My previous post is still visible a few messages back…And I don’t know anything on any of this, I’m simply trying to understand your logic and ‘facts’

But first, I must ask, who/what are you that qualifies you?Are these just opinions, things you’ve ‘learned’ (cause you know everything everyone ‘learns’ is always 100% truthful), or do you/have you dealt with this stuff in real life?

Physics SEEMS to have laws that ‘prove’ everything, but every so often, something doesn’t follow those laws EXACTLY, so, they make other laws to ‘fill the gaps’.Water is one of those not-quite-right items.

Next, how much energy DOES it take to separate the hydrogen?I don’t feel like reading back, and I don’t study this stuff, so you may be totally correct, BUT, can you agree with me on the FACT that hydrogen, when burned produces MORE energy than gasoline?

You never made such a claim as to ‘.... the gasoline you put in the engine IS NOT 100% efficient. So, theoretically, you CAN NOT RUN YOUR CAR ON GASOLINE’?

I believe (according to my copy and paste keys) you said :

"HHO" systems are 100% guaranteed to use more energy than they return to the system, you'll similarly understand my recalcitrance to build a device which is 100% guaranteed to fail!

is what you said.But, previously, in the same post, you said ICE’s are only 30% efficient, which, in MY BOOK, means they use more energy than they return to the system.

An alternator doesn’t produce more than it needs, huh?I will concede this point, having read more about the electrical system in the car.





ok, I GUESS my statement #2 didn’t really make sense, did it?Fuel not 100% efficient?Well ok, NOTHING is 100% efficient, but, not really what I meant.What I should have said is more along the lines of it should be cost vs. mpg…. My bad J(This is an unchecked rant about stuff I don’t have a lot of background on, like MOST of us here, I’m trying to learn more… thank GOD we have self appointed geniuses such as yourself to help us along our way J )

Modern cars burn 99% of the fuel….Ok, so, if we could make that 99.5%, that would be better, right?I’m sure that comment was because of my ‘fuel not 100% efficient’, but we’re past that…



You're never going ANYWHERE in a vehicle 'powered by water' because there has never been one!





Ok, NOONE is trying to build a car ‘powered by water’, we’re trying to ASSIST a gasoline engine with HYDROGEN.



One more time- no one is trying to run the vehicle on water.







“No devices on petrol burning automobiles "recaptures" unburned hydrocarbons”

what does a PCV valve do?OHH! That’s right!The PCV valve is a control device which sends partially burned gases that come from the engine's crankcase to the combustion chamber. Its name, PCV means Positive Crankcase Ventilation and is one of the oldest and most used emission control devices



“Do you have a clue as to how quickly these adjustments are made by the engine computer? Apparently not. This is a continuous monitoring and adjustment process, which happens in milliseconds.”

If I can save .0001 gallons of gas 10,000 times in 100 miles, what does that do for my MPH?



“WTF? Fuel and water?”

exactly, but I HAVE see you nay-sayers say that in other comments about HHO, brown gas, etc….Did the guy who build the first engine have pcv valves, and efi?His engine PROBABLY didn’t get very good mileage at all, huh?It took time for people to learn HOW they could make it more efficient….



“I'll make it deadset easy for you. "HHO" systems consume more energy to produce hydrogen than they return when the hydrogen is burned. This means that they are a net energy LOSER. “





UNFORTUNATELY, that does not make it deadest easy.PROOF, give me some facts or some point of reference that I can research, because from the (limited) research I’ve done, I have not found that to be true.

“An electrolyser based in a jam jar and running off a typical automobile's charging system will produce just a few litres of hydrogen (certainly less than 10L, more like 2-5L) PER HOUR. Compare that to the airflow through a typical auto engine; a 2 litre, 4-stroke engine draws in 2 litres of atmospheric air with every other crankshaft revolution. Thus, at 2500RPM, this engine is flowing 5000L of air per minute, 300,000L per hour. 2-5L/hr of hydrogen out of 300,000L/hr is a fart in a hurricane.”





WHO CARES ABOUT AIRFLOW?!WE’RE NOT CONCERNED WITH THE AIRFLOW.THE AIRFLOW WILL STILL BE THE SAME WITH OR WITHOUT THE HYDROGEN.***HOW MUCH GAS DOES THE CAR USE PER MINUTE?GAS AND HYDROGEN IS WHAT WE ARE COMPARING.***



“If your engine is running on another fuel (i.e. petrol) and you're piping the hydrogen into the engine's intake, since the hydrogen generation system takes more energy off the crankshaft than you get back when the hydrogen is burned in the cylinder/s, you're simply increasing the amount of petrol the engine burns. “

See here is where we have the problem.How do you think you know, where did your facts come from, that it takes more energy to split the hydrogen from H2O than can be recaptured?(you may be right, I just know, for the good of all involved, I can’t take some text on my screen as fact without something to back it up.)



“Remember, the alternator belt loses 30% of the energy taken from…”

So, YOUR stance on this is that EVERYONE of these people that claim they get MORE MILES PER TANK OF GAS with this added to their car are lying, or just too stupid to figure out that 200 miles on a tank of gas without the HHO thing is the same as 300 miles on a tank of gas and a bottle of water?

And, as an FYI, there ARE PLENTY of hydrogen powered engines.IT IS POSSIBLE that one may not be able to use such a simple device to efficiently produce the necessary hydrogen, but, I’ll state again, the first gas engine didn’t run very efficiently.The BIG car companies DO produce hydrogen powered cars, they DO produce (well, starting to) cars that RUN ON WATER.They use FUEL CELLS, maybe you’ve heard of those?So, don’t say it’s not possible.Yes, I understand, ‘fuel cells are not the same thing!’ no, they are a progression. Learning starts SOMEWHERE.

Please, if you haven’t already, scroll down and read my post from a month or so ago..I could be 100% wrong with everything, and I’m not afraid to admit that.I’m here to learn.I wanna know WHY what I think is wrong, not just ‘because I said so!’Everything in that post while (quickly) researched was put together from information *I BELIEVE* to be factual. Nothing I have said in this message has be proof read, verified, or validated.Again, bare with us while we try to absorb as much knowledge from said geniuses as we can (and I say that in the friendliest smart ass way I can cause I thought it was cute, not case I am trying to be mean)