more irony...
you do actually read your posts right?

 

IRONY to the power of ten!!! Seriously though... do you even look at what you type? You do have a good sense of humor whether or not it's deliberate.
Many of your assumptions are painful, you sound relatively bright so it concerns me that you have been missing some very reasonable and rational conclusions.

I dont expect you to respond to these quotes that I am providing to you
via...ummmm yourself, but I sincerely do hope you realize what you are saying in your responses and learn from them intead of perpetually antagonizing, and using poorly substantiated logic to justify it.

 

To the moderators (you know who you are...ahhahaaa) I think that with the exception of some needless personal attacks this thread has not gone off topic.
I say this because this thread seemed to be started as some odd sort of intellectual survey of sorts, with that in mind I would like it to continue on its rather odd path so that people have the chance to truly understand where some reasoning comes from and how it can either be misconstrued
and/or just poorly justified, or perhaps properly fullfiled (highly subjective yet appropriately and at times functionaly undeniable)

lets not poopoo or belittle (its the more apropos word for pejorative) someone for responding in a reasonable way, and if you just happen to say "my bad" that does not mean all is functionaly correct...
for all those who like to say "mea culpa"

 

Snap Fit-
I guess that you have some point, but I can't guess what it is/they are with your obscure posts. Please feel free to elucidate further.

 

No prob...clarification comming....but which one in particular or just the general gist? (As it changes how much I have to stretch my fingers first...hahaa )
I have recieved some feedback that was contrary to them being of the obscure nature... but I aim to please.... so without further ado-
Being ironic in ones hypocrisy is fun for humors sake but it does not make ones points more apparent or valid and serves little to educate.
That seems to pretty much sum it up...or atleast make it relatively truncated right?hahaa

You are good at the being funny with irony (so i guess it is indeed intentional )...introducing the word obscure
in your post about someone else then asking for elucidation. Thats pretty funny if not completely unnecessary. but still pretty funny.

 

Okay, well, whatever your point is, it's nice that it brings you so much enjoyment.

Back to the topic to keep mod TOOL happy, with all the yelling about how obvious the scam is here, and how it can't work-won't work-is impossible, etc. etc., no one has argued with any scientific fact to prove how it couldn't work. It it did work, they wouldn't need the scam sales tactics with a money-back guarantee that is actually a trap. If packaged properly, it could work.

Just like the best science fiction & horror books and movies, there is enough reality to set the stage, but they need the CGI special effects to get you involved. This site couldn't afford CGI- just a bearded guy smiling as he breathes the magic engine exhaust.

 

Hey guys so I heard about this thing called the Tornado.. it gives you 20 extra horsepower and will give you 4000 miles per gallon....

 

edit lolz its the same guy speaking.... on the christian video lolz

ooo and btw at 1 :14 on the hydro boost video isnt that a .... storage place? lolz not a compound for research lolz

Dennis Lee Scam & Hydro Boost Scam



look at this guys

 

Just because I can.....

so anybody notice something funny on the front page of FF today (new threads)

....hmmmm....

 

I'm in the camp that's on the fence w/ this one -- I've been on the fence for two years and counting. The science behind the electrolysis of water and combustion of H+O makes a lot of sense.

There are a lot of unburned combustibles leaving our internal combustion engines -- hence the need for catalytic converters. If adding hydrogen and some oxygen into the equation burns a large percentage of those previously wasted combustibles you would see a gain in gas mileage.

I wish that someone that's not financially motivated would take a look at this stuff.

 

SO, my turn.
An hour and half later, I get through all 4 pages of this thread, hoping, HOPING, someone would get back directly to the technology at hand. Ignoring this PICC stuff (I think they are getting a tad too ambitious) and back to the HAFC, there are tons of start up companies - via internet AND physical store fronts - designing, manufacturing, and selling this product. A company of of West Palm, FL I think was one of the first to develop and sell the product, and it's been getting great reviews and coverage.
(Before I continue, I'll be happy to admit my own lack of knowledge in chemistry, despite my undergraduate degree in biology, I am more medically oriented. But I can break down facts to get the basic idea(s).)
So, I'm not going to get into the details of the technology or how and why it works, but it appears to. I can't speak for the specific manufacturer that the OP referenced, but at least I can say what I know and have heard about ::HYDRO-4000:: , the company out of West Palm. Their unit sells for $1200 - clearly based on the concept of supply and demand as the materials and cost of labor comes no where near being able to justify that cost, however it seems more companies are acquiring blueprints or reverse engineering the original design to sell it in the low $100s range, much more affordable.
The local news station in West Palm did a full coverage story; they didn't get into the science or details much, except saying that it is something like a hydrogen fuel cell, only by keeping the components in water form until they are needed they are able to keep the H atoms stable. (I'll reference the Honda FCX Clarity, now in limited production, hopefully someday mass production/availability) and they went on to installing the unit on their news truck, a dodge durango. They dyno'd the truck for quite a length of time to get fuel consumption and MPG, as well as driving and recording the MPGs before installation. Real world and dyno'd values combined they calculated 9.4 mpgs for the durango. (They also suggested the vehicles mechanical history contributed to the particularly low MPG despite being a full sized SUV.) After having the kit installed for 30 days, driving to and from news events and transporting personnel and gear, they retested the vehicle and determined an increased MPG of, I believe 21.5 MPG. This, to me, is enough to get me wondering what this sort of technology can do for me. News Channel 5 is currently retesting the kit on another SUV, this time from a volunteer TV viewer, a Chevy Tahoe. The preliminary tests indicate a real world MPG of 11.8 mpg, when dyno'd, set to a load of 108, whatever that means. They are testing the vehicle for one month and should have results in July.

Unfortunately like any new concept, idea or technology, there WILL be people looking to make a quick buck off the hopes and fears of the public, especially at such a critical time in the nation's fuel consumption and economy. It's normal to be skeptical. But at the very least, there must be some companies out there with a genuine interest in assessing the need for higher fuel efficiency and making it available and affordable to the general public.

So, I'll end of this note; I know I don't present my thoughts and ideas as clearly and understandably as others but that's just who I am. Also, my hope is this gets the discussion directed back to the topic at hand. Aside from all the "intellectual debating" here (as informative and/or humorous as as 4 pages have been) I'd really like to see what others go out, research, dig up, and report back here about this technology. I'm also contemplating purchasing the design plans or getting a more affordable kit from the "follow the leader" companies behind Hydro4000.

 

Yay! to Dave Brown and sevenaprils-
The two adults that this thread was posted to attract to a discussion- thanks for coming albeit a little late. As I have stated numerous times, the chemistry here is real, and if the mechanics were properly executed, such a system would increase fuel economy in any gas-powered vehicle. The manufacturer behind the infomercial looks to be extremely dishonest because of the b.s. showmanship in the videos, but mainly because of the impossibility of the buyer making good on the money-back guarantee (needing non-existent factory trained techs to "adjust" your ECU to get the promised results).

Anyway, it is nice to see that, months later, there are actually people in the forum membership that are able to see the possible practicality of this idea. I think that we will see this commercially available fairly soon.

 

I've been looking at various hydrogen generators on the internet -- comparing their cost vs volume of HOH generation, installation components, etc. I do have a lot of questions for the designers that no one seems able to answer.

I'm not sure what the volume/intake cycle of HOH needs to be to positively affect your engines efficiency. Everyone says "more HOH is better" but how much do you need to see a difference? Usually catalysts for chemical reactions are used in relatively small quantities, compared to the other "ingredients." I'm also wondering if the alternator on the Fit has enough oomph to power the cells that output a reasonable volume of HOH.

Everyone that refutes the science says that you consume more energy producing the HOH than you get back from its combustion. But, they're missing the point. You're not combusting the HOH, you're using the hydrogen to speed up the flame propagation in the combustion chamber. The oxygen being added to the mix is also a benefit. Of course your O2 sensor will take that extra oxygen into account when adjusting your air/fuel ratio.

Modding the ECU is supposed to change the air/fuel ratio, making the engine burn a leaner mixture. This is possible because injecting hydrogen into a fuel mixture effectively raises its octane rating. The problem becomes, how much has your octane rating increased? It would be nice to be able to modify your air/fuel ratio and O2 sensor readings on-the-fly and while monitoring your exhaust gas temps -- at least until you get the system dialed in.

These are just some of my thoughts on the subject. I'm at work so I can't do a complete brain dump.

 

Sorry for showing up late to the party. It's been a busy month and I don't get on the boards as much as I used to.

Also, after researching this technology for so long, I'd gotten frustrated by the lack of interest in the car forums and stopped searching for related threads. The vast majority of respondents want to dismiss it as snake oil but that's like condemning a new car that the auto magazines haven't tested and you haven't driven. Try it or point me towards credible evidence, then tell me what you think.

Using the excuse that "if the car manufacturers haven't done, it must not be viable" is faulty logic. Electrolysis of water requires a continuing supply of clean water to the electrolyzer. That requires attention by the operator of the vehicle -- something that's not too popular nowadays. When the first recommended maintenance interval for some cars is 100,000 miles and the federal government has mandated tire pressure sensors for new vehicles it's obvious the typical driver doesn't want any more responsibility than putting gas in their tank. Asking drivers to check water levels at every fill-up wouldn't make the car manufacturers popular w/ very many drivers -- except for hyper-milers or guys that like technology. My wife would be all for it, but who would be making sure the water is topped up?

I can't recall offhand how efficient the combustion process is in internal combustion engines but it's not great. Have the manufacturers been working to make it more efficient? Not really. There goal is to meet government requirements and turn a profit. In terms of efficiency, the catalytic converter is a band-aid. It's there to take care of the unburnt combustibles so we can forget they're being wasted. That's like burning your garbage so you don't have to thinking about how to make your lifestyle more efficient. The world's governments mandate fuel efficiency and emission levels. They don't specify combustion efficiency. If they said "every motor has to be 35% efficient," then you would see more innovation in combustion technologies.[IMG]chrome://dictionarytip/skin/book.png[/img]

 

Even if this was proven to work, I would not buy it. The problem many "new" technology is that it is sufficiently tested. I've seen many times in the past technology that improves one area of a system and either decreases or destroys another area of the system. Given that my Fit is my only car and I actually like it, I wouldn't jeopardize the tested technology that's it. There's wonderful "new" automotive technology that's 10-20 years old that's not commercially available because it either has to many drawbacks or just hasn't been tested enough.

As inelegantly manxman has presented his intelligence (insults turn people off to you regardless of knowledge level). I agree with his statement: "If packaged properly, it could work." Although, anything packaged properly will work...otherwise it's not packaged properly.

 

Check out the article at MIT and this one at Purdue. Then check out the dates. This isn't new technology -- it's just overlooked.

This stuff works but no one w/ any money is advancing the research.

 

Of all the electrolyzers I've seen, I like this guys the best. The design is sound and I like the fact his prices are reasonable, he's straightforward in what he says and he posts videos of his work. The website is cheesy but I think that's better than "slick."

His complete generators seem a bit expensive but when I build mine from scratch, I'll probably use one of his electrodes.

 

Nice find Dave. I am looking forward to your results when you build your system. I like this guy's electrode design also, but wish for his sake that he had done a better job on the quality of his videos. Also, his soldering torches seem to be more trouble than they are worth if you have a lot of soldering to do. What you might save by making your own gas you would lose in the slowness and low output of the process, large amount of space required and danger of accidents, when compared to a hardware store bottle of propane.

 

Thread cleaned... lets stay on topic with information on these water to gas kits.

 

Much appreciated Chris. Thank you. BTW, I sent a PM to mod sam asking him to close the thread if he felt it necessary.