HHO for car/bike doesn't make sense for me

Hi guys, I've see people using HHO gas installed in their vehicle. this is doesn't make sense for me.

1st is about the chemical.
2 C8H18 + 25 O2 → 16 CO2 + 18 H2O is the equation for gasoline in engine.
amount of Oxygen in the air is around 20%, Nitrogen is 70%.
to make efficient result the amount of oxygen must enough, if it's not enough will produce CO not CO2.
if we replace the air with HHO, we get 66.7% H & 33.3% O.
the amount of O is bigger than the air that just 20%, but..... the amount of O there is just enough exactly for H.... so in the engine c8h18 is struggling with H2 to get O2. there will be some of the c8h18 or h2 didn't get burn.
it will be more make sense for me if we replace air with pure O2 or replace c8h18 with pure h2.

2nd is about power source.
in vehicle, H2 & O2 is produced using car battery. the battery charged by engine movement. according to physic law (i foget the name) there will be energy loss, some of the energy move vehicle, some become heat and some become electricity for sound system, light and others, some to charge battery. this way the power in the battery will getting lower each cycle. (someone who ever try use please tell me am I right that the car battery lifetime is much shorter than without HHO)
it will be make sense for me from battery to movement (Electric car) is more efficient than battery to HHO, HHO to movement.
if we want to use H2 & O2, it will be much better if we produce H & O in our home store in tanks for use in our vehicle.
(Note : I didn't recommend to store HHO mix gas in 1 tank, I mean store pure H)

please give me your comment, because I'm developing SHOGEN (Separated Hydrogen & Oxygen Generator) and planned to market it.
you can watch SHOGEN video here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sf8h6_JzqVk

Nice thread here, it gets people thinking and learning. I can't speak too much from a chemical perspective as I'm not an expert, however from what I've learned is that the small amount HHO that is sucked into the cars intake helps increase the burn rate and the theory is that it gives you a cleaner more efficient burn. A bi-product of running HHO (with the correct amount) is that your exhaust temp drops which allows people to lean out the fuel mixture. (within reason)

You are correct about an extra draw on the battery and alternator, it does take power away from the engine. Most people running it correctly are between 5-15 amps, at this amount it's not going to wear out your battery much faster than normal. It's hard for people to grasp that you increase your efficiency at a lost of power to the engine, that's why this method is ridiculed so badly.

hello. I write through the translator of google. I am from Uruguay.

with all due respect:

The air does not explode just because the molecules are widely dispersed. if any spark would do well to exploit the air around us

We use pure and concentrated hho to improve the combustion of gasoline, because only hho is not enough

We are not intend to operate a vehicle only hho produced by it same, because the internal combustion engine loses much efficiency
is imposible with hho generator run the vehicle alone. By the laws of physics

what we are looking for fuel efficiency, to someday get to spend at minimum of what we spend now.
Imagine you spend 30 or 40% less than what is spent today in the united states that would reduce by 20% the global pollution

and if this is global, I have no idea how we will decontaminate the planet, but if it would be a lot. And I think that's the idea of ​​the group

thanks and sorry for spelling errors

First, you're adding hydrogen AND oxygen into the combustion chamber along with a air / fuel mix of 14.7 to 1. This allows the hydrogen to burn without robbing O2 from the incoming air. Hydrogen can't burn without O2. Vehicles can run on pure hydroxy and would only need a safe storage container, a compressor to pressurize the fuel rail, and a modified computer to control the injectors. No throttle body would be needed since, as I mentioned, the gas mix contains it's own O2

Second, The naysayers always mention the fact that it takes more energy to produce the hydroxy than is gained by using it. [Second Law of Thermodynamics]

What they can't seem to get into their perceived master minds is that there is additional energy stored in the un-burned fuel. As a matter of fact 70% is wasted in the form of heat.

The claims are that by injecting H2 O2 into the mix you can produce a faster burn. The more of the fuel burned on each power stroke, the more energy is released in measurable horsepower.

So, if you can trick the PCM into thinkin the mixture is too rich, it facilitates the injection of less fuel. Now you're transferring more energy into the power train which should result in greater horsepower using less fuel.

I did the math and realized it only takes a little under 2 hp to generate 15 amps minimal so I'm guessing the alternator needs the make 20 amps nominal to separate the H2 O2 from the water. Again, an educated guess of 3 hp nominal. I would need to see a 6 hp increase on a dyno after leaning out the mix to believe that this works.

It's a simple concept and a simple test so why are there no youtube videos and other documentation to prove this simple fact? If anyone knows where I can see some dyno results, I'd be willing to try one of these contraptions. Otherwise, refer what David Hannum said to PT Barnum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dejavouxdoux

. . .
What they can't seem to get into their perceived master minds is that there is additional energy stored in the un-burned fuel. As a matter of fact 70% is wasted in the form of heat.

The claims are that by injecting H2 O2 into the mix you can produce a faster burn. The more of the fuel burned on each power stroke, the more energy is released in measurable horsepower.

So, if you can trick the PCM into thinkin the mixture is too rich, it facilitates the injection of less fuel. Now you're transferring more energy into the power train which should result in greater horsepower using less fuel.
. . .

---

You should expand on the idea and clarify it. You are on the right thought train. You have some errors of detail, but your concept is right.

Hello and OK already. I have a wood stove that I put ten oak logs in a day to produce 1000 BTUs. I have found that I can put seven oak logs in plus four relatively free rolled up newspaper logs and get 1000 BTUs. Am I saving three oak logs a day? Can I use twenty free newspaper logs and get 1000 BTUs a day. And not have to buy any oak logs from APEC? I am not a scientist, I am a commonsenceatist. A and B are combustibles. My truck runs on A. If I add B am i not using as much A? The more B I add the less A I use? I am not convinced that HHO does not or can not work. However, I am convinced that the powers that be will stop at nothing to protect their way of life.