engine will raise the RPM's for just a second and then it will lower again. Without HHO, at idle, my engine will stay at 900 RPM's, but with HHO on, it will lower to 825 RPM's.

When I turn the cell off, the engine will raise RPM's again for a second a then it will lower to 900 RPM's.

thanks

[Bossman]

Once I get my cell completed I'm going to install it on a 1996 GMC Sonoma 4 cylinder 5 speed. I'm going to install a LM-1 tuner http://http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/ This will show my A/F reading. I can try it with the cell on & then switch it off. I'll have to get another bung welded to my pipe. Do you think this will help. I tune my race quads wih this LM-1. You get the A/F spot on the get peak performance.

[Phantom240]

Sorry,

Adding Hydroxy will LOWER MPG unless MAP/MAF enhanced.

Really? Have you built working units and tested them on every vehicle known to man?

Didn't think so.

Take your self-righteous attitude down a notch.

[loumiii]

I'm an old newspaper driver quite used to filling up and topping off a gas tank consistently and checking the mileage to the tenth with every fillup.

I built and installed a 6 mason jar hho generator and connected the output to a vacuum line on my car last week. I went from 25 to 26.2 mpg on a ninety mile run. The next day I improved the gas flow a bit, added 3 lbs to the tires and toned down my normally agressive driving (by driving for maximum vacuum) and got 36.2 mpg on the same course.

The next day I teed the output with one hose to the vacuum line and the other into the air filter housing. I returned to my normally agressive driving and on my way from Durango to Denver, over 5 mountain passes including the dreaded Wolf Creek, I got 28.2 mpg.

I haven't made any sensor mods or enhancements at all yet.

My car is a 2001 Subaru Forester S with 88,000 miles. It has a four speed automatic transmission. I bought it new and its never had any major repairs or alterations. It has consistently gotten 25 mpg in Colorado, I saw 27 mpg once at sea level.

So improvements are possible with hho only.

I have more mods/testing to do of course. And I'm wondering if these generators will freeze in the wintertime! (Does anyone know the answer to that one?).

Regards
Lou

[Atechguy]

I'm an old newspaper driver quite used to filling up and topping off a gas tank consistently and checking the mileage to the tenth with every fillup.

I built and installed a 6 mason jar hho generator and connected the output to a vacuum line on my car last week. I went from 25 to 26.2 mpg on a ninety mile run. The next day I improved the gas flow a bit, added 3 lbs to the tires and toned down my normally agressive driving (by driving for maximum vacuum) and got 36.2 mpg on the same course.

The next day I teed the output with one hose to the vacuum line and the other into the air filter housing. I returned to my normally agressive driving and on my way from Durango to Denver, over 5 mountain passes including the dreaded Wolf Creek, I got 28.2 mpg.

I haven't made any sensor mods or enhancements at all yet.

My car is a 2001 Subaru Forester S with 88,000 miles. It has a four speed automatic transmission. I bought it new and its never had any major repairs or alterations. It has consistently gotten 25 mpg in Colorado, I saw 27 mpg once at sea level.

So improvements are possible with hho only.

I have more mods/testing to do of course. And I'm wondering if these generators will freeze in the wintertime! (Does anyone know the answer to that one?).

Regards
Lou

I have hho on 01 Forester 5 speed also , but has a few perfomance mods on it before i put my HHo on , i am getting about 32-33m/gal. but i also am not done with the sensor mods yet, i also have oversizes tires 235/60/16 and i work out of my vehicle and carry tools and supplies. For winter i may try denatured alcohol or try to add a small solar cell to heat unit , not sure yet. I have also been adding actone /xylene /lucas.Best regards.;)

[Walt]

HHO in it self will not "lower your MPG." I have made no computer mods and am on my second month now. Before HHO I got 33-35 now I get 40-43

This is not just one tank.

How you can get lower MPG with HHO

1) Over tax your alternator and battery. I tryed to go from 1 1lpm unit to two. My mileage dropped and the car ran like crap. This was not the fault of more HHO but, not enough voltage. My voltage with two units at idle was 11-12.5 volts not good.

2) Poorly attached or executed vacuum attachment. If you have a leaky cell and are attached to the manifold you have created a vacuum leak. This will cause higher or surging RPMs at idle. Some people mistakenly are convinced the higher RPM is a result of HHO. Higher or surging RPMS will likley lower your MPG.

I do belive the EFIE and MAP-MAF enhancers will maximize the potential gains but by no means are they required to see results in every car.

My car is 10 years old with 130k mi. The original EPA estimates were 29-33 MPG. My pre HHO observerd were 33-35. My current is 40-43. All of my MPG tests are done at fillup with a completley toped off tank after at least 150 miles. There is no explanation for my improved mileage other than HHO.

Walt

PS. I am not selling anything

[fu89]

You have no evidence that just by adding hydroxy (which is "Brown's Gas" or more correctly, Oxyhydrogen) you lower fuel economy, Mr. Knowitall.


Back to the topic at hand, what color is the smoke? If its white, it is most likely just steam created from the combustion process with your HHO generator working. If its black, then that would indicate running rich.

It is white but I appear to be getting less MPG.

[Omega]

I am running a HHO system with no electronic mods (only an O2 extender) and went from 34 MPG before HHO to 35.4 MPG with HHO. A little more than 4% improvement. Not very impressive, but an improvement, nonetheless.

For my car, electronic mods will be necessary to get a significant increase in mileage.

[bigapple]

good replies from everyone... good post

i have to say that there r no two brands that are made similar (im talking about maker; for example, jeep and dodge are one in the same)... every computer is different and every car has different numbers of sensors... thru extensive research, we'll be able to find out what each brand is like and if improvements are noticeable immediately once hydroxy is introduced... i know in newer fords it mite be tough (from what ive seen; unless someone brings details on a ford gas engine and gets me ecstatic) and thats because of the computers being different... and from my own gained knowledge, it seems the easiest increases are thru diesel engines since they basically create the same flashpoint almost every time (im sure there r slight differences; saying that glowplugs r much different than spark plugs)

so point being, u can increase mileage with hydroxy only in SOME cars... it all depends on the way the ECU is set up