Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles HHO kits - Do they really work?
252 messages, Last post on Dec 27, 2008 at 5:31 PM
You are in the Hybrid Vehicles Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
|
Replying to: pf_flyer (Aug 11, 2008 10:29 am) The grand and glorious physics professor and assistant secretary of the Smithsonian Samuel Pierpont Langley splashed into the Potomac with his version of a flying machine. Orville and Wilbur were bicycle mechanics who never went to college. I don't even have to use their last name to make my point! |
|
|
Replying to: pf_flyer (Aug 11, 2008 10:29 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: pf_flyer (Aug 11, 2008 10:29 am) but still don't you think there must be something to it if d/benz got a patent on it?Why patent something if ther's no use for it? maybe it wasn't worth developing because the benfits weren't big enough. Can you concede that it is possible to get SOME more mpg from mixing hydogen and oxygen with gasoline? |
|
|
Replying to: malmouza (Aug 11, 2008 11:31 am) |
|
|
Replying to: pf_flyer (Aug 11, 2008 10:29 am) The grand and glorious physics professor and assistant secretary of the Smithsonian Samuel Pierpont Langley splashed into the Potomac with his version of a flying machine. Orville and Wilbur were bicycle mechanics who never went to college. I don't even have to use their last name to make my point! |
|
|
What I said was the idea is not new, I pointed out a car company that was obviously looking at it over 30 years ago, and saying that nobody has found it worthwhile to market in all that time. That says a lot about the real world practicality of the idea. There are plenty of patents for inventions that really don't work or are not practical to implement for whatever reason. Right now I'd have to say HHO kits fall into that category. NOBODY is sitting on this idea because it would hurt their business. There's a patent out there that was issued in the 80's for the design of an auto body that improves mileage by ducting the air in front of the car through the body and out the back. The idea being that instead of the air pushing on the front of the car, you give it a path to flow thorugh and thereby reduce the drag on the car. Decreased drag does lead to increased mileage. Do you see any vehicles anywhere using a system like this? No. Whether it's because they would be to expensive to make, or impractical to incorporate into the design of a car doesn't really matter. If it was a great idea, someone would have picked up on the opportunity to make some real money on it. HHO kits haven't been commercially marketed or applied yet because nobody has found it worthwhile to do so. And it sure sounds like people are looking to me. Again, if it turns out that somehow the laws of physics change, or better yet, some as yet undiscovered process comes up that makes it actually work in a provable, repeatable manner that provides a signifigant benefit, I'm right there with you. But I'm pretty sure there's more evidence and fact on the side of this being an elaborate MLM scheme than there is of it actually working. How many times have people here said, "I know it works, I've seen it" without one shred of evidence other than their claim? No websites to point to documenting trials or testing by independent labs to bolster their result. I really don't care how times someone says "the internet is full of claims of success". The internet is full of a lot of stuff that people believe and think they have "evidence" for. Chem trails, the moon landing was faked, Elvis sightings, eat all you want and lose weight. If you can think of it, more than one someone is out there trying to sell it to you. Is it possible that there is SOME gain in mileage from just putting hydrogen into the mix? My gut and reports like that from Popular Mechanics is telling me no. Greater than zero? Maybe. Greater than a fraction of a percent? Unlikely. Wanting to see proof of something beyond a wild claim is prudent. Changing the target from "signifigant" to "some" gain really only makes me even more suspicious about the claims. I want better mileage, you want it, we ALL want it. That's a consumer need. Successful companies fill needs with products that work and the consumer WILL buy them. The danger for us consumers is that we may want something bad enough that we'll part with our hard-earned cash on the promise that something fills that need.
|
|
|
Replying to: pf_flyer (Aug 11, 2008 12:13 pm) 1 don't work at 2 might work in a limited fashion or 3 don't produce any increase whatsoever. I'll remind you I am one of those who said I saw a homemade one installed and operating ina '85 chevy luv p/u truck. It was very crude. And I can't verify the owners claim of 11 more mpg. But the guy is driving around with it and there must be some reason. I can tell you he wasn't selling anything. I came here to hear of some research and test results. but for the most part i don't mind listening to the "I saw one and it works" people. I are one
|
|
|
Replying to: brian76 (Aug 11, 2008 12:34 pm) |
|
|
OK, you've seen it on a car but can't verify the mileage claims of the owner. What kind of proof is that? The fact that he has something attached to his car and is driving it around shows me what eactly? I'd really like to understand what it is that makes anyone think these claims have any merit at all with "evidence" like that. So what you're actually saying is you saw one and someone told you it's working. I play too much poker to be that trusting. Being "homemade" certainly doesn't disqualify anything from being effective. But when the backyard tinkerer comes up with something terrific, it rarely stays in the backyard for long. Since you say it was an '85 Chevy pickup it must be an S-10 since that replaced the Luv in 1982, but you'll get my point here. The EPA mileage estimates for the 1985 S-10 are 21 city/27 highway for the 2.0 liter with 4 speed manual. Any other configuration on the truck other than the diesel versions has worse numbers. An 11 mpg mileage increase is simply a ridiculous claim to take at face value with no verification when faced with the reality of what the truck is rated at for mileage. If that pickup owner isn't selling anything it's because he doesn't have anything to sell. If he actually was getting a 40-50% mileage increase on his pickup, I know a couple of people who would want to tie up the rights to whatever it is he's done and wouldn't be shy about making the millions that would come with a product that could do that. Have you done this simple thing to your car? And don't kid yourself. If a product comes out that can, in fact, increase gas mileage by even 10% there's no way that $50 is going to be close to what you're going to have to pay for it. We've laid out over $2500 for gas year to date in our household. The thing would be worth $200 to me right now and the frenzy over such a device would be staggering. People paid $5000 over MSRP because they had to have a PT Cruiser and had to have it NOW. A company would be hard pressed to keep up with demand for a true gas saving device at this moment in time.
|
|
|
Replying to: pf_flyer (Aug 11, 2008 2:15 pm) I had assumed it was a Sierra full sized pick up by Chevy. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles HHO kits - Do they really work?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
