Mpg gains up 25-30 % with or without hho ?!?

[Jonnkopp]

Hi everyone,

I have been fooling around with hho now for about 9 months. My current setup is in a 2001 silerado with a 4.8 l engine. I have "evolved" int a 13 plate dry cell that produces about 3 lpm at about 30 amps. No efie or other electronic mods to the engine. My fuel consumption pre-hho was 13 mpg average, consistently over two years. I had varying results with an all time best of 21 mpg, with hho. The past two months my mpg has stabilized at around 17 1/2 mpg consistantly. Three full tanks ago I decided to turn off the hho just to get an idea of what my mpg would be after running hho for about 6 months consistently. Interestingly enough, my mpg over the past three full tanks has been consistent with what I have been getting with hho, around 17 1/2 mpg.

My question is... Has anyone else experienced this and any theories why?

I am wondering if it could be due to the long term fuel trim that the computer references to determine the amount of gas injected?

Also.. The CE light is on.. And has been for some time now.

I am planning on going with an efie at some point, but have been very satisfied with the mpg results I have seen so far without one, not to mention how well the engine runs.

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Jonn

[mike]

I think you're right about the fuel trims. The computer has adjusted to HHO. Theoretically, you should lose those gains if you keep driving without HHO.

However, I would handle that CE light. The computer tends to compensate for error conditions with the sensors, by adding more fuel. This will waste mileage. It's time to get an EFIE installed, and make the ECU happy with the o2 signals. I think you'll find that your mileage goes up considerably.

Last note, once you get the EFIE installed, turn down the amps on that cell. We run Semis at 25 amps. Your Silverado should be running at about 10-12 amps. You'll get better mileage. Try it and see.

[Jonnkopp]

Thanks for the reply Mike.

Yesterday I filled up again after driving another 352 miles and my milage was down to 16.3 mpg with no hho. It would seem the computer is adjusting the fuel trims back to its pre-hho settings. I wonder also if this "time delay" in the mpg adjustment could explain why some people are not satisfied with results they see or don't see.

I re-filled my tank and am running at about 15-20 amps for a while and see what happens.

I think your right about it being time to get an efie installed and get that CE light taken care of... But to me, it serves as good evidence that the hho is actually making a difference in my mpg, and further motivates me to continue my endeavors with it.

[amos33]

Hi John,

In reading your posts it seems to me you on the right track.

I have been running HHO in my 1998 Buick Lesabre 3.8L since October 2012 and have witnessed the same effects you have.

I think the good mpgs you getting without HHO is becuase the engine is cleaner and runs cooler.

I consistently get 40 % improvements after many tankfuls and when I run without it my mpgs drop off. They do not go back to original but there is a noticeable drop.

I ran at 20 amps for a long time then I tuned it down to 10 amps and my mpgs dropped off. I am now back to 20 amps and my mpgs are climbing back up.

I have a 25 plate dry cell that does not overheat and I have no PWM, no EFIE and no Volo Chip.

My suggestion is to take care of the check engine light and continue at the higher amps before you add anything else.

Thanks for your report, will be tracking it.

[Jonnkopp]

After running three tanks at about 25 amps, back up to a consistant 17.5 mpg.

Interestingly enough, the milage increases came back right away from the first tank running with hho. It also doesn't seem to matter if I run 20 or 25 or 30 amps, still get 17.5 mpg.

My current setup uses an analog amp meter and I do have a 50 amp pwm. My cell is only 13 plates but the plates are 7 inches by 12 inches, so they can handle a lite of amps (60)

Running at 25-30 amps it also never gets too hot.

---

I am suspect though that sn analog amp meter is not 100% accurate when using a pwm.

[mike]

Whether or not the 25 amps you read on the meter is actually 25 amps is not important anyway. What is important is that you can know that 25 amps on your meter is less than 30 amps on your meter and more than 20 amps. It will be plenty accurate enough for comparison purposes.

But in my experience, those meters aren't too bad, even with a pulsed load. They seem to average out the pulses pretty well.

All of that being said, you should adjust the PWM to the lowest amps that gives you the gains. Don't run any more amps than necessary to get the gains. This will also make maintenance and water refills easier.