2GN.ORG

here we go... stuff just for us!
http://www.engineperformancechip.com/do ... 05-c-8_219

The best way to save on gas is to not drive. If we're so concerned about our decade old cars getting only 30-40mpg, then perhaps walking would suit us better.

Racer12306 wrote:On the same table, propane is noted as being rated at 105 (a quick peek at wiki shows this being the AKI). Going on the more octane equals better fuel economy theory, pure propane would be an even better option than mixing a little hydrogen into the combustion process. It's much more feasable too. However, I'm pretty sure people do not cite a significant increase in fuel economy when switching over to propane.

Propane has less energy than gasoline; kind of like running E85. So no, you will not see better fuel mileage. But when boosted, it can make decent power, due to the octane, like E85.

The hydrogen, if it worked would still not increase economy, it just would use less gasoline, due to the hydrogen off setting it. Much like propane use in diesel engines. They get better power, and use less diesel, but not really less fuel. But me thinks propane in diesels has far better benefits than hydrogen in a gasoline engine.

i meant 100 miles per tank

This really boils down to a system of inefficiencies. Energy must be conserved in any reaction. Essentially, you are using engine power (via electricity) to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen. Then producing engine power by joining the two again. There is no way to gain energy via this process, only to loose it.

Any mpg increases that people see from these products are simply from throwing a bunch of crap on their car that tricks the sensors into making the engine run lean.....which may or may not create better mpg. This effect could easily be done by modifying 02 signals.

But by using a pulse width you can use frequencies to seperate the molecules with less power input . molecules all have a resonating frequency, when finding that it takes less power to reach a higher efficiency

The number of harmonics in the frequency domain from a square wave makes this statement seem fishy to me. Anyway, its not like you're using electromagentic radiation to exite the water like in a microwave, its just pure electrical energy.

Donkeypuncher wrote:Tornado fuel saver FTW

Call me crazy, but I will say that these do work in certain applications.

I noticed a couple MPG increase on my Monte SS (carbureted 305) but when I tried it on the Neon I got nothing. In hind site it makes sense. Modern engines have pretty efficient induction paths compared to the engines of yesteryear.

occasional demons wrote:

Racer12306 wrote:On the same table, propane is noted as being rated at 105 (a quick peek at wiki shows this being the AKI). Going on the more octane equals better fuel economy theory, pure propane would be an even better option than mixing a little hydrogen into the combustion process. It's much more feasable too. However, I'm pretty sure people do not cite a significant increase in fuel economy when switching over to propane.

Propane has less energy than gasoline; kind of like running E85. So no, you will not see better fuel mileage. But when boosted, it can make decent power, due to the octane, like E85.

The hydrogen, if it worked would still not increase economy, it just would use less gasoline, due to the hydrogen off setting it. Much like propane use in diesel engines. They get better power, and use less diesel, but not really less fuel. But me thinks propane in diesels has far better benefits than hydrogen in a gasoline engine.

I didn't think to take energy density into consideration. According to the published paper I linked above, hydrogen has a very poor energy density. It has about 25% the density of gasoline when in liquid form and just a mere .034% the density of gasoline at 0 bar. Energy density does increase as pressure increases but it's still pathetic.

However we are talking about octane only here. Octane is the sole contributing factor to fuel economy.

Nothing else matters

Son of a bitch. I totally missed this thread.

Goes to merge some posts into this one

occasional demons wrote:

Many people do not realize that when you run a car or truck on gasoline of diesel fuel, you are actually running it on hydrogen. And all we are doing is using the hydrogen from water

Flawed.

Explain to me how for every gallon of gasoline burned, nearly a gallon of water is expelled out the exhaust pipe. If the hydrogen in the water was being used, water would not be coming out of the exhaust.

A statement like this cracks me up. You have no idea how chemistry works, do you? You don't "use" molecules/atoms. They get shuffled around and end up as a product.

And someone went all nuts on this thread and mixed a bunch together.

dblsg wrote:

i meant 100 miles per tank

So is he still using it?

Yeah, this thread was the result of a discussion in another thread. I thought it was appropriate to combine them.

It's all about the same principle.

racer12306 wrote:It's all about the same principle.

MPG tomfoolery?