Legoland951

Sorry but I thought you were being the know it all by attacking other people who do not believe based on what they see because of what they thought they have learned from high school. What I learned back in 1981 which I still very much remember is that OXYGEN DOES NOT BURN. It is the definition of combustion. When you burn something, you add oxygen to it as in oxidation. If you burn hydrogen, you get H2O, if you burn carbon, you get CO (incomplete combustion) or CO2. You get the idea.

You obviously have never turned a hand generator either. Its something I thought I learned from junior high school. I guess you don't know the difference between pressure and torque either, which is taught in the first course in physics. The alternator does not have constant "pressure" or torque (proper measure to turn alternator". The torque required to turn alternator is DIFFERENT depending on load due to power usage including power used for electrolysis. If you think load does not change due to power drawn either through higher amperage or voltage, then try to power your city generator with a hand crank. The gas engine is very inefficient mainly due to heat dissapation. Now if someone made a steam generator off of engine heat which provides power for the electrolysis, then I believe it. If someone use a turbocharger utilizing the kinetic energy of the exhaust gas to generator power, then I believe it. This I do not.

There are always inventions that defy conventional wisdom and I never said its impossible. However, there is a process called critical thinking, which most people this day in age never learned. Yes that is one of those things I thought I learned in high school by a very good US government course teacher.

944J

im not arguing about the function of the alternator... i'm 100% right in what i say that the efficiency of the car can be increased... also without a test none of us know... this is all i said...

also someone said not to put the oxygen into the combustion chamber because "technically" oxygen doesnt burn... sounds silly to me...

944J

he should have taught you to TEST things before stating a conclusion.

theory - test - conclusion

not

talk out my *** - nothing - nothing

Darwantae951

Considering everyone here is using the knowledge base that they gained in college, you're the one who sounds like you're talking out your ***.

You keep falling back onto your life line of "you haven't tested it so you can't talk" and it's getting repetitive. Why don't you shut up, buy the kit, test it, and tell us if it worked or not? Or are you not gonna waste your own money in case it doesn't work?

944J

i didnt make a claim that is worked or didnt work, i just said it sounds foolish to say that it doesnt work without an actual test.

Jfrahm

It's like the old saying: "A day in the lab will save you an hour in the library."

Go ahead and test it. Personally I find I do not need to test dumb stuff I'm quite sure isn't going to work, like putting a fan on a sailboat and powering it with a windmill.

This HHO stuff is on the same level as that. Really. So dumb it's not worth testing. I already did the quickmath on it and found that your best case is losing half the gasoline you put towards making HHO.

I'm out.
-Joel.

944J

why dont you post it up here then as a benefit to us all?

Darwantae951

I didn't say you "said" it would work, I merely said quit arguing unless you are going to test it yourself.

Strike-Force

He did, post #15, last post first page.

Legoland951

So where is the test that this works? I am sure you were taught everything is a theory until TESTED POSITIVE. The test in my mind tells me it won't work and I won't waste my money to test it until they prove to me it works. I am not going to test that gravity attract the same way I am not going to test sticking my finger in the wall socket will shock me. Also, I am sick of your insults. Its obvious if you read others posts who is talking out of their *** and who appears to be an idiot. For someone who can't tell the difference between pressure and torque, you are a disgrace to the UC regents/associates. Let me explain: pressure increases when your sperm builds up from lack of sex. Torque is something that happens when you get an erection in the form of lift around the pivot where your nuts are attached. I hope thats simple enough for you. One can only pretend to be stupid but not the other way around so stop trying.

What kind of bonehead would not know about loads on a generator/alternator? Its the most basic knowledge for anyone with a science degree. If you did, maybe you can see where others are coming from. You need to go back to school.

alordofchaos

No, it's not. you need electricity/electrolisis to create your Brown's gas, no? So, "it needs nothing but water" to run is not true. There must be an external input of power - solar, batteries, etc. Your example of the Japanese car that runs on nothing but water fails.Yes, yes, all very interesting, but the issue is not whether Brown's gas is combustible, but efficiency and the laws of thermodynamics. It will take more energy to create your Brown's gas than you will get from burning it.
No, you didn't. Hell, you didn't answer most of the questions.

My questions to you were, basically, how do you think this thing works?

If something like this worked, why hasn't GM picked this up? They have billions of R&D money, cars they can't sell, but they won't put a $25 (retail , their cost would probably be $2) device in to get even one more mpg?

You keep bringing up "examples" (YT videos, links) that make it seem like you think it works, then you say you never said that it works.

I will conced that older cars can become more fuel-efficient. I will not concede that this thing will make older cars become fuel efficient.Yes, it is entirely different from a Prius. Good lord, if you think a car - designed as a system for fuel efficiency, that relies heavily on batteries, regenerative braking, shutting off the gas engine, etc., is the SAME THING as sticking a jar of water in an old car and running an electric charge through it, there is no hope.
We're talking about fuel economy, not efficiency in general.
By your logic, I can't "know" that sticking a couple of magnets on my fuel lines won't help my fuel efficiency without buying them and testing them, and I can't "know" that an electric turbo from eBay won't give me 20 more HP
BTW, the EPA has already tested most of these devices, but they keep popping up - guess you didn't read that part earlier
Nobody said that, you said "oxygen burns" which is incorrect. I asked if you put pure oxygen into the intake, what happens next?

harrisonrick

944J is the same guy a few months back arguing about painting a car when he didn't even own one IIRC...he'll argue with you over nonsense.

Put him on ignore.

Someone close this idiotic thread!

Legoland951

Thank you. I second that.

944J

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/03/16/d...first-green-s/

"The idea behind the setup is to produce enough hydrogen on board and inject it into the fuel stream to get the benefits of the gas (increased fuel economy, higher octane and reduced emissions) without having to top up at non-existent hydrogen refueling stations. Combined with the ultra-efficient V6, Ronn Motors claims a boost in mileage of around 20 to 30% and a substantial drop in C02 output. With only 2,200 pounds weighing the Scorpion down, the company estimates fuel mileage at around 40 miles-per-gallon."

"A judicious dip of the throttle sends the tach spiraling to the right as all 450 hp is fed through a lightened flywheel down to a standard limited-slip differential. Just as the experience transitions from turbocharged torque to high-revving bliss, our fun is cut short by a 4,500-rpm rev limiter (it's an engineering mule after all, so expect something closer to 8k in production trim) and the wastegates fire off with enough gusto to give SRT4 owners bouts of blow-off valve envy."

"the same fabrication gurus responsible for building the concept as well as dozens of others for big-name automakers – we're far less skeptical about the Scorpion's future."

tinklybear

Dude, I am going to buy this, run it in my car to make energy from nothing, sell it on the grid, and buy 2 more with the profits! =] How long will it take me to own 1 billion of these things?
As another branch of my business, I will leave 1 battery running for a long time to charge up a space ship to go to the moon!

I have paypal if anyone would like stocks in my company, dividends include one free spaceship trip to the moon per time it takes for a battery to charge the spaceship enough to go to the moon.