Way OT Saving money on gas

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Sun May 11, 2008 1:59 pm

I know there's been a lot of OT stuff here lately but this is a unique forum.

Earlier this week I was listening to an all night radio show while I was driving. The Coast to Coast AM radio show had two guys on there that were talking about introducing hydrogen into your car to boost fuel milage. It works with diesels too, even big ones. Anyway this process has been around for years. the gas is referred to as HHO. there are a lot od entries about it on youtube as well.
Well low and behold I went to Church Sat. Morning for a men's fellowship breakfast and there was a fellow there who had done it to his '93 Cadillac. he's now getting 31 MPG.
There is a web site where they sell the book if you need it but you can get by without it if you like. The website is www.hhowater4gas.com

It looks like something I'll have to do myself. I was wondering if anybody else here has tried any of this information?

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Sun May 11, 2008 6:26 pm

Thank you for posting this. Here's the chance everyone wanted, to lower driving costs. Let's see how it works out for us. I have fuel injection, have to research that part. Might make the old pickup trucks no one wants to drive worth buying while they're sitting around.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Sun May 11, 2008 8:32 pm

Grizz,
The fellow at church that has his installed on his Cadillac used a really low tech instalation. He basically just ran an exhaust hose off of the HHO generator and ran it up the snorkle for the air intake.

The guys on the hhowater4gas.com website address how to bypass the effects of the MAP sensor and the O2 sensor in later engines with the advanced computers.

Kurt · Post by **Kurt** » Mon May 12, 2008 3:04 am

A friend and I heard the program, as well. What's funny about us together is, he is an electrician, but went to automotive school, I am a millwright (industial mechanic) but went to electronics school. We spent many hours discussing this HHO system, how to build one, how to make it work, even if we should go into business together in the HHO system.

I am going to build one and see if it works, some thing like the one installed on the gentleman's Caddy. If I get improvements on my Cherokee, I'll let you know.

I was afraid I was the only one here that listened to that program!

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 am

Guys this interesting. Please post of any results, good or bad.

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Mon May 12, 2008 8:22 am

Rusty, any chance you could get some photos?

The only conceptual problem I'm having is how in the world that little jar can produce enough hydrogen to affect the gas milage. It's uncompressed, so in terms of parts-per-million the ratio is VERY LOW.

If this is sufficient I'm all for it. I want it to be real. I'm just a REAL SKEPTIC ABOUT EVERYTHING.

Grizz

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Mon May 12, 2008 8:59 am

Ya gotta remember Grizz, you're not running on pure hydrogen. You're only using the Free hydrogen to supplement the gasoline the car is burning. There is also a small amount of oxygen in the gas as well. Evidently there is a lot more energy in hydrogen than there is in gasoline. I guess they would somehow rate it in BTU's.

After looking at some of the devices on youtube, one thing I'm seeing is a vast amount of difference in the amount of gas produces by different types of construction and the difference is the type of electrodes used.

The guys on the radio show talked about some people who use what they call a "6 pack" of hydrogen generators linked together. I guess they do that rather than try to improve the efficiency of the one unit they're using.

kimwcook · Post by **kimwcook** » Mon May 12, 2008 9:53 am

Rusty are you talking about water injection?

I was once a Master NIASE certified mechanic many, many years ago. I also played in the field of high performance. I used water injection on my '65 Mustang fastback for detonation/pre-ignition control. It was only used when past a certain point on acceleration. It is also used on RV's and engiens under heavy load. The evaporation of the water from it's solid form to vapor boosted compression, cooled the cylinder and the free hydrogen from the water helped in combustion.

gcs · Post by **gcs** » Mon May 12, 2008 11:17 am

There was a guy selling such a unit some years ago, can't remember his name or company, but it was a hydrogen generator for diesels and gas engines.
Maybe a search will find something.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Mon May 12, 2008 12:40 pm

No it's not water injection. That's what I thought it was a few weeks ago when I saw an instruction booklet for it at church.

The reader's Digest version is like this: You build a Hydrogen Generator out of a qt. jar with a couple of electrodes in it. Fill the jar with water and baking soda. The soda enhances the conductivity of the water. When current is applied the water is separated into water and hydrogen. The gas comes off the generator and is vented into the air intake.

If you want to find out more search on youtube for HHO, or try a Google search. You can also find out more by looking for "Brown's gas."

ole pizen slinger · Post by **ole pizen slinger** » Mon May 12, 2008 2:08 pm

For those of you inclined to think this is a good idea, here's an experiment you can perform. Find two test tubes of equal size. Find yourself a 12 volt car battery and hook an insulted copper wire to the positive side of the battery. Strip two inches of insulation off the free end of the wire. Fill one of the test tubes with water and place the bare copper electrode in the water filled test tube. Find some way of keeping the bare wire in the test tube but leave the tube open at the mouth. Repeat this procedure for the other wire and test tube. Partially fill a glass beaker (or glass) with water and invert the test tube/electrode into the glass without allowing the water to flow out of the test tube. Do the same with the other test tube/electrode. Now time how long it takes for one of the test tubes to become half filled with gas. You will notice that one test tube will have 1/2 the amount of gas as the other. This test tube will be collecting oxygen and the other test tube will be collecting the hydrogen. If you have used pure water, you will find the process very slow. Now add table salt or your bicarbonate of soda and time the reaction. You will notice that the reaction speeds up. However, I think you will find that this reaction is (1) too slow to aid in enhancing the operation of an internal combustion engine and (2) does not produce enough gas reactants to make a difference.

I have seen this idea come around several times in my life time. First time the idea was to combine water with dawn dishwashing detergent and then mix this solution with gasoline. The dawn supposedly acted as a surfactant and kept the water from separating out of the mixture. However, if you left the mixture to sit long enough it would indeed separate out.

This idea is akin to the 'cold fusion' of a year or so back. It's just not going to happen. You have heard the old saying "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is." This belongs in that category.

Best Wishes,
ole pizen slinger

gundownunder · Post by **gundownunder** » Tue May 13, 2008 1:35 am

It apparently does create flammable gas but whether or not it does so at a level that is useful in a vehicle engine is still being debated.
I'm thinking it may have a use as a catalist gas in a diesel vehicle the same way that lpg is used in diesel vehicles to increase power and economy.
Heres a link to an article I found on actually creating the gas:
www.dangerouslaboratories.org/hydrogen1.html

HEAD0001 · Post by **HEAD0001** » Tue May 13, 2008 5:20 am

I am not an electrician, or mechanic. I do not really understand what you guys are talking about. But i understand the concept of what you are talking about. NOPE-all I am is a simple, tax paying, American consumer.

This is my opinion. We can fly a man to the moon. But we can not make a Ford truck that can get 25 mpg. Horse Puckey. I do not believe it. I believe the Ford can not get 25 mpg because there is no profit in it for somebody?? To much profit to be made. I have a 2001 Ford F-150 that gets the same milage my 1976 Ford F-150 got. Sorry but I am not buying it. Just my little rant. Tom.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Tue May 13, 2008 7:38 am

Tom,
According to the guys on the website at www.hhowater4gas.com when you reach a certain level of efficiency with your hydrogen output the car's computer will counteract what you've done. This would be right in line with your hypothesis.

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Tue May 13, 2008 2:13 pm

There is no way the generator will produce enough on it's own to run a car, but if hydrogen is 50% greater in energy (example number only) than gasoline, then in theory, if you replace 10% of the gasoline vapor in the cylinder with hydrogen, you'll get a 5% increase in effeciency, per cylinder.

How this translates in MPG will have a lot of variables to it.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Tue May 13, 2008 7:44 pm

I don't know just how the numbers will play out but I'm going to try and build a little generator tomorrow on the cheap and see if I can notice any difference with it.
If you look at the pictures on youtube, there seems to be a great deal in the output of different units. The configuration of the plates seems to be the big factor. On the web site they talk about some people who have made multiple units and linked them together. I would guess that's why.

gundownunder · Post by **gundownunder** » Tue May 13, 2008 8:21 pm

If you want to try making a unit have a look at the link on my last post, it gives very detailed instructions, including how to make the gas explode.
Handirifle is right as far as what he says but this unit produces both hydrogen and oxygen and the oxygen will also help with combustion.

Tumbleweeds · Post by **Tumbleweeds** » Tue May 13, 2008 9:34 pm

collision insurance will be invalid as soon as you rig something like this up.

Remember the Hindenburg? AllState does!

243dave · Post by **243dave** » Thu May 15, 2008 4:10 pm

I've been experimenting with a hho generator for more than a month. I have'nt put it on my truck yet but it is going on this weekend. Give me another week or two and I'll post my results,good or bad,with lots of details and opinions. The past couple weeks I've been mess'n with mothballs, I know it sounds stupid, and before everybody jumps on me, I've done my homework. I know there are two types of mothballs, I didn't use the wrong type, I will say, there is definately a increase in power and mpg. Give me a few days and I'll post detailed results and some does and dont's If anybody is interested. Dave

claybob86 · Post by **claybob86** » Thu May 15, 2008 11:31 pm

243dave wrote:I've been experimenting with a hho generator for more than a month. I have'nt put it on my truck yet but it is going on this weekend. Give me another week or two and I'll post my results,good or bad,with lots of details and opinions. The past couple weeks I've been mess'n with mothballs, I know it sounds stupid, and before everybody jumps on me, I've done my homework. I know there are two types of mothballs, I didn't use the wrong type, I will say, there is definately a increase in power and mpg. Give me a few days and I'll post detailed results and some does and dont's If anybody is interested. Dave

Lookin' forward to hearing the results. What's the deal on the mothballs?

243dave · Post by **243dave** » Mon May 19, 2008 9:22 pm

Claybob, Mothballs was used by racers years ago to increase the octane rating of gasoline. From what I've read octane ratings were lower than 70. There are a couple types of mothballs I know of, the one to use is the old fashion type, naphthalene. Naphthalene is a hydrocarbon same as gas. I'm not going to sit here and tell you mothballs is safe, I'm not sure, I've read where people have ran them for more than a year and no troubles, and one guy in particular raised his mpgs from 12 to 18. I have a 96 Ford Ranger with a 3 liter engine that gets 18 mpg driving to work and in town and 24 highway, it always has. Adding 6 mothballs to my 20 gallon tank gets me just over 20 mpg in town and to work over a period of 3 tanks of gas,a gain of 2 mpg ain't bad. And believe it or not it seems to have more power. Not bad when about a hundred mothballs cost 2 dollars. This will be my last week experimenting with the mothballs then on to the hydrogen thing. I'll update again this weekend. Dave

243dave · Post by **243dave** » Wed May 21, 2008 3:39 pm

If you'll haven't noticed I'm all over this topic. I enjoy trying to reduce Exxon Mobil's 44 billion yearly profits a few dollars when I fill-up, plus the money I save can be spent on something important, like more powder and primers. A buddy of mine decided to add mothballs to his toyota truck last week, his mileage went from 25 to 29 mpg and that was hauling his trailer with big mower. He believes it will break 30 mpg without the added weight no problem. It's a early 80's model with 240,000 with a 4 cylinder engine. He said it had more power too. A few more of my buddies have started mothball experiments I'll keep you posted if anybody is interested. Dave

sore shoulder · Post by **sore shoulder** » Wed May 21, 2008 3:47 pm

Interesting. the only thing I know about mothballs is my MIL heard they were good for insect repellant, so she went down in the basement and threw a couple hundred into the crawl space areas to kill the spider problem we were having. My wife started having dizzy spells and I wasn't feeling so good, then we heard about the mothballs. MIL said she left the unused box in the laundry room so I go read the label. Yea, you guessed it. Toxic, and I had to crawl around under our 100 year old house cleaning them out.

Anyway, do you have a link for any of the mothball stuff and does it work with diesel?

alnitak · Post by **alnitak** » Wed May 21, 2008 4:17 pm

Sounds like the benefits in today's engines, with today's high-octane gases, are minimal, if not negative:

"Can mothballs increase octane?
The legend of mothballs as an octane enhancer arose well before WWII when naphthalene was used as the active ingredient. Today, the majority of mothballs use para-dichlorobenzene in place of naphthalene, so choose carefully if you wish to experiment

. There have been some concerns about the toxicity of para-dichlorobenzene, and naphthalene mothballs have again become popular. In the 1920s, typical gasoline octane ratings were 40-60, and during the 1930s and 40s, the ratings increased by approximately 20 units as alkyl leads and improved refining processes became widespread.

Naphthalene has a blending motor octane number of 90, so the addition of a significant amount of mothballs could increase the octane, and they were soluble in gasoline. The amount usually required to appreciably increase the octane also had some adverse effects. The most obvious was due to the high melting point (80C), when the fuel evaporated the naphthalene would precipitate out, blocking jets and filters. With modern gasolines, naphthalene is more likely to reduce the octane rating, and the amount required for low octane fuels will also create operational and emissions problems."

The other point made on this site is that if the vehicle is using the appropriate octane-rated gas for the engine, making the gas a higher octane will only waste money, at best, and could damage the engine.

Here's the site:

http://www.thor-racing.co.uk/Octane_Rating-149.asp

And from here:

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/c ... m00485.htm

"Yes, mothballs will slightly assist the octane rating of gasoline. HOWEVER, in that grain of truth there lurks the potential for disaster. One must use very few mothballs (naphthalene only) because the ratio of carbon to hydrogen in the molecules makes for a very dirty burning fuel. Too many mothballs and your engine will load up with carbon deposits -- very bad news in the performance department.

Also DO NOT mistakenly use moth crystals (paradichlorobenzene). The chlorine atoms in this material becomes HCl upon combustion. ydrochloric acid (HCl) is very destructive to engine internals.

Finally, unless your engine is high compression and in need of high octane fuel, enhancing the octane rating of the fuel over what is required is simply a waste of money. High octane fuel burned in an engine designed for lower octane fuel does not increase engine power."

Thunder50 · Post by **Thunder50** » Wed May 21, 2008 10:07 pm

I would think that if you tried the hydrogen trick, you would lose any efficiency from the hydrogen/oxygen fuel, by the energy needed to produce the gases, from water. You will put a greater load on your alternator, and the energy has to come from somewhere, so you would use more gasoline.

243dave · Post by **243dave** » Thu May 22, 2008 9:20 pm

I'm not suggesting for anyone to do any experiments with their vehicles, you shouldn't believe half you read on the internet. As for the mothballs for a fuel additive, people who try it seem to have positive results, people should be skeptical but not negative about this,people has been doing this for more than 50 years. If napahthalene only raised octane ratings to 90 why don't we all just fill-up with premium and get better mpg's? Because high octane fuel usually only benefits high performance engines. I believe napahthlene helps gas burn more complete not just raise octane that is why I get more mpg and power. At least thats my theory. As for the worry about putting too great a load on your altenator making hydrogen, it can happen. But you can easily control that with how much baking soda, lye, whatever you use in your water to help conduct the electricity. You are only running 12 volts to your hho generator, but if you draw too many amps because you used to much lye in your water, you will surely strain a altenator. You gotta experiment to know how much to use. I aim to draw only 10 amps, that only adds up to be only 22 watts of power, way less than your lights or stereo. Dave

sore shoulder · Post by **sore shoulder** » Thu May 22, 2008 11:08 pm

243dave wrote: I aim to draw only 10 amps, that only adds up to be only 22 watts of power, way less than your lights or stereo. Dave

P=IxE = 10Amps x 12Volts=120Watts

shooter · Post by **shooter** » Fri May 23, 2008 1:47 am

As an alternative to mothballs, I read several places that you can add acetone to your gas and achieve the same effect without the impurities found in the mothballs. I've heard either 3 or 4 ounces of acetone per 10 gallons of gas. I'm experimenting to see which gives me better results, if any. I'm starting out under 3 ounces and working my way up. I'm just scared to do the hydrogen thing right now because I don't have the money to fix my truck if I screw anything up. I'm mainly worried about the computer readings after adding the hydrogen.

243dave · Post by **243dave** » Fri May 23, 2008 3:35 pm

Sore shoulder your right, I added instead of multiplied, 120 watts. How much does a headlight draw? Eventually I'm going to run a series of hydrogen generators on my truck, six total, only adding 2 volts to each generator. That should be efficient. You can make a fair amount of hydrogen with only 2 volts. Six generators getting 2 volts will produce alot more hydrogen then one getting 12 volts. At least its my plan if all goes well!! Dave

sore shoulder · Post by **sore shoulder** » Fri May 23, 2008 3:52 pm

243dave wrote:Sore shoulder your right, I added instead of multiplied, 120 watts. How much does a headlight draw? Eventually I'm going to run a series of hydrogen generators on my truck, six total, only adding 2 volts to each generator. That should be efficient. You can make a fair amount of hydrogen with only 2 volts. Six generators getting 2 volts will produce alot more hydrogen then one getting 12 volts. At least its my plan if all goes well!! Dave

That would vary with age of vehicle, but if I had to guess I'd say around 100W for the average vehicle made in the last 10 years or so. I know the KC Daylighters on my old CJ5 were 120W, and the new beams are about the same as far as I can tell.

I was talking to a good friend a couple weeks ago. He is on his 2nd hydrogen generator. He was laughing as he told me the first one blew up. Crazy hilljack.

Gryphon Black · Post by **Gryphon Black** » Fri May 23, 2008 4:46 pm

Time to drop the tuppence...

Back in the early 90's, I used to be an over-the-road truck driver. While hauling a load along I-84 one day, going uphill at about 45mph on a long gradual grade, a Kenworth blew past me at about 55 to 60. I would have just figured it was empty, but I saw a sign on it stating it was running a special fuel cell. After hollering at 'em on the hailing frequency, it turned out they were loaded medium-heavy.
The short version is that they had rigged up one of these hydrogen-oxygen generators from a guy in Georgia who was building them. It's nothing but a NASA fuel cell, and by running the gasses given off through a vacuum line into the intake manifold, that Kenworth went from 7-8 mpg to 13 mpg, according to the guy driving it.
I've heard nothing about this idea since, until now. Apparently, the guy making the generators made his money selling the "special electrolyte solution" that is added to the water. That's why I never got one rigged for my pickup. Didn't wanna be dependant on some entreprenuerial flake, or lose my savings in buying his "special" electrolyte.
Fast-forward to today. Gas that was $0.95 is now $3.75, and I'm starting to see people on the interstate actually SLOW DOWN. I guess we finally found what it would take to make people change their habits.
I'm thinkin' this is worth a second look, and some real experimentation to find the useful way to apply this to todays engines and electronic fuel systems.
Oh, yeah, one more thing. Air up your tires. I bought at least 2-3 mpg's just by running mine at 45-50 lb's. It reduces the rolling resistance.

Gryphon

gundownunder · Post by **gundownunder** » Fri May 23, 2008 8:36 pm

Gryphon Black is right on a couple of points
Air up your tyres, a hard tyre will give better economy.
Knock 10% off your cruising speed and you will probably knock close to 10% off your fuel bill.

Just one more bit of wisdom that I learned years ago when I was a lunatic. drive a V8 like it was a six and it will give the economy of a six.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Fri May 23, 2008 9:07 pm

If you're interested in building a HHO generator ( for lack of a better term) a search on youtube will show a lot of people playing with the HHO. The idea seems to be to make the generator the most efficient. There were two really good designs. One was made from a Stainless steel kitchen canister and it used the outside of the canister as one of the electrodes. The other was suspended inside the canister.
The other really efficient version was a stack of electrodes all shaped like a star of David with alternating positive and negative plates.
Neither of the efficient generators seemed to be using all that much power.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Fri May 23, 2008 9:14 pm

Thunder50 wrote:I would think that if you tried the hydrogen trick, you would lose any efficiency from the hydrogen/oxygen fuel, by the energy needed to produce the gases, from water. You will put a greater load on your alternator, and the energy has to come from somewhere, so you would use more gasoline.

I would think that the water has to have enough energy added to it to separate the hydrogen, that the energy gained from the hydrogen would be less than (or equal to, if 100% efficiency) that energy put into the water by the engine to make the hydrogen.

If there is "waste" energy like the heat the engine already gives off which can be captured, THAT would make sense (i.e. use the HEAT to make the hydrogen free rather than adding a generator load).

Also, if whatever you add in to the input is something which has MORE energy than whatever the end product will be, that would bring in net energy - i.e. the acetone, which will in the end, be CO2 and H2O. But that part of the economic equation depends on if the caloric content of that additive per dollar cost of the additive is greater than the same ration for the gasoline.

Right?

alnitak · Post by **alnitak** » Wed May 28, 2008 8:18 am

I've been waiting to hear back on the results of the HHO test. Has anyone installed and tested the concept in the last couple weeks?

shawn45 · Post by **shawn45** » Fri May 30, 2008 12:53 pm

I just installed a HHO unit on my truck and am still playing with it. I will have to check and see if it makes any difference this weekend.

phlatnose · Post by **phlatnose** » Fri May 30, 2008 3:28 pm

AJMD429 has it exacty right.
I have explained the principals of the combustion engines and their fuels to dozens of people over the years both in scientific and laymans terms, but few seem willing, able or want to believe the facts.
I could write pages on this stuff, but here are a few facts, and mythbusting.
The easiest way to save fuel, is switch the motor off when you are not moving.
Cold starts are the next big waster of fuel. The first few miles after cold starting will half your gas mileage. eg chevy truck that normally averages 15mpg will get around 6mpg for the first mile or two until motor approaches operating temperature. all you are doing for the first few miles is heating the water/coolant within the motor. Get an electric block heater on a timer for the first start of the day. The colder the temperature outside, the more you will save. Electricity is cheaper per btu or calorie than gas or diesel.
Overinflating tires. Bad ju ju. Max inflation pressures are written on the side of tires. This does not mean you can run at these pressures all the time. You will burn out the center of the tires in short time if the vehicle is loaded light. You only increase tire pressures as load increases. Thene is a large safety aspect involved here. Do some research on slip angles. The bulge you see on the bottom of the tire when correctl inflated actually assists and is designed to get you around a corner or bend.
Magic cars and engines etc. No such think. The magic carb never existed, we have fuel injection now anyway. Its hard for most any carb to compete with FI. Just about all watercooled gas engines burn about the same amount of fuel per horsepower. It takes about 0.4 pounds of gas per hour to generate 1 hp/hr. Diesel engines are getting down to 0.250 lb/hp/hr. Aircooled engines typically use more fuel to make the same amount of power., as they operate in a wider temperature range, and internal tolarances cannot be maintained. The watercooled motor has the advantage here through the use of a thermostat to keep the motor at a near ideal operating temp.
On to HHO. One of the biggest myths of all. Why make hydrogen from water using an alternator? Yes you can run on hydrogen. Why not just go and buy it in a cylinder or by the tankful? Simple physics and a bit of maths is involved here. It will cost you more in power to make hydrogen from water, than what you will get back out of it. You are burning gasoline to make the hydrogen. Mains electricity is a lot cheaper than burning gasoline., and it still cost more to make in energy and dollars than what you get out of it.
There is/was an inventor on you tube, that was supposedly killed mysteriously(most likely the oil companies, Big Oil), that had a HHO system that could generate hydrogen from water fast enough, that he was able to drive across the USA on a couple gallons of water. (look it up). Yeah right. Absolute bogus rubbish. Once again do the research and maths. 1 gallon of water is 2 parts hydrogen and 1 part oxygen. Calculate the number of btus in the hydrogen, and you will see there is not enough energy there to travel that distance on what he claimed. I have done the calcs on this a long time ago, and cannot be bothered to go through it all again. Look up the number of btu's needed to make 1 horsepower, and you will see as clear as day that this is all bogus science.
Adding or boosting octane. Why? Well, it allows a motor to run more spark advance, thus allowing an earlier spark and more thorough burn of the fuel. Well it used to. Actually it still does. Modern computer controlled cars are desined to run clean for smog purposes. Smog tests dictate the level of unburnt hydrocarbons(fuel). Levels are very low. The gas analyser shows all the fuel is being burnt. So how in the heck can yuo burn it more efficiently. The answer is you cannot. You can add touluene, and other octane boosters that will allow more spark advance, but if you really want to take advantage of it and its cost, you may as well pull the pistons and or change the cylinder head to give more compression thus allowing you to squeeze the combustable mixture harder and extract more power from it. By doing this you may have difficulty in passing smog testing on the newer cares.
OK. I am getting tired of typing.
Here is another. They can put a man on the moon, but we dont have a cheaper better metodof transport. Gas is cheap. Even at 10 bucks a gallon. Think of the amount of energy or work that gallon can do. Would you want to walk 20 or30 miles carrying 1 ton or more. How about moving 10 yards of conrete 5 miles using a wheelbarrow? Starts to sound cheap doesnt it?
If you really want to save gas, convert your vehicle to run on LNG. A couple of years ago it was about 80cents/ gallon. I cant remember the btu value for a gallon, but it was way cheaper than gasoline.
The next cheapest fuel to run on was/is electricity. Cost are about 1 dollar for the equivalent distance traveled of a gasoline vehicle. About 1/4 of the cost for fuel energy. Downside is cost of new vehicle, battery technology, and the cost of replacing this stuff when it wears out.
OK. I'm done. Might type some morelater.

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Fri May 30, 2008 4:26 pm

If you really want to save gas, convert your vehicle to run on LNG.

OK, what's the skinny on lng? What's the best, cheapest, or quickest way to get there?

I looked at buying the Civic lng car, but the range is barely 200 miles. That means it's not a touring car, or you have to fill the trunk space with another flask.

I agree, gasoline is cheap and it would be plentiful if the dirty rotten scum-sucking politicos weren't opposed to U.S.

phlatnose · Post by **phlatnose** » Fri May 30, 2008 7:06 pm

Hi GRIZZ,
Yes there are downsides to every type of vehicle powered by different fuels. It depends on how much you want to haul and how far you need to travel. That is the beauty of gasoline, and also the reason why we still use the piston engine. Its cheap and relatively reliable.
Many years ago in England, a guy built an electric car that was recharged by a generator and engine mounted on the vehicle. He used the most efficient engine ever devised even to this day. He fitted a small gas turbine engine which turned a generator when the charge in the batteries fell below a certain level. The turbine always operated at its maximum efficiency, which far exceeds that of any other engine. The big plus is you can run these engines on just about anything. The downside was noise, and it would tough to get it past the EPA for use in the family car or truck.
I think it was in the early 70's, Leyland or AEC built an experimental truck/tractor that was a turbine. The thing had all sortsof power, but was uneconomical due to the fact that stopping and starting and accelerating does not favor turbines. When the turbine was operated at a steady state at maximum efficiency, nothing could touch it for power and economy.
LNG is not readily availible here in this part of california, but I understand that it may be more favorable in the mid west and northern states. I was contemplating switching over to diesel engines here, and burning waste motor oil in them as we used to do in england years ago. The cali laws state that you may not burn used motor oil, so that rules it out. I dont know what the feds say or what the rules are in other states.
All you have to do is cut the oil with some white spirit or cut with diesel. some of the old lister engines run well on 95-5 oil diesel mix. You have to decoke them every coupleof months os. Just rev the nuts off them, and it clears out the soot. If you can run on waste oil, there is no cheaper way to go. Forget veggie and WVO, used motor oil is cheaper or even free.

shawn45 · Post by **shawn45** » Sat May 31, 2008 12:33 pm

Browns gas is 2 parts hydrogen and 1 part oxygen, one liter of water makes 1600 liters of Browns gas. Will it help fuel milage, I don't know but I am having some good cheap fun trying .When it is all said and done I will know weather or not it works, not just taking some ones word that it can't work.

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Sat May 31, 2008 1:12 pm

I'm having a hard time trying to see why using electricity off the alternator is automatically going to make the brown's gas useless. I understand about conservation of energy. But I also know that alternators put out a lot of juice all the time, and extra amp isn't gonna break anything, there's probably that much leakage in most older cars anyway.

Think about exhaust powered turbos, maybe that's a way to drive an alternator using otherwise wasted energy.

So you're using a tiny fraction of the gas btus to break down the water, and you're getting some of the energy out of the water to supplement the gas. It's not the same thing as perpetual motion.

I think if the reality of the proposition lived up to its hype you'd see those things hooked up on everything...

Still got the fingers crossed...

Grizz

phlatnose · Post by **phlatnose** » Sat May 31, 2008 4:52 pm

GRIZZ,
Making browns gas from electricity isnt useless, just pointless if you have to burn fuel to do it. Alternators do not put out vast amounts of electricity all the time. Its peak output occurs after staring an engine, when the battery has to be replenishe. All the remaining electrics in the vehicle consume a lot less than the starter motor. Thats what the voltage regulator is for. Without that the battery would be toast in short time.
An exhaust driven electrical generator can work, and considering 80% or more of the enrgy in fuel goes down the tail pipe or cooling system, is thinking along the right lines.
The worst offender on a vehicle is probably the a/c system. When operating, at todays fuel prices, it costs around 1 dollar an hour to keep it running. It consumes a lot of power to run it. It becomes obvious when you get the vehicle under load and especially noticable in a small engine. switch the a/c on and off and see what happens.
Braking and stopping is wasteful of fuel and energy. All of that vast amount of energy need to be saved or stored. It is termed as regenerative braking today, and is used by some electric vehicles. This enrgy can be used quite simply to suppliment the a/c, and electrical systems, but its cost effectiveness depends on the terrain which you drive.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Sat May 31, 2008 6:22 pm

Phlatnose,
From what I've seen from the state of Ca. most likely the main reason they don't want you to burn used motor oil is because it robs them of the tax. There have even been issues with people who are making their own bio diesel getting snagged for not paying the road use tax. that would be the same as burning off road diesel or "red" diesel on road.

Several years ago I worked for a company hauling gas and fuel. We were a common carrier. From time to time someone would cross drop a load of fuel. Gas in diesel or diesel in gas. We would then have to pump the contaminated fuel out and it would stay at our terminal and every time we would bring fuel in for our trucks we would pump 5-600 gallons into the 5,000 we used ourselves. This still resulted in "HOT" fuel but we were able to use it up.

243dave · Post by **243dave** » Sat May 31, 2008 6:23 pm

Making Browns gas is not useless or pointless if done correctly. A HHO generator (or generators wired in series) can be made to draw less power than your headlights. Do you notice a drop in engine power or mpg when you turn on your headlights? I don't. This isn't new technology, people have done it sucessfully for years. Internet claims most of the times are greatly exaggerated, mostly the ones selling a product. A couple of fellows at work have them in their vehicles and are getting another 10 mpg, and they are as dumb as me, maybe a little dumber. Maybe I can get 12 mpg!! I'll find out soon. Dave

phlatnose · Post by **phlatnose** » Sat May 31, 2008 7:12 pm

243dave,
Youmay not notice a decrease in mpg when you switch on your lights, but there is. Where is the extra power coming from to drive the geneator that little bit harder?
What vehicles are getting another 10mpg?
Rusty, I dont think so. California would love to get more taxes on anything they can. Its the EPA and greenies here. Increase in particulate and soot plus other contaminates in the used oil are a concern also. p.s. the local diner just had all of its wate veggi oil stolen.
The whole thing is a bit of a joke. Electricity and cost of fuel here is expensive. During the winter months lights are not burning late into the evening. People are burning more wood to heat their homes The newer homes are not allowed fireplaces. There will be limitations on burning wood here soon. If you go outside at night, the air is disgusting. Woodsmoke burns the back of your throat. Here we are in 2008, and in a lot of respects we are no further along than 1908.

phlatnose · Post by **phlatnose** » Sat May 31, 2008 7:12 pm

243dave,
Youmay not notice a decrease in mpg when you switch on your lights, but there is. Where is the extra power coming from to drive the geneator that little bit harder?
What vehicles are getting another 10mpg?
Rusty, I dont think so. California would love to get more taxes on anything they can. Its the EPA and greenies here. Increase in particulate and soot plus other contaminates in the used oil are a concern also. p.s. the local diner just had all of its wate veggi oil stolen.
The whole thing is a bit of a joke. Electricity and cost of fuel here is expensive. During the winter months lights are not burning late into the evening. People are burning more wood to heat their homes The newer homes are not allowed fireplaces. There will be limitations on burning wood here soon. If you go outside at night, the air is disgusting. Woodsmoke burns the back of your throat. Here we are in 2008, and in a lot of respects we are no further along than 1908.

phlatnose · Post by **phlatnose** » Sat May 31, 2008 7:14 pm

Guys,
sorry about the diabolical typing and typo's. I think I am need of a new keyboard. Maybe even some new glasses.

Bridger158 · Post by **Bridger158** » Sat May 31, 2008 9:05 pm

Here's an interesting but long thread about this from the trapperman forums (hope yall don't mind me posting links to threads there occasionally)

http://www.trapperman.com/forum/ubbthre ... 51/fpart/1

243dave · Post by **243dave** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:17 pm

Phlatnose, the one truck was a 94 chevy 4x4 with a 350. This guy has always seemed to be honest, he claims he went from 11 to 21 mpg. The other guy had a dodge truck, not sure of the year or motor. I talked to another guy at work who claimed he got 60 mpg out of a dodge caravan. He went on to tell he decided to take his hho generator out of his van and put it on his riding lawnmower, powering it on hydrogen alone. Of course I didn't believe his B.S.. I just don't know why someone would lie like that if your not selling anything!! I'm not saying this stuff can't be done I'm saying this individual can't do what he claims. This guy said he wasn't even leaning back his fuel to get that 60 mpg. Nuff about that. Yesterday I put my HHO generator in my truck and it is running fine. No explosions or anything!! Keep your fingers crossed for me. Should have some numbers in a few days. Dave

gundownunder · Post by **gundownunder** » Sat Jun 07, 2008 5:26 pm

From what I've read you shouldn't get an explosion unless your storing the gas, which shouldn't happen if your only generating while the engine is running, and there is nowhere for the gas to get trapped and build up.

Meanwhile, we all sit here with bated(sp?) breath waiting for the result of your test run.

Way OT Saving money on gas

Way OT Saving money on gas

NOPE

Just don't do this on a car you care about, because your

Re: Way OT Saving money on gas