Deseret News | Reader comments: Gas saver? Bluffdale man says invention increases mileage, aids engine performance

Reader comments
Gas saver? Bluffdale man says invention increases mileage, aids engine performance

Page:
1
2
Next >

Good Luck! | 2:04 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

An invention that "cuts mileage". Who would want to cut their mileage?

He didn't invent this though he may be trying to perfect it. This concept has been around for a long time.

I like the idea... | 5:29 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

I wonder if certain vehicles computers re-adjust to the hyro-capacitor and limit savings? I' glad people like Jared are trying to invent things that are neeeded instead of just complaining about them.

Wilford Woodruff | 5:44 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Great headline! Who wants to "cut mileage"? Writer must have been "cutting sleep" when they wrote this one!

Comments continue below

PBM | 5:51 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Sounds to me like "improved power to the motor and improved gas mileage" are outcomes that we do know. For AAA spokesperson Fairclough to dismiss it with comments like "we don't know the specifics but we do know these things can be harmful" and "it doesn't make sense when we don't know the outcomes" is very disingenuous. Which is it, AAA? Do we know the outcomes are harmful, and if so, where is the documentation? Or is it "we don't know the outcomes" in which case your comments are very misleading and perhaps a bit dishonest. What is AAA's agenda in knocking something that seems to be working, albeit on a small scale. AAA, Big Oil, and the auto manufacturers have certainly not produced any positive alternatives to the status quo. I hope Peterson's invention is successful.

liberal Larry | 6:57 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Wait a minute, you can't write, and publish, a story like this about a potentially bogus, and possibly dangerous, engine modification without running the whole concept past some respected automotive engineers. A Triple A spokesperson hardly qualifies as someone to evaluate this contraption.

Just another HHO scam | 7:44 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Check the science behind it. It violates the law of entropy - you can't get more energy out of a system than you put into it.

That's why none of the HHO/Brown's Gas/OxyHydrogen proponents has EVER produced a scientifically regulated test (closed loop or dynamometer test) that shows that it increases mileage. Ask them for proof and they'll tell you their story.

It's this year's rage. Remember the fuel pill from last year?

G | 7:45 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Kudos to the inventor and the buyers! Certainly over the last 50 years there have been many ingenious devices created by inspired inventors that the motor vechicle industry tries to squash as it threatens their stranglehold on gasoline engines. Wouldn't it be great if these inventions could be evaluated, improved, tested and produced? I believe that there is a wealth of ingenuity that has no easy way to be tapped for mass distribution. Over the years I have heard about numerous devices that would minimize gasoline consumption that never can be sold. The only buyers are American motor companies who are interested in preserving the status quo.

ceg | 7:55 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

RE Just another HHO scam

Energy is also expended as heat. The article did say the engine ran cooler thereby saving energy.

Erap | 8:07 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

There needs to be better regulation and laws controling promotion and sale to the public including proof of truth and guarantee of results. This should include material products as well as intangables such as MLMs, religion, etc. Scams and brain washing are becoming major american enterprises, especially in utah. It is harmful to a healthy society and prosperous communities.

to G | 8:13 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

OK, let's evaluate your paranoia. GM and Ford recently announced massive cuts in their engine programs due to higher CAFE standards. There's even a possibility that the US may be left without a V8 powered Corvette or Mustang, the flagship cars for both corporations. In short, the new CAFE standards are going to cost automakers (particularly US automakers) BILLIONS of dollars.

Don't you think that, if such a simple and relatively inexpensive device actually worked, the automakers would prefer to use it and not lose billions of dollars?

Josh the bad bear | 8:18 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Hog . . . wash ! But . . . I have invented a pill that will make you live longer and cooler and smarter and run faster, jump higher and it only requires theconsumption of junk food and . . . .

well it cost a small fortune and I will soon be able to quit my day job as well. Anyone want to sign up ?

ceg | 8:23 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Here it is as a simple analogy- Let's take a windmill to produce energy and hook up an electrical fan to drive the windmill. If I give the fan a little boost, it should start turning the windmill, which will produce electricity to run the fan, which will turn the windmill....

Nope, it doesn't work. Why not? Because there is energy lost as waste at every stage of the process. Some of the energy input into the windmill is turned into heat (lost energy). A small amount of the electrical transmission is lost as heat. Some of the electricity used to turn the fan motor is lost as heat. Not all of the wind energy produced by the fan can be captured by the windmill.

In an HHO system, the hydrogen is electrolyzed from water by electricity, a process that is at best about 80% efficient (20% loss). That gas is then burned in an internal combustion engine at 35% efficiency (even running cooler, you'd be lucky to gain 1% efficiency) which then turns an alternator at 55% efficiency which then produces HHO....

Sorry, no perpetual motion here.

Anonymous | 8:25 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

1.21 jigawatts! Got to get me one of them there flux capacitors!

Peoria Cougarfan | 8:36 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

I read the Des News for two reasons: 1) to get caught up on Cougar football, 2) to occasionally be entertained by the funny things that happen in Utah. Thanks for the laugh!

What's funny about this is not that this contraption is being peddled in Utah, or that gullible Utahns are buying it. What's funny is that the Des News wrote a serious article about it. Has no one on the editorial staff ever taken a college-level physics class? If so, the article could have been newsworthy and easily debunked this. Apparently, however, the Des News is willing help perpetrate this fraud, and now permit this guy's friends to write all kinds of silly comments re how society isn't fair and doesn't respect the garage inventor and conspiracy theories about how AAA wants us to remain in fuel inefficient cars?

Don't worry, our nation and society keep moving forward. In this election year, I pause to contemplate that the fact that a lot of people don't vote is what saves us.

re: PBM | 8:39 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

"...and the auto manufacturers have certainly not produced any positive alternatives to the status quo."

Hybrid cars?

GatewayToNevada | 8:40 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Note to DesNews editors:
These goobers inventing some fuel saving device come out on a regular basis. Instead of giving them attention, perhaps you could use the occasions to promote the teaching of basic science (including physics and chemistry, please) in our public schools.

Make It Yourself | 8:58 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

AAA says, "The sky is falling! The sky is falling! Beware, beware!" Everyone calm down!

Go to water4fuel dot com or go to You Tube and type in HHO, water4fuel, etc. and see for yourelf how to make one of these. What he's done is not new.

AAA should keep their mouths shut about stating that "they know" that these can be harmful to a vehicle without stating where we can go to read about the tests they've done.

I'm looking forward to his website to find out his results. $500??? Or making it myself??? Either way I'd put it on my 93' Corolla just to see.

Another solution: walk | 9:01 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Another way to decrease our fuel consumption: walk! Yes if we would walk a lot more (for those who can) I think that might just help a little bit. Gee do ya think?

That tv commercial where the mom drives her kid from their house to the next door neighbor's hits pretty close to home. I've seen very similar actions (although not quite that ridiculous) in my own 'hood. Parents driving their kids to the high school which is 300 feet from our neighborhood (or kids driving themselves, I guess so they can conserve energy to run around egging cars and TP'ing houses at night); neighbors driving to another neighbor's six or seven houses away (no heavy packages or other stuff to deliver either); active healthy people driving to the church that is right inside our neighborhood when it's a beautiful Sunday.

Hey, and when you are "forced" to walk (like in a mall) try to pick up the pace a bit, ok? I see many walking so slowly in the mall it's like they're afraid they might burn some calories. Same goes for crossing the street, although they get kudos for walking.

Garage inventors | 9:25 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

I don't know if this invention really works, but I do know that some of the greatest American inventions have come from garages and bicycle shops.

Flight: Wright Brothers - invented the airplane while running a bicycle shop.

Television: Philo Farnsworth - a farmboy from Idaho invented the television. He got his initial ideas while plowing a field.

Personal Computers: several prominent computer firms began in garages.

If this guy's invention really works, then he should approach some venture capital firms to get some funding for product development, production, and marketing.

Wowser | 9:43 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

RE: Just another HHO scam

I also took basic chemistry as well as a couple of Thermodynamics courses in my mechanical engineering undergraduate coursework and so I'm "familiar" with the term entropy that you like to use. To assume that the combustible engine is completely efficient and cannot be improved is to err. There are methods and means of improving the amount of energy that is converted into motion, that's what being an inventor/engineer is all about. The story doesn't say that the inventor is claiming to create energy from nothing. Of course some efficiency gaining techniques can actually decrease the longevity of the motor. In the long run, which solution will incur the greater cost/risk?

An Ex-Mortgage Broker....... | 10:18 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Wow, done ripping people off with sub-primes! Now on to the next scam............

Bob | 11:04 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

I'm building one...I've tinkered with one in a friends car. They work. Here's how. Hydrogen is far more combustable than gas. Our car engines burn about 30% of the fuel...60% on a good day. All these do is make HHO which is sucked into the intake and causes the fuel to burn better. More burns=more engergy=better effiency. However this guy did not invent this. Check your facts DNews (one of the reasons I don't read it often). there is a down side, you have got to like to tinker. These are NOT install and drive forever devises. And yes, to get better mileage, you put a circuit in line with the O2 sensor so it does not think the engine is running lean, dumping more fuel in. There is some amazing 'garage' technology working on this right now. Minds unfettered by corporate bottlenecks. Another issue, tailpipe emissions are so low, the machines often fail you car. Not suppose to be that low running gas.

Conejo | 11:09 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

I don't care what the science is. If I get an extra 50 miles on a tank of gas without any other modifications to my driving habits, then it is working. Many things could not be explained by the science of the day. Remember the old standard "If man were meant to fly, God would have given him wings"? I'm wondering that standard no longer is used.

Gitano | 11:30 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

I cannot imagine that a person with an engineering background has not already "discovered" and utilized what this lender/financial advisor is "refining" in his garage at home. I am not an engineer, but I am a realist. It just sounds a bit too----hokey?

To Bob | 11:33 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

If your engine is leaving 40% of your fuel unburned, you won't be passing an emissions test. In fact, your spark plugs will foul out in short order.

In fact, a computer-controlled, fuel-injected engine burns about 98% of the fuel before it gets to O2 sensor.

Re: Conejo | 11:36 a.m. Sept. 1, 2008

I don't care what the science is either. I have a magic twinkie I will sell you. You put it on the dashboard and you will magically get an extra 100 mpg.

Truly you have a dizzying intellect.

Nit Pickers | 12:18 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Must be Utah people that are not to smart
What would we do without people inventing in their garages
The Nit Pickers set on the Computer and make stupid remarks

Val | 12:20 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

We too have researched HHO units and have found a Purdue University study with a dynamometer which shows these units increase mileage by roughly 15%. We also found a manufacturer of HHO units who have just added extra manpower to their assembly line because they can't keep up with the demand. We have made one and have installed 4. So far our mileage has incrased from 15mpg to 25mpg. We plan to help others get the same results. It works. Do your own research.

make it happen | 1:09 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

I have always noticed that these types of innovations come down to individuals working from basements, especially when the powers that be don't want the system to be rocked. We went to the moon how long ago and they still can't make a car more energy efficient? Besides, wasn't the TV invented in a Utah garage?

RE: Just another HHO scam | 1:53 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

I did not see any claim that this was a perpetual motion machine. Therefore your comment that this is a scam is ridiculous. In this case they are just using excess electrical energy from the alternator to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. The hydrogen then can be used for a fuel. They are still using gas to power the vehicle. There is no claim that the car will run on water alone. There is a huge difference in what is being claimed in this article and what has been claimed by a few con artists. Please do not confuse the two!

Re: Peoria Cougar fan | 2:06 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Obviously you did not learn anything in your basic science class. Have you ever heard of electrolysis? You can split water into hydrogen and oxygen gas with excess electricity from the alternator. The only thing that would be in violation of the any law of physics would be if they claimed that the car would could run on water alone. Notice that this is not claimed in the article. They still have to use gas to make the car go. They are just using some excess electricity that would go to waste to convert water into some usable fuel. Get your facts straight before you start making claims about science!

We need to teach science | 2:17 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Next we need a multilevel marketing scheme. I've ran generators. There is a mechanical energy loss converting mechanical energy into electrical energy. To get a water molecule to break out in to hydrogen and oxygen requires additional energy.

You never get everything for free.

Ing | 2:31 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

This is another one of many situations where it'd be nice to just get some INFORMATION unpolluted by everyone else's agendas.

My dad got one of these kits (not from this guy, though) and is testing it in an old car. So far it seems to be improving the mileage...but we'll see how it goes over time, I guess. What you really need is an a/b sort of test; he's planning to track the mileage on his daily drives with and without, and then see what the difference is (driving to the same destinations several times over a period of a couple of weeks, at least, so that different terrain or maybe being stressed out one day won't distort the overall results).

We'll see how it goes, I guess.

Jared | 2:37 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

I came up with this idea when i was 14. I then took physics and chemistry and realized that it was a flawed idea. The idea is that one can take water (H2O) and split it into Oxygen and Hydrogen using electricity from the alternator. the hydrogen is then put back into the combustion process of the vehicle where hydrogen is rejoined with oxygen. in the splitting of water into H and O it requires around 220 Kcal/mole of engery, which comes from the engine through the alternator. when the hydrogen and oxygen are rejoined in combustion it gives off 220 k/cal/mol. some of that energy is given of in the form of heat rather than mechanical energy to move your car. In the end you have lost some more energy by adding more steps to converting chemical energy into mechanical energy. If there is someone else who understands this otherwise let me know. this is just the way i understand it.

Re: We need to teach science | 2:40 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Do you know how much excess electricity your alternator produces? There is a good chance that you have a spare 20 amps that are not used and are wasted. You can use that 20 Amps to split water into hydrogen. No one is saying that you can run the car on water alone. You still need gasoline to provide the majority of the energy. Plans can be easily found on the internet so you can build your own. You don't need to buy a unit like this from anyone. Therefore don't knock the idea because you think it is a multilevel marketing scheme.

Re: Jared | 2:44 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

You are right that there is not enough energy to keep things going if you were running the car only on water. These guys are still using gasoline. The hydrogen is just added to the fuel mixture.

Ing | 2:48 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

I'm thinking it might be possible to get additional combustion energy out of this. Your alternator is already producing electricity in vastly larger amounts than your car requires, so there's not necessarily a big energy drain in passing some electricity through the hydrogen apparatus. And the use of a catalyst could change things. If the catalyst prompts water to release hydrogen more easily, then a chemical reaction is doing at least part of the work for you, which makes it more likely that your machine (the engine) could get more energy out of the apparatus than it puts in. (I wish I knew what this catalyst was, though; how effective is it? How much does it cost?)

Like I said before, we don't need a bunch of "I know better than you" pronouncements. We need some controlled testing. From the reading I've done, I don't see much information with any sort of detail. I wonder if anybody ever has fully tested this.

Re: Ing | 2:59 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Join the Hydroxy group on Yahoo. They have done extensive testing and have information for free!

Anonymous | 3:04 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

sounds like they need to make better alternators that don't waste energy.

Re: Anonymous | 3:16 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

The alternator is not the problem. We need more efficient engines.

Anonymous | 4:19 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

How about powering a car with batteries, which drives the car forward and the generator on the wheels keeps it charged and it goes forever?

more power to those who keep trying, that is what makes this country great.

grain of salt | 4:33 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Interesting that not one person using his device gave comments or a testimonial.

Most news articles dont cantain all the facts and are misleadig due to the writer's lack of scientific knowledge.

Anonymous | 5:46 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

This is nothing new. I use a hydrogen generator to precision solder and weld in my lab. A small unit runs @ 1000.00. Industrial units can run in the 10's of thousands. Don't know why it cant be adapted. Mixing hydrogen with fuel at the point of injection probably works great. Hope he makes millions and I wish I had thought of it.

Less | 5:51 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

My kid put a similar device on his honda and it lost about 15 mpg. It may be the computer adjusting for increased oxygen. Most of them do not generate enough brown gas to power a squirrel cage. The ones that do generate a lot of gas also tend to over heat and some blow up.

The idea has promise but I would rather have one that was engineered by Toyota.

GoodGuyGary | 6:44 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Ask any "smart" Chemcial Engineer and he/she will tell you it is a doable idea. Don't ask mechanical engineer and expect the same result.

Dr. Emmett Brown | 7:51 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

My invention doesn't increase mileage, but it does take you anywhere you want to go, IN TIME.

It's called a fulx capacitor, it only needs 1.21 jigawatts, and it's as commercially viable and proven as the item in this story.

No checks, please.

I have a similar car | 7:58 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

My system has a patented method of getting fuel to the cylinders. I call it a "hot beef injection", simply because it is performed at very high temperatures.

No Free Electricity | 8:18 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Your alternator puts out enough amperage to meet demand. The load on the alternator is equal to demand. If you increase demand, you increase the load. Increase the load and you increase the amount of gasoline used to turn the alternator. It does not produce "excess" electricity. If it did, you'd be replacing your battery very often.

Matthew | 8:19 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

Alternators have a very advanced inner coil circuit that adjusts in real time to the electrical demands of the car. It can even be turned completely off even though the belt and pulley are still turning.

I have no idea whether hydrogen can cause the gasoline combustion to be more efficient (sounds unlikely), but there is no "excess" energy coming from your alternator. Sorry.

Re: Matthew | 8:49 p.m. Sept. 1, 2008

That's interesting because people are already using excess electricity from alternators. The only problem I see is if you overloaded the alternator by trying to draw more current than the alternator is rated for.

Page:
1
2
Next >

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.