Water Burning Engines - What the NWO don't want you to know

reply to post by firepilot


If I remember correctly, that's not correct

The energy required to seperate the H and O is actually less than what you get from the combustion by 10% or 20%. Read Puharich papers (www.linux-host.org...) for the chemistry.

I think the problem has so far been the efficiency at both ends which does not allow overunity even if there is 20% extra available theoretically.

however, I haven't visited these ideas for a couple of years, so am out of touch. Currently looking at compressed air and implosion tech/theory which seems much more promising.

For this to work you would have to be making a lot of H and O. If I did my math right, and neglecting air flow efficiency, at 3000 rpm a 2.0 litter engine will be taking in 50 liters or 1.75 cubic feet of air a second. It seems it would take a lot on HHO to have any real effect.

Originally posted by Mindmelding
I'm saying that if you want to use the argument of authority you need to break anonimity or I will play your "scientist" card with my "hahaha really?!" card.

Thanks for that. It made me laugh. And thanks for this:

What I personally need to know is the ressonance frequency which breaks the water molecule.

I rather think that many of the overunity devices we've heard about use this principle. It seems so obvious, and when "scientists" turn up to say that you can only get the molecule to split with the sledgehammer of electrolysis, I always think, "never heard of resonance then?"

I recently saw a documentary about Tesla that mentioned experiments he did with resonance frequencies. He scared construction workers witless by putting a very gentle mechanical hammer on the steel frame of a building under construction, and tuning its frequency until the whole fram began to shake violently.

OK you guys are still operating on the principle that the engine burns the HHO gas as a fuel that is entirely wrong. A system like ours is simply a catalyst IT ENHANCES THE BURN RATE OF THE FUEL. In short the typical engine is less than 50% efficient that means it wastes over 50% of the fuel that enters the engine. OK what HHO or any catalyst does for that matter does is improve that burn rate meaning you burn a higher percentage of the fuel. therefore to maintain a car running at 55mph on the interstate that is 50% efficient, you are holding the throttle at 35% to maintain speed if you increase the efficiency to 65% then you have to hold the throttle at 25% (these numbers are just examples) therefore using less fuel.

if anyone would like to see how this works our research and development center is open to the public (upon signing a NDA and few other things) You guys are more than welcome to come and see how this all works.

check out the How it works section of my website gives some more details hhotek.com...

This discussion has been going on for a while now on a few different sources so i just made a blog post explaining all this in laymens terms for the most part. you can see it here
hhotek.com...

I have a 80's model suburban with a carbed 350 v-8 in it. I made the water for gas stuff.

I've got six cells. It hasn't improved my mileage per say. There are other factors involved with it. Such as the fuel grade at the pump. Ethanol, and winter blends play heavily.

I have leaned out the metering rods, and jets. Tuned the engine.

What I am getting is a power gain that I can feel. I've got it leaned out so much that if the HHO system shuts off I can feel it. I don't know why I'm not seeing a mpg gain, but it does have turbo 400 transmission; which doesn't have overdrive.

So what I do see is power gain, I can see the Hydroxy gas formed in the bottles, and I've had them explode with a backfire.....................That's because I didn't put backflow preventers. Just minor explosion, didn't hurt anything.

So, IMO the tech. is solid, but surpressed on purpose. On the note of using all the electricity from the alt.? Nope, there is a lot of energy produced by the alt. which is never used.

Originally posted by sanchoearlyjones
I have a 80's model suburban with a carbed 350 v-8 in it. I made the water for gas stuff.

I've got six cells. It hasn't improved my mileage per say. There are other factors involved with it. Such as the fuel grade at the pump. Ethanol, and winter blends play heavily.

I have leaned out the metering rods, and jets. Tuned the engine.

What I am getting is a power gain that I can feel. I've got it leaned out so much that if the HHO system shuts off I can feel it. I don't know why I'm not seeing a mpg gain, but it does have turbo 400 transmission; which doesn't have overdrive.

So what I do see is power gain, I can see the Hydroxy gas formed in the bottles, and I've had them explode with a backfire.....................That's because I didn't put backflow preventers. Just minor explosion, didn't hurt anything.

So, IMO the tech. is solid, but surpressed on purpose. On the note of using all the electricity from the alt.? Nope, there is a lot of energy produced by the alt. which is never used.

Couple things what is your total amp load? if it is more than 10 amps per .75 liters of HHO you will not see a mileage gain

another thing is you said alternator creates extra power, that is true to an extent but if you install the March labs system (one of my competitors that we tested) and set it up to run 30 amps (which is ok) you can turn the unit on and off with the car running and the car will idle up and down. The reason for this is even at 30 amps the system only put out about 1 liter per minute, which is very inefficient. and the unit running is actually pulling more current than the alternator can put out at idle.

reply to post by HHO TEK


Er? I've got the water4gas homemade........ I've got six quart jars.. I'm not sure the liters there. It pulls under 20 amps because that's what it is fused for.

I've played with White vinegar, and baking soda. The most power I've gotten was from the baking soda; at about 2 teaspoons.

Like I said, I'm getting a little more power, but the fuel mileage isn't that hot.

I'm getting around 13.9mpg's which is better than I've read many getting, but that's still a gas guzzler.

The complexity of gearing, and engine tuning also play a major role in it.......... Then you've got the external factors of road conditions, and fuel grades varying from location to location.

I've been in many forums dealing with carbed cars, and the fact of people not having a clue how to adjust the metering rods, or jets is commonality.

From what I gather the average for a vehicle similar to mine is 10mpg. Still, again, just a big beast I guess.

Did you ever get a baseline mileage? it sounds that you are getting a little bit of an increase but from the water 4 gas stuff ive never seen anyone that actually saw any results. The other problem with there setup is it doesnt last long....how often do you have to replace your electrodes?

I have a few older models that i have on the shelf that i can get you real cheap that will be light years better than what you have now

reply to post by HHO TEK


The electrodes have lasted fine. I've not had any problems with them. I've actually not had many problems with them at all. They have gotten mucked up, but then I just switch to white vinegar, and they look good as new, but the baking soda does work better.

As far as mileage base lines? I drive the rig mainly in the winter, up north. They add a bunch of crap to the fuel in the winter....... So, it makes any kind of baseline difficult.

Imo the technology is solid, and it is big oil suppressing it. Also, imo it is very difficult to actually visualize mpg gains when many of the people selling the HHO systems have little to no engine experience.

Not to many 'motor heads' have real good understandings of carbed engines anymore. I know a man that raced cars in the 50's, and 60's. He said that with an eight barrel carburetor he got 28 miles to the gallon..........It was in the way he had the dual 4 barrel carb set up. It usually only needed to barrels to run off of.

Another example is that a turbo 400 is a 3 speed automatic. Great for heavy pulling, racing, and offroad applications. However, it is a direct drive with a 1 to 1 ratio, or not very good mileage at high speeds. If you had overdrive, or high gear with a .73 ratio you'd get an extra 3 to 4 mpgs in something like I've got.

The point I'm making is water as a fuel has merit, but it is surpressed; however, the overall efficiency of a vehicle has many many many components; which seems to be overlooked at many peddling the HHO systems.

made some good points there. Try using KOH in your cells instead of NaHCO3 it is much cleaner. if you are going on the acid side of the spectrum use acetic acid you can buy it from chem companines (causes electrode life to be reduced dramtically)

As far as you saying alot of guys that are selling these type systems not knowing anything that is correct 100% And they are building them in the kitchen of there house based on plans they found online. We are one of the very few that spent the proper time testing and researching this before ever lauching anything which is a key to why 2 years later we are still here and bigger than ever.

if you are a car guy check out our skyline 570 rwhp and over 30 mpg
below is a link to the article on my blog
hhotek.com...


edit: oh yea another thing you can do to your truck is add a gear vendor

[edit on 1-8-2009 by HHO TEK]

reply to post by HHO TEK


Again I have to ask, how much gas are you making in a min? An engine will be using a lot of air and it would take more then a handful of H and O atoms to make a difference.

I would also like know how much current you are putting through the water.

[edit on 2-8-2009 by numb99]

Originally posted by johnnyflip
As a scientist I am calling B.S. on this one. If it sounds too good to be true it most assuredly is. Notice the complete lack of actual tech data.

Autowrench:
Really? I am a mechanical engineer, and I say it does work, provided the proper materials are used in construction of the reactor, and it is constructed and installed properly following instructions.
Iceland is already turning water into transportation fuel using this technology. You scientist types, I do value your opinion, but build the device and bench test it before saying it will not work. These things have been working since the 40s, but it is suppressed tech, and people have been murdered for having it. Have I seen it work? Yes, I have, on the bench. This design right here.
www.keelynet.com...
To any mechanical types who are thinking of building one of these and running it on your vehicle: Keep quiet about it! Big Oil will do anything to keep this down and out of your hands.

Related:
fuel-efficient-vehicles.org...

www.fuel-efficient-vehicles.org...

www.squidoo.com...

www.panacea-bocaf.org...

www.hhogasgenerator.com...

Originally posted by numb99
reply to post by HHO TEK

 

Again I have to ask, how much gas are you making in a min? An engine will be using a lot of air and it would take more then a handful of H and O atoms to make a difference.

I would also like know how much current you are putting through the water.

[edit on 2-8-2009 by numb99]

Our cells make 1.1 liter per min per 10 amps

and regarding your comment about qty please read this post you will understand. I have explained this in depth here (actually read it before you repeat yourself again thanks ) hhotek.com...

For those skeptics, here's a cell design that I built a couple of years ago. Non magnetic stainless steel tube, wrapped with Screen door mesh, overlay wrapped with stainless steel welding wire. Lots of gas with only 6 amp, in regular tap water, no distillation. Had I distilled the water, it most likely would have been pumping out alot more.



www.youtube.com...

I haven't messed with this stuff since though, because of other pressing matters in my daily life, but one day I'd like to resume my work, because I believe I was headed in the right direction and on to something for sure with this design.

Cool video

few things. you had 1 cell meaning 12 volts went into that one cell. 2.4 is what is needed for electrolysis to take place efficiently. So with that design you are basically wasting about 9 volts in the form of heat. thats why after you ran it for a minute or 2 it would be very hot and the water would start to boil after 10-15 mins. (been there done it...lol) so you have to series numerous cells together to get the optimal 2.4 volts per cell froma 12 volt system.

nonetheless very cool first time project

Thank you. I actually had planned on doing a series of these cells to balance the voltage, because as you said, it would get hot, and at some point, the water would just start to boil. I haven't done anything with it yet though for a year or better. I have all of the materials and stuff, just no motivation to work on it, with all of the life drama happening right now. I even have a square wave pulsing device that goes in line with the cells if I ever get back to it. I also have to find my journals that I used to log my progress.

Originally posted by Oreyeon
Thank you. I actually had planned on doing a series of these cells to balance the voltage, because as you said, it would get hot, and at some point, the water would just start to boil. I haven't done anything with it yet though for a year or better. I have all of the materials and stuff, just no motivation to work on it, with all of the life drama happening right now. I even have a square wave pulsing device that goes in line with the cells if I ever get back to it. I also have to find my journals that I used to log my progress.

if your cell is designed properly you will not need a PWM pulse width modifier that is just an answer to a poor design.
Good luck

They shut down the images hosted on fortunecity.com

Hopefully the webmaster switches the image hosters.

reply to post by Oreyeon


Autowrench:
Agreed, the reactor does get hot, but the amps fed to the unit in my application is 30, same as a lot of other devices, and my alternator is a one wore 100A model. The trick is this, the plans on the internet want you to produce and "feed," operative word the Brown's Gas into the engine. Wrong. Some of you who said that it takes more power to produce HHO on demand is not effective, and you are correct. The sweet spot has not been found yet. Also there is the complicated control unit, and the throttle to power ratio is difficult to set up. Here is what we figured out, instead of the original plan, just feed the reactor and draw that available HHO into the engine by vacuum. We put a tee into the positive crankcase ventilation line, and fed a common 5/8 vacuum line to the reactor outlet. Now we cannot run the engine on HHO alone, but! the HHO really helps with mileage, I am here to tell you. In one controlled test we got 68 mpg from a 3800 pound car with 350 c.i. V-8 engine and automatic trans over a somewhat hilly road surface. This technology will work, but it needs some serious design people working on it full time, for a manufactured, easy to install unit that will retrofit any car or truck. For a reasonable price. Using the engine vacuum to draw the HHO works a lot better than trying to control with voltage.

Before you ask, we do not run this on our cars yet, and I stress the word "yet." Just like a lot of you in here, we are testing, experimenting, trying to find a better way. All you guys who haven't yet built a prototype, and tested the technology should lay off, and let this thing happen. Here are two webpages everyone should look at...

www.byronwine.com...

Among the more than 350 documents/videos concerning the energy scam you will find:

* There is an abundant supply of oil in Alaska
* 376-mpg technology was demonstrated in 1973
* 72-mpg and 104-mpg automobiles were sold in Europe
* The Japanese have two water fueled automobiles on the street

This nation sent a probe more than 400-million miles, landed safely, sent back video and dug in the soil. Yet, we can’t duplicate, except on the space station, the Japanese water-fuel technology for automobiles. Does this make any sense?

waterpoweredcar.com...
The Inventors of Water Powered Cars

If simple electrolysis worked to make hydrogen from clean H2O, then we would have water powered cars already. Most Engineers, Mechanics are taught, it takes more energy to produce enough energy to propel a car, therefore it will never work. You cannot break the laws of physics. They say you will not get enough BTU's from hydrogen or egas to push an ICE motor. They are right, Gasoline gets too hot, and 78% of the energy produced goes right out the exhaust pipe. A complete waste of energy is applied everyday we drive our present vehicles and also the heat contributes to the Global warming. With "On Board Electrolysis" with egas or supplied by hydrogen tanks, you don't need all this heat. What you need is strong combustion to push the piston down. Hydrogen is 2-1/2 times more combustion power than gasoline, with less heat! The inventors below manage to propel a car on hydrogen, so can you. A trillion dollar industry awaits you. Many of the inventors lives were threatened. Yull Brown had shots fired into his kitchen, Stan Meyers was threatened and eventually poisoned, a few months Yull Brown dies of old age. . Andrija Puharich mysteriously fell down a flight of stairs. Carl Cella died in prison. Today their are way too many of us to control. The time is now.

One last thing, fellow mechanics and motor heads, and those poor working people who cannot afford expensive gasoline and are willing to do something about it....build something!
Make this happen! Even BIG OIL cannot kill us all, and tell me, would it not be great to drive right past a gas station with a smile on your face. When ours is completely operational, i will post the design, and the tech on how to do it. All I ask is for others to do the same. Together we can start a Movement....you know, like we did it in the 1960s!