The image on the right is the inside of the cap for the wide mouth jar. Specifically, you're looking at a double vacuum set up where I used lock-washers to hold the angled fittings in place. As you'll see in the video below they're not always easy to put in place, but I found them to be more practical and frankly easier to use than the 1/4 inch nuts as indicated in the book.UPDATE NOTE: 7:42 PM EDT Aug 10, 2008 - A new friend of mine in Fort Worth just called to tell me that the 1/4 inch lock washer slid right off the elbow! Between us we figured out that the elbow he was using was an irrigation variety purchased from Home Depot. The elbows that I'm using are automotive vacuum fittings and can be found at PepBoys, NAPA and Auto Zone. It's a pretty darned important distinction. Thanks Chris! - j
The video should give you a pretty good idea of how to put the angled fittings into the cap. I've had the question asked quite a few times concerning how this is done, and I finally got it through my head that there was a need for a video. The photo is actually something that I took a couple of weeks ago and has been lost in my computer until now.
It has lately occurred to me that what I take for granted is not necessarily obvious - so I ask in advance for you to be patient. If I've neglected to point out something important just drop me a note or give me a call and I'll see what I can do to fix it properly
NOTE: The O-Ring mentioned in the video is now available.
Very soon I'm going to be making further modifications to my car in the quest for better mileage. Someone early on told me that I should be getting 70MPG on the highway, and I just figured that he was exaggerating - that he was all hot about selling the technology and had become what I call a cheerleader (if you know what I mean), however as you know I'm now getting very close to 40 MPG on the highway - and it was only scant weeks ago that I thought that was impossible. Hey I haven't tried the PVC Enhancer; the Fuel Heater or any gas additives. I've been running with my AC on. I'm not all that careful with my starts and stops, and I sometimes wait for my wife or my kid with the motor running and the AC on at the same time! Get it? I have room to grow and new things to explore. However the AC stays on. I like to be cool:-)
My current w4g set up is as follows:
Two (Single Vacuum Line Style) Electrolyzers connected in series
j
Very soon I'm going to be making further modifications to my car in the quest for better mileage. Someone early on told me that I should be getting 70MPG on the highway, and I just figured that he was exaggerating - that he was all hot about selling the technology and had become what I call a cheerleader (if you know what I mean), however as you know I'm now getting very close to 40 MPG on the highway - and it was only scant weeks ago that I thought that was impossible. Hey I haven't tried the PVC Enhancer; the Fuel Heater or any gas additives. I've been running with my AC on. I'm not all that careful with my starts and stops, and I sometimes wait for my wife or my kid with the motor running and the AC on at the same time! Get it? I have room to grow and new things to explore. However the AC stays on. I like to be cool:-)
My current w4g set up is as follows:
Two (Single Vacuum Line Style) Electrolyzers connected in series
- No line to the Air intake
- No Vacuum Line Check Valves - (with four feet of vacuum line going to the manifold)
- 1 1/4 teaspoon Baking Soda in each
- Each Tower has 1/4 inch notching - (accepting longer wire for more surface area)
- Positive Side wire - 60 inches - quadruple twisted 316 L
- Negative side wire - 60 inches - double twisted 316L
- Pots set at approximately 10 on a scale that runs to 60
- Formerly had a spacer on it which gave some benefit when no other enhancements were in place
- IMPORTANT: Has now been disconnected from the system. - It was found to be in conflict with the MAP Enhancer.
j
Posts
11 comments:
I noticed in your setup you have 1.25 teaspoons of baking soda in each jar. That's a good amount for a single cell running on 12v, but when you have two cells in series you can use up to 6 teaspoons in each jar without overheating (or 5 teaspoons in a hot climate). That might help you out even more, but you may need to turn up your MAP enhancer a little to make up for the extra hydrogen.
I have 5 teaspoons in each cell, and it has never overheated, even after driving 2 hours in 100F heat.
After emailing back and forth with you earlier today I went out and added a teaspoon to each of the units. I have to say that I feel that when I step on the accelerator the car has more zip. So I don't have to push down as far to get the same power - thus using less fuel? Is it my imagination? We shall see on the next fill up.
I wouldn't be surprised if you got a little extra power from the additional HHO. Just remember that the more HHO you produce, the more you need to compensate for it with the MAP enhancer. Your optimal setting from before may not be optimal anymore. I think this is what darrell experienced when he added a second cell. And it's what I experienced today (refer to my new post about the supply hoses). I previously had my optimal setting at 305mV. But now that my hose problem is fixed and I'm producing more HHO, 305mV actually gets me a huge drop in mileage. All the EFIE tuning I have done up until now is out the window. I have to start all over now that my hydrogen production has increased significantly. It was still a good learning experience though.
So I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you try slowly increasing the amount of baking soda, your optimal MAP enhancer setting will change each time, and it will be hard to get optimal results. I say just go all in and try 5 teaspoons per jar, then you only have to adjust the MAP enhancer once. In the water4gas book, ozzie says he is using 8 teaspoons in each cell in his six-cell setup. But his six cell kit is really just three dual cell kits. So I wouldn't be afraid to use 5 teaspoons. If you're willing to try it, I think it will save you some time. Then you only have to re-discover your optimal MAP setting once.
Well I am willing - I guess I was just being cautious:-) Let me ask this question though - when you talk about adjusting the MAP Enhancer up and down can you be more specific..? Meaning is up in the direction of 0 or 60? - since I'm at 10 now - after adding another 3 1/2 teaspoons of Baking Soda which way should I expect to go? As I said in an earlier posting - this feels counter intuitive to me.
I was meaning up towards 60. I forgot you had your o2 sensors out though. My thinking was that by burning more hydrogen you will have more o2 in the exhaust, and that the o2 sensor would detect it and try to run a richer mixture. But without an o2 sensor, you are basically controlling the mixture directly with the MAP enhancer. In your case, the MAP enhancer is not having to compensate for the o2 sensors, so that's probably why a low setting is working well. Using the same scale from 0 to 60, my wife's MAP enhancer is set at about 20. But it's having to compensate for the o2 sensor reading plus lean out the mixture. And that's with an o2 sensor spacer installed. Without a spacer, I had to set the knob about half way.
Even though that theory doesn't apply in your case, I still think you will be able to turn up your knob a small amount with 5tsp baking soda (maybe in the 13-15 range?) Even though you don't have to worry about the o2 sensor stuff, the additional hydrogen should allow you to run a leaner mixture than you were before. You should also have slightly more power, even with a leaner mixture. That's where the mileage savings happens. Part of the savings come from not having to push the pedal down as hard. The other part is finding the leanest mixture you can run while maintaining that extra bit of power. So adding extra hydrogen should give you a little more power and at the same time allow you to run a little bit leaner. When you put those two things together, you should see a noticeable difference.
After adding the extra baking soda, I would start at 10 and start increasing the knob (towards 60) by increments of 2 or 3 and do a mileage test at each setting. Eventually you will hit a peak and then your mileage will start dropping back down. At that point you should have a pretty good idea of where your best fuel saving range is.
Excellent! Thanks. The information that you have at your fingertips is nothing less than awesome. I really appreciate your willingness to share with those of us who are still knocking around:-)
No prob! I read through the water4gas books several times to make sure I understood everything. The books are not very well organized... there are some very important bits of information in very random places, and it took several reads before I could put all the pieces together. One example is the additives chapter. There's a whole section about how great acetone is, and then the recommended formula is acetone + xylene + GP7. But on some random page in the other book, there is a warning that you should not use acetone while using HHO. C'mon ozzie! That's kinda important, shouldn't it be on the additives page? A lot of what I know comes from the books, but a lot of the mistakes I made were also because of the books. But I think I finally have most of it sorted out.
My mileage has been all over the place. My best mileage of 25.02 mpg was with the knob at 20. Set at 30, I got 17.74 mpg, 25 was 22.25 mpg, 22.5 was 11.54 mpg(!), and at 17.5 I got 19.54 mpg. I can only conclude I have a leak, so I've ordered a couple of O Rings from you, Jon.
I'm also ignoring the highway setting at this point. I'll find the best spot for the city setting, then experiment with the highway setting.
How many miles are you driving for each test? I've been doing 40-50 mile tests, but I'm starting to question whether that's really enough to get accurate results. In the water4gas books, he just says to make sure you drive at least 30 miles for a test. But I'm starting to wonder how accurate the auto-shutoff feature is when filling up the tank. I honestly don't know what the margin of error is for the auto-shutoff. But when it only takes about 1.5 gallons to fill up, any inaccuracies in the auto-shutoff could potentially make a big difference. So in other words, the amount of gas you start with may not be exactly the same as the amount you end up with after refilling.
I don't know exactly how the auto-shutoff works, but it seems like it could possibly be triggered early if the gas is sloshing around.
I have no idea how close this is, but let's just estimate that it could be off by as much as 0.2 gallons. When you're talking 40 miles divided by 1.3 gallons vs. 1.5 gallons, that changes the results by over 3 mpg.
I would like to find out what the typical margin of error is for auto-shutoff. It may even be higher than my estimate. And it might explain some of the erratic test results. In the past, I experienced a range of results between 18 to 26 mpg with the exact same settings. That was with short tests. I also took it on two longer trips (over 100 miles) at those settings, and I got right around 23mpg both times. So my long range tests were pretty consistent, and they were close to the average of my shorter tests.
I don't really have any concrete evidence that the auto-shutoff is causing the erratic results, it's just a hunch. From now on, I am not going to fill up until I have at least 100 miles at a particular setting. Then any differences in the auto-shutoff will be minimized and hopefully the results will be more consistent.
So darrell, it's possible you do have a leak. Making sure your cells are sealed can only help. But if you've been doing tests of less than 50 miles, there may be a margin of error as high as a few mpgs. Again, it's just a theory. But I'm taking my short-test results with a grain of salt now. I think longer tests are more likely to tell the true story. I'm going to try it out and see what happens.
I'm still excited about my 32mpg result though, even though it was a 40 mile test. Even if I was off by 3 or 4 mpg, 28 mpg is still pretty darn good.
Just a side note... my wife gets pretty consistent results with her o2 extender + MAP enhancer setup. I only calculate hers when she fills up from empty, and she gets almost exactly 27 mpg every time. That's another thing that leads me to believe the short testing method is flawed.
I'll report back when I get some long test results... might be awhile though.
My test runs range from 35-60 miles. My worst run was only 13 miles.
Wasn't there something written in the Water2Gas books about a computer that can be hooked up to show real time gas mileage? I think that is the only way to go to fine tune your fuel mixture on the fly.
Yeah, the scangauge II can give you real time mileage. It costs about $150.
I just looked over my history of tests, and it seems to confirm the theory. My tests have been anywhere from 30-55 miles. All of my worst results plus my best couple results were the shortest tests. Some of the tests had slightly different settings, but not by much. For tests of 40 miles or less, the range was anywhere from 10 to 30 mpg! The range for tests over 40 miles was much smaller, 22-27 mpg. And then my two trips of over 100 miles got me almost the exact same mpg at 23 (that was before I fixed my hoses, so I think my average is higher now).
So the longer the test, the less variation I had between results. From what I've experienced, I would say 75 miles is the bare minimum that a test should be to get fairly accurate results (at least in my truck), and 100 is better.
Post a Comment