No, You Can't Run Your Car on Water - It's a Scam

People have been generating hydrogen since the year 1800, when Volta discovered electrolysis and a few months later English chemist William Nicholson found hydrogen was produced by passing a current through water.

And as I stated before the faster burn of hydrogen will cause a loss in power as well. So there is nothing left to cause a gain in power or MPG.

The following are facts that dispute the effectiveness of these HHO machines-

*Hydrogen has less energy by VOLUME than gasoline 0.01079MJ vs 34.6MJ for Gasoline
*It takes energy to separate the H and O which comes from the alternator that is powered by the engine. 66% of the energy it took to separate the water is release when they recombine into water again.
*It does not supplement the chamber with oxygen either because what ever extra Oxygen is produced will be consumed by the hydrogen.

And you should know that it is alot more powerful than you dry ice bombs that you've been playing with.

Well Mad4skilz, it's been working for me since the 70's. Way before I ever knew who Stanley Myers was.

electrolyte in the water to conduct the current. This is called electrolysis. Most use stainless 316 plates for electrodes because it resist the corsive effects the best
Be forwarned that Hydrogen is very explosive and you should know that it can harm you and/or kill you if you don't know how to handle it.

I don't think I need to clarify, it looks pretty clear to me. Please, enlighten me on the simplicity of it; I would love for this to work, but if it's driven off the cars electrical system, it's impossible to gain any improvement in gas mileage.

In order to make a HHO Generator, all you need is direct current, I have made it with as little as a 9v transistor radio battery and water. You can use copper wire as an electrode. It will produce oxygen on the positive side of the electrode and Hydrogen on the negative side. You can even place the electrodes inside of a test tube and separate the two gases as long as you allow enough water in the test tubes to cover the electrodes, as long as you have enough

Well if you are talking to me Mad4Skilz, it is very simple. And if you are accusing me of something then you need to clarify what you are accusing me of.

Your selling this stuff so you are guilty of scamming. I wouldn't accuse other people of scamming when you are guilty of it yourself. You claim to have been a mechanic for 40 years then explain how the HHO generator works in a logical way. If you can I will retract my statement.

BTW, You should change the name on your video as there are many runnung on HHO out there, irregardless of what they maybe getting in mpg
So, the title of your video "No, you can't run your car on water - it's a scam" is a lie in of itself.

Well I checked out your so called Million-Dollar Challenge, which sounds like a scam to me, in that you promise to pay it with your so
called investors but you are demanding that we put up $5,000.00 in order to participate in your so called challenge. If you were serious about your challenge, you would put your money where your mouth is, first. And I am not defending Ozzie nor his product as I have never had any dealings with him nor his product.

"50 years ago it was said to be impossible to go to the moon"

Actually, they said it was possible. That is why we went. They said it didn't break any laws of physics to go to the moon. Getting something for nothing does.

I was a sceptic. I have been an auto mechanic for 30 years. I snickered when I heard of this. I went out to disprove it. Guess what. I took my harley from 50 mpg to 70 mpg. My diesel from 14 mpg to 27 mpg. I now do experiment everyday with it. It does work. 50 years ago it was said to be impossible to go to the moon but we did anyway inspite of what some said. Have an open mind.

Again, how is that an advantage. It will cause the point of peak cylinder pressure to be closer to top dead center resulting in a loss in power if your in tune. The reason gasoline is "dulled" down(increased octane rating), is to slow down the burn rate of gasoline so the most power can be applied to the piston in a controlled manner and when it has the highest mechanical advantage, generally speaking peak pressure some where around 18 degrees ATDC any sooner and you loose MPG's +risk detonation

"either way hho burns faster than gasoline", which advances the timing, which is an old trick to get better mileage, which also damages engines, which is why they don't come from the factory that far advanced.

either way hho burns faster than gasoline

One of our NZ TV channels just screened the result of a month-long test of a car fitted with one of these HHO devices. Guess what the result was? No fuel savings at all. Well what do you HHO-fanboys have to say about that? You wanted proof - there it is and it was on TV so it *must* be true, right (at least that's what you claim for your "evidence" so it must work both ways). Another victory for science and commonsense!

That's not scientific evidence! I guess you also believe that the TV series Star Trek is *proof* that there is life on other planets? Please point to some genuine scientific study that has been conducted by an independent university on a vehicle equipped with one of these HHO systems. You can't can you? That blows your argument right out of the water really.

More made-up facts from the HHO brigade. The flame propagation speed in a gasoline/air deflagration is measured in tens of feet per second, not 4,000 feet per second. Want proof? Get a can of gasoline, pour a trail on the ground for about 30 feet. Light one end. How long does it take for the flame to travel that 30 feet? Please stop believing the idiots who promote these scams - their lack of basic scientific knowledge is embarrassing for all concerned.

And for those seeking to find a judgment on HHO based upon Internet testimonials...

You must first understand the logical fallacy of Observational selection, also known as "cherry-picking".

HHO claims of better fuel economy are revolutionary and controversial, and therefore the positive results travel faster and farther than the counter-argument that HHO is simply another hoax.

Also, there is a LOT of money to be made by selling HHO kits and will cause more cherry picking of positive results.

post a link (or mention the source) to your "credible" evidence. I will accept university or EPA studies on "on-demand" hydrogen production only.

Don't try to pull cheap news stories from dumb reporters that don't know anything, or websites of people selling stuff, or anything concerning the REAL hydrogen cars that get their hydrogen externally. On-demand HHO and the real hydrogen cars are VERY fundamentally different.

Unfortunately, the dis-believers CANNOT disprove it by experimentation. Because even a thousand failed experiment wouldn't shut you up.

You would only claim that something slightly different would work. Like plate sizes, current flow, putting the HHO feed somewhere else, the car type, the ECU settings, etc, etc.

That is why the burden of proof lies with the claimant.

And no, there hasn't been ONE credible test yet. Only testimonials and anecdotes. Just like the scams of earlier decades.

Gotta love the "show me your proof" arguments flying back and forth.

Xjet is right about the burden of proof being on the claimant (HHO believers).

The main reason is that you "can't prove a negative". If his experiment were to come up as no change in fuel economy, you will just say that he didn't do it right or that you have a slightly different way that gets positive results.

...

why would you want that?? the spark ignites the fuel around 15 degrees BTDC(at least on my car). That means the flame front would spread so quickly that most of the power would be applied to the piston when its at or before TDC when it has the LEAST mechanical advantage. You would have to pull alot of timing for that to work.