Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

HHO kits - Do they really work?

frank74frank74 Posts: 2
edited April 2014 in Honda
Looking for people that have tried these kits and their input....I have been doing some research on this and it seems that the people that accually have them say they do work and the people that don't are very scepticle about them......your thoughts


  • frank74frank74 Posts: 2
    Guess not!!!
  • dalton95dalton95 Posts: 1
    I have been experimenting with a Hydrogen Generator for several weeks now. I've tried several different designs, stainless steel plates work the best for me. I tried the plastic with stainless wire wrapped around it. Within 1 week the wire was very brittle and weak.Tweaking here and tweaking there, it does work, I have a 94 Nissan Sentra. The generator I have on it now, is working the best so far. I'm not sure about mpg yet, but I filled up the gas tank and drove 193 miles and the gas hand now sits just below 3/4 of a tank. Before the generator, I had to use at least a half tank to get 200 miles. I tried the O2 extender that I've read about, it was only a couple bucks, so I figured what the hell. This wonderful little device is CRAP. It actually hurt my mileage, so , of course it's gone now. Give it a try, it's cheap and idiot proof....a kid could build one of these....Good Luck.
  • PF_FlyerPF_Flyer Pennsylvania Furnace, PAPosts: 6,374
    You'll need a little better evidence and a bit more accurate information than assessing it using your gas guage as to how much fuel was used to declare "it works".

    This idea/technology has been around since the early 1900's. If it actually did what it claimed, you'd think that by now it would have been proven.

    The Environmental Protection Agency evaluates after-market retrofit devices like this, but only at the request of a manufacturer, and only after an independent laboratory has conducted preliminary tests showing “significant improvement” in fuel economy or emissions reduction.

    To date, no manufacturer has applied for these tests, and the U.S. government has not addressed hydrogen fuel enhancement.

    The clincher for me that this is snake oil is the claim by folks that this is being "actively supressed by 'big oil' so they can maintain their profits.

    Right. And the goverment is probably running HHO kits on all the vehicles in Area 51 :P


    Need some roadside assistance? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

    Share your vehicle reviews

  • brian76brian76 Posts: 39
    hi dalton
    did you buy a kit or make this device yourself? If you made it yourself would you please provide a website that gives detailed insructions. Also now that you've had a few more days of driving, what is your actual mileage? I would like to try it myself .It seems that's the only way to know for sure if it works.. since there are so many claims for and against it.Fill me in thanks
  • PF_FlyerPF_Flyer Pennsylvania Furnace, PAPosts: 6,374
    You could chronicle your results on your CarSpace page and even blog about it there. If youhaven't set your CarSpace page up yet, it's really easy to do. If you have any questions about it, just click on my username and pop me an email and I'll be happy to help youget it going.


    Need some roadside assistance? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

    Share your vehicle reviews

  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,913
    " If you made it yourself would you please provide a website that gives detailed insructions. "

    Ah, but that is just the point. There are websites selling the information, not providing the information.

    These people are out to make a buck - and you are providing that buck .
  • brian76brian76 Posts: 39
    doesn't sound like dalton is selling anything.sounds like he built it himself.lets give him a chance to respond. I just posted some info about an operating hydrogen generator I looked at today. the post is on the 'hybrid fuel cell cars forum' here at edmunds.
  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,913
    "doesn't sound like dalton is selling anything.sounds like he built it himself.lets give him a chance to respond."

    It is against Forum rules to directly sell - the posts would be yanked by the moderator.

    It appears to me that what he is doing is promoting the idea so people will go to a website. It looks a lot like the "pump and dump" spam I often see in my spam catcher.

    But in any case it doesn't make any difference how he responds. If the technology is viable, it would be tested by an independent publication. Until I see such verification, I'm basically ignoring these things...
  • brian76brian76 Posts: 39
    this guy dalton didn't mention a website. I asked if he would direct me to one. I meant a site with good hands-on info other than some company selling 'gizmos'. I did look at one today built and installed by a backyard mechanic from info gleaned off the net.Cost him $38 in parts. Looked simple and he swears he's getting 11 more mpg in his little old '85 chevy luv 4cyl. truck running a gasoline hydrogen mix. He's a local guy with no axe to grind or anything to sell .I suppose he could be lying to me but I don't believe so. Of course, I could be lying right now to you. A healthy skepticism is always good, but it seems there are posters here who wouldn't believe an airplane could fly had they been alive pre- Wright brothers era. I'm going to try to make one for my truck as soon as I can get a little more info. I still would like to hear more from some who have tried to make one if they aren't afraid of being ridiculed here.
  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,913
    "I still would like to hear more from some who have tried to make one if they aren't afraid of being ridiculed here. "

    I don't intend any ridicule. If you get it to work, contact one of the car review organizations (maybe EDMUNDS!), and get the concept validated. It would be worthwhile news if one could actually get a 33% increase.

    Until then, I am skeptical.
  • catamcatam Posts: 331
    There seems to be a complete lack of even anecdotal data showing benefit.

    Ususally on threads like this proponents would at the very least post some observed data, like before conversion I got x mpg, now I am averaging x+5 mpg over 3 tanks of gas.

    Everyone here is talking about, "one guy somewhere".

    Please I'd like to at least hear from 1 person his actual data. ie I gat 300 miles on 12 gal before, after conversion I got 386 miles on the same 12 gal.

    My personal experience suggests we would all be better off reading about hypermiling and uses the techniques there that make sense to each of us.
    Certainly everyone can inflate there tires to the max on the sidewall, go easy on the gas/ brake, etc.

    I do the hypermiling thing and my last 3 tanks have been 42.1, 42.9, and 43.8 MPG respectively. I am improving my technique I'd guess. at any rate this represents a 50% improvement over my car's 29 mpg hwy rating.
  • My freinds I am new to this forum, so hello to all!. i'm a rep with a company that sells HHO units, I will not mention the name or the website because I don't know if I am permitted to do so. We have a standing challenge, we gaurantee that if the car does not get at least 50% increase in mpg, you win the challenge and receive $5000, and visa versa, we bring the car to your location, you can have mechanics check the car, you can have the media there, engineers, anybody. If anybody is up to the challenge let me know.If I'm permitted to post the website let me know. I'm not trying to sell any thing on this forum, only trying to share info, and assure you HHO does work if installed and tuned correctly. Tks Paul
  • texasestexases Posts: 6,080
    Having never seen an explanation that makes even the slightest bit of sense, I doubt you can deliver. Good advertising, though :sick:
  • Just take the challenge, and make yourself $5,000, The website has all the technical information you could ever want plus videos. I dont know if I can post the website or not, but if you send me an e-mail address, I will gladly send you the website address. Not advertizing my freind, but I sure can use $5,000.
  • texasestexases Posts: 6,080
    You'll need to find another sucker. "Inventions" that violate basic laws of physics (perpetual motion machines, anyone?) don't interest me.
  • I'm not trying to find a sucker, just educate if possible, as you can see i'm not posting the website or trying to sell you anything, i thought the purpose of this website is to share ideas. There is no violation of the laws of physics here, any scientist will tell you as far as fuel is concerned. Fuel in a gas state is much more efficent in a gaseous state than in a liquid state and burns much cleaner. The company I represent are now in negotiations with a worldwide Fortune 100 Co. An announcement of these negotiations will be in Mid September. Stay tuned
  • PF_FlyerPF_Flyer Pennsylvania Furnace, PAPosts: 6,374
    Information shared. Let's move on because we're starting to sound like advertsing now.


    Need some roadside assistance? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

    Share your vehicle reviews

  • texasestexases Posts: 6,080
    And the BS begins...."Fuel in a gas state is much more efficent in a gaseous state than in a liquid state and burns much cleaner" So that's why CNG vehicles typically have lower power output than equivalent gasolive vehicles.

    Can you make hydrogen? Sure. Can you save gas doing it? Absolutely not. And any physicist will tell you that. I'd suggest waiting for your 'Fortune 100 Co.' ship to come in. Another typical come-on from folks such as you... :sick:
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,661
    Why haven't any of the major Car Magazines tested out these kits and given a report? About a month ago someone reported the same $5000 gimmick and hit a dead end when he tried to collect. I am sure you have gotten yourself sucked into a MLM or Ponzi scheme and are just trying to find enough gullible folks to get back your investment. Edmund's is a hard place to sell that type of gadget. You would be better off on a non car website where people do not understand how an engine works.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 10,959
    Won't even fly there - these posts get zapped by users on craigslist all the time, even when posted outside of the automotive section. It seems that even non-car people have common sense :)


    Need help navigating? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

    Share your vehicle reviews

  • Erm, liquids CANNOT burn, solids CANNOT burn, only gases can burn (and yes, that applies to logs), which is one of the reasons cars work so poorly when cold - the gas has to become vaporized before it can burn, which is why we have expensive injectors to create as much surface area as possible by making it into tiny droplets.

    CNG cars make less power because the CNG has less BTU's per gallon. The fuel economy record (for a 'normal' car is held by a car which burned normal pump gas but which metered it in it's gaseous form. Incidentally this was in the 1970's and it was made by GM...

    I'm highly suspicious of anything which claims to improve fuel economy, and I'm a scientist so I demand proof. There is just a slight chance that the HHO could improve the combustion by a fraction higher than the energy losses in it's creation (which would be very significant) but I remain unconvinced until someone proves it to me. Step up to the plate HHO kit vendors - prove it on mainstream TV and maybe we'll take notice, until then I'm going to assume it's in the same category as snake oil.
  • texasestexases Posts: 6,080
    This is how engines work - they transform chemical energy (gasoline/methane/hydrogen/whatever) into mechanical energy (powers the car, the alternator, the airconditioner, etc) and heat energy (removed by the radiator or lost out the exhaust pipe). Gasoline internal combustion engines can transform about 20% of the chemical energy into mechanical energy, the remaining 80% is lost as heat. Therefore, even if we assume 100% conversion efficiency for the hydrogen convervsion (impossible), the HHO devices still have to (repeat, have to) lose 80% of the energy used to create the hydrogen when it is burned. So there is not 'a slight chance that HHO could improve combustion by a fraction higher than the energy losses in it's creation". It is absolutely impossible. A 5 to 1 losing game. End of story.
  • OK, fair point when taken at face value and I would mostly agree if the claim was that the energy was released purely from combustion of the hydrogen. I also agree absolutely that the 20% energy extraction is typical of an ICE but note when reading some of the HHO sites that they claim an efficiency increase in the energy extraction process and there's the critical difference.

    It is very possible (and indeed proven) that the percentage of energy converted into mechanical energy can be increased by slowing the flame propagation in the combustion chamber causing a reduction in irreversible thermal looses, resulting in shorter injector pulses and therefore better fuel economy. Incidentally the current max values for high efficiency Otto cycle engines running on conventional fuels is around 32% conversion of energy into mechanical energy, whereas the max for Diesels is presently around 52% so I'm sorry but there is no 'have to'. Theoretical maximum hovers around 59% based on the Carnot cycle between the adibatic combustion temperature of pump gas (about 2300 degrees Kelvin) and the admitted max working temperature of steel (about 925 degrees Kelvin, and note we're limiting it based on steel, not any exotic ceramics). Some of us in the petrochemical engineering field have worked on hydrated alcohol mixes in steel Otto cycle motors and achieved between 35% and 38% extraction efficiency as a result, I suspect we can achieve more too so don't throw all hope of increased fuel economy away. Think about it this way - the O2 sensors in your injection system prevent very much variation in the fuel exiting your exhaust system and yet you can radically change the mechanical efficiency of your motor by being gentle (or not) with your accelerator despite the pumping losses actually decreasing when you open it all the way up... Most of that difference is in the thermal losses because the expansion rate of the burning fuel mixture is limited, which is why your exhaust temperatures increases.

    I respect your opinion and maintain a great deal of common ground with you in being cynical of these devices but must note that there is a large potential for improvement in most ICE motors presently for sale. I therefore remain open minded about the possibility of devices which will help to improve the energy extraction efficiency of Otto cycle engines and await results from HHO system manufacturers with bated breath - until then I'll continue working on the fuel development.
  • texasestexases Posts: 6,080
    OK, I'll go with your 32% (my searches turned up only the 18-20% number). So, even using that number, only 1/3 of the combustion results in mechanical energy. So the mechanical energy used to generate the hydrogen is reduced by 2/3 in the combustion process. A losing game, 3 to one. To believe the claims of the web sites requires belief that a little hydrogen added to the fuel radically alters the combustion process. Sorry, no evidence of this from outside sources can be found. The claims of 50-100% improvement in economy are outrageous, right? And have you not found the vast majority of claims in these web sites pure nonsense??

    Finally, my opinion really is immaterial. If there was any truth to any of this, half the Fortune 500 companies would be pouring billions into the technology, if only to reduce the costs they are now bearing from $4 gas. Not happening.
  • Yes - most of the HHO websites are mumbo-jumbo, pseudo science and meaningless rubbish. At best it could improve the mechanical energy extraction by a small amount (and yes, I'll make some and try it using an external energy source to isolate the effect), set that against alternator wear, unknown side effects and high generation losses and it seems extremely unlikely it has any tangible positive effect. On the plus side it's a large scale experiment in my field of expertise so I'm keen to see the results before I write it off as a total loss.

    For what it's worth, I won't be planning on changing anything on my own car - I'll simply buy a Honda Diesel next year and hold onto my Porsche, which despite being able to get to 60 MPH in under 6 seconds still gets 34MPG(not at the same time, I might add)... Those Germans might have had a few bad ideas in the 30's but they sure know how to get the most from a flat-6.
  • texasestexases Posts: 6,080
    "I won't be planning on changing anything on my own car - I'll simply buy a Honda Diesel next year and hold onto my Porsche"

    Good idea - I'm holding off my next car to get a look at the Honda diesel, along with other that should be coming out in the next year or so.
  • brian76brian76 Posts: 39
    Nice to see there is someone out there willing to get their hands dirty and try a little actual experimentation rather than simply stating "imposssible"! "defies the laws of physics"
    Go for it techquipment . Introduce some hydrogen into the gasoline oxygen mix in an ICE and see if the gasoline doesn't burn more efficiently and thereby produce more power and 'bang for the buck' ... and more than enough to compensate for energy used to produce the elec. current.
    Side effects...that's another issue.
  • texasestexases Posts: 6,080
    First prize for grasping at straws, Brian. If you have some facts or documentation, great. Doubt it...
  • brian76brian76 Posts: 39
    Why is it on most all forums there is always one person who seems to feel this little domain belongs to him/her so, like a dog, goes around pissing on everything in a pathetic attempt to intimidate others?

    I, for one, welcome techquipment's willingness to do some hands on experimentation. He obviously is a bright person with an open mind.
  • texasestexases Posts: 6,080
    Why do I continue to comment? Because, in my humble opinion, HHO is a scam, and that makes those who sell it, well, you fill in the blank.

    There are three reasons that no individual should spend a penny on "HHO":
    1. It can't work. You cannot get extra energy out of an engine by generating hydrogen when you lose at least 2/3 of the energy when you burn it.
    2. The web sites lie. They are filled with nonsensical jargon, unsupported claims, and basic lies about how engines work. I have not seen one that would get past the slightest bit of technical review.
    3. If you don't believe 1 and 2, believe this: If these things worked, there would be hundreds of reputable corporations world-wide building them, if only for their own use. Also, every government agency (think about the Post Office! the Army! every government, school district, whatever!) would jump at the chance to reduce their fuel costs. NONE OF THIS IS HAPPENING! And there is a clear reason why - it doesn't work.
This discussion has been closed.
HHO kits - Do they really work? - Car Forums at