latest hoax/scam

[jayman]

Zem previously said:

so people will think your opinion matters more??

1990, B.Sc, Chemical Engineering, PE
1986, B.Sc. Computer Science

I'll be the first to agree that opinions are like sphincters: everybody has one and they stink, although most folks believe they have the only non-stinky one in the universe

I've had the bad luck to be stuck doing a report for a client, carefully and patiently explaining *why* the hocus-pocus thing didn't work. I've *never* believed in magic, mystical stuff, or patently absurd stuff. I'm the ultimate skeptic

However, when I am wrong, I fess up to it. For example, I've been wrong about the Toyota stance on synthetic gear oils, as the Nov 2007 TSB proves. I've also been wrong about the rapidly escalating fuel prices, and the rapid decline at Prudhoe Bay.

I've been wrong about how slowly the oil industry is embracing new technology, by now we should have increased refinery yield for feedstocks 35%, and we haven't. I was also wrong about the public reaction to high fuel prices: they just grumble and put up with it

Know what else I'm s*** at? Personal relations, I'm middle aged and still single.

There, that felt good. Time to drink

[Zem]

I wasn't doubting that you're an engineer, only that the mere fact does not make you an expert in anything machine based. I have a BS and MS in mechanical rngineering specializing in thermal/fluid sciences with my research on fuel cell systems. That doesn't make me an expert on all thermal/fluid topics, and I wouldn't pretend to be. It doesn't even make me an expert of fuel cell systems.

You know as well as I do that the notion of using a catalyst to increase efficiency does not, off the bat, violate any rules. When people say "I ran my car off water!" they are full of crap. But gaining efficiency by using water as a catalyst...? Maybe.

I don't know it doesn't work. I'm doubtful, sure. I certainly didn't go get myself a Tornado air intake thingy either. But I'm willing to look at it as objectively as possible until I know for sure.

But when in two threads you mention you're an engineer and that it doesn't work... that implies that you're speaking from some level of technical expertise that you don't have.

Perhaps you are unaware that's how your post appeared, or at least how it appeared to me.

Similarly, there's a fellow in a thread about E85 that clearly read and believed all the emails someone forwarded him about how wrong it is to use E85. I don't have the time nor interest to go through his post and point out why it's almost completely wrong and poorly misinterpreted. He presented himself as an expert because he's a farmer, and farmers grow corn. I find that really irritating.

[jayman]

Zem previously said:

I don't know it doesn't work. I'm doubtful, sure. I certainly didn't go get myself a Tornado air intake thingy either. But I'm willing to look at it as objectively as possible until I know for sure.
<snip> Perhaps you are unaware that's how your post appeared, or at least how it appeared to me..

Agreed.

However, I'm a natural skeptic as it literally drives me to drink when a client pays me to do a technical post-mortem on why some gadget didn't work. Of course, the person/company who made the claim has disappeared, so there is no legal recourse

Due to escalating energy prices a lot of industries are hurting, badly. Within reason, they are willing to try almost *anything* to reduce process/feedstock cost. I hope no casual reader believes that layoffs, red ink, and plant closure are part of some sinister global conspiracy, they aren't

One proven way to reduce plant energy cost, which I very strongly advocate, is co-generation or "combined cycle." Why more facilities aren't using co-gen is beyond me

All one has to do is flip through the back pages of Popular Science, Mechanics Illustrated, or god help you browse the Internet, and there are many incredible claims about low cost or free energy. They belong in the back section of a magazine for a reason

I have a lot of faith in modern engineered catalysts. For example, the fluidized catalytic cracker - in combination with alkylation - helps improve gasoline yield and with hydrocracking, distillate yield.

Naphtha hydrotreating, isomerization, and catalytic reforming also allow us to "catpure" what had been a waste gas that was flared off. In particular, the hydrogen from catalytic reforming, and the light cycle oils from the fluidized catalytic cracker, are *very* important to hydrotreating and hydrocracking. Yields are far beyond "straight run" distillation

It's not unreasonable for one to expect a carefully controlled lab test of the gadget, with easily verifiable results. That's all I ask

[plnfixr320]

1983FJ60 previously said:

it's a water/methanol mixture injected into aircraft engines. some turboprops still use it.

it lets you run higher compression ratios.

Right you are!

This trick is also used in drag racing. It helps to protect again detonation on turbo and S/C cars. More boost same octane fuel and lower combustion chamber temps. There are also a few extra ponies on the dyno sheet.

[nosmaharba]

holy crap...you guys and your huge vocabularies...i'm just wonderin if anyone's actually tried this on an FJ yet, and what are the results...

if nobody has, then i'm willing to be a test-monkey, but i'd like alittle guidance as to which one of the HHO mods out there would be the best bet.

also...any ideas on what kinda damage i could do to my FJ besides complete and total obliteration? i mean hell...if one of these things can add 5 mpg, i can use the money i save to buy more god-d*mned windshields...

-nos

[1983FJ60]

plnfixr320 previously said:

Right you are!

This trick is also used in drag racing. It helps to protect again detonation on turbo and S/C cars. More boost same octane fuel and lower combustion chamber temps. There are also a few extra ponies on the dyno sheet.

exactly.

[ramsee1]

nosmaharba previously said:

holy crap...you guys and your huge vocabularies...i'm just wonderin if anyone's actually tried this on an FJ yet, and what are the results...

if nobody has, then i'm willing to be a test-monkey, but i'd like alittle guidance as to which one of the HHO mods out there would be the best bet.

also...any ideas on what kinda damage i could do to my FJ besides complete and total obliteration? i mean hell...if one of these things can add 5 mpg, i can use the money i save to buy more god-d*mned windshields...

-nos

lol exactly. I think it's great to have technical data and an education to back it up, but I also know a great deal of inventions have been happy accidents. Test the thing and put it to bed.

[walmartshopper]

I already have one installed in my 2003 Tacoma 4x4, and I went from 17mpg to over 25mpg in the city. It worked so well that I installed a single cell HHO kit in my wife's 2001 Camry and she's getting 35mpg city.

I see a ton of posts of people calling it a hoax who don't even understand how it works. The point is not to run your car completely on water. All it does is produce enough HHO to allow you to run a lean fuel mixture, and that's why it saves gas. Read this wikipedia article on hydrogen fuel enhancement. This is the concept it is using.

Call it a scam all you want, but I'm enjoying a 50% increase in mileage. See my post here for pictures: HHO Pictures