Monday, August 11, 2008

Water4Gas Testimonial

In following the hho gas world, I get alot of emails from people at various stages of realization that Water4Gas technology works. Today, I got a note from Les Pollyea of State Street Motors in Hastings, MI. He's been in the automotive repair business for 30 years. When I spoke to him today on the phone, the first words of his mouth was, "I was a skeptic. And before we started this thing, we looked at it for 2 months trying to figure out if it was a scam or not a scam. So, finally we did it. And I'm telling you what, we were amazed!" Mr. Pollyea went on to explain that his whole approach to studying this was as a skeptic. He wants to prove it doesnt work. But so far his test results show it does. They are going to install it on 2 more vehicles now.

Just another testimonial from someone without a name, address or phone number, right? Wrong! Mr. Pollyea gave me permission to include his full contact information right here on the blog. That's right, a real person just like you who scratched their head for awhile wondering if they should buy a Water4Gas manual and give this thing a try. I'm sure too many people will call Les and he'll send me an email saying take this info down but for now, here is his exact email to me posted with his permission:

I own and operate STATE STREET MOTORS INC. in Hastings ,Mich. We have recently installed a Water4gas system on my 1997 Chevy Sububan 2500 4X4. Prior to installation the Last 3 fuel economy fuel ratings were avg. 13.2 to 13.4 mpg. after install the first mpg test was 18.2 mpg. we are going to continue testing to see if this was just a fluke or if this system really does have merit. We will mail you a continuing report as we progress.
1455 W. STATE ST.

Here's more of my interview with Les:

Blogger: How long have you been working with cars?

LP: Oh God.....30yrs?

Blogger: So when you first looked at this, you thought it was a complete scam?

LP: Absolutely! Absolutely.

Blogger: Why did you keep looking into it? What pushed you over the edge to try it, if you thought it was a scam?

LP: $4/gallon for fuel and I think curiosity more than anything. That and by God, you know what, if it does work, then why not? I mean if this does work, just look what it would do for the nation.

Blogger: ...or SUV sales. People can't buy Ford or General Motors SUV's these days because of the price of gas.

LP: Exactly. That's it. I'm going to test this on a motorhome which currently gets 7mpg. We're going to test it on there.

Pollyea went on to ask if I hear that others are getting more power from these systems and I said yes, that's what I hear all the time. He said he's getting a very noticeable amount of extra horsepower.

So there you go.

Monday, August 04, 2008

Mike Allen at Popular Mechanics

Popular Mechanics' Mike Allen is skeptical---skeptical of the effects of HHO gas on fuel economy in a vehicle. He's written about it and due to an overwhelming reader response, he's going against his professional judgement and is taking steps to run a series of tests himself on a 2009 Nissan Maxima. Many are reporting this as Popular Mechanics' attempt to debunk Water4Gas and the various kits that you can buy on the Internet.

I had chance to talk with Mr. Allen today to learn how his testing is going. First, he let me know that this is not his top priority right now (completing print magazines is) so when he gets time, he does push his project forward a bit. We discussed the kit he has installed and his testing methodology. I also learned which kit he chose to install and I even spoke to that manufacturer today to get his take on working with Mike on this.

In the coming days, I will be posting excerpts of my interview with Mike and with this--for now--unnamed manufacturer. Stay tuned.

In the meantime, I'd like to request again to hear from Ford, General Motors, Nissan or any manufacturer out there testing HHO. I'm hearing today that when it comes to testing HHO devices, folks in the aftermarket industry believe that legislation exists which would compel the auto manufacturers to be responsible for testing. Many times, you will hear that tampering with an oxygen sensor is against the law. I'm still researching that but at least one person I spoke to believes that challenging that would involve necessarily the underlying manufacturer of the vehicle to which the aftermarket device was installed. If you are in SEMA and understand this, can you get in touch with me:

HHO Gas: What types of proof are offered?

I've been blogging about HHO gas for over 2 yrs now. There are still quite a few aspects of this topic that I do not understand but I think compared to the vast majority of people I am reasonably well informed. My personal hope is that this technology can be scientifically proven beyond a doubt to work and to be the sort of technology that can scale through continual study and testing. But until this is done right by the EPA, we will have to make do with less scientific approaches. I'd like to walk you through an evolution of the types of proof that are being attempted out there.

First, we all know about the consumer testimonial type of evidence. This is probably the most emotional type. The problem with it is it's difficult to compare before to after due to variability of driving conditions and the impact having an HHO device has on the driver in terms of their psychology. Second, a somewhat similar attempt at proof comes from the YouTube or MetaCafe audio/visual genre. Plainly, these attempts want to allow you to experience an engine before/after HHO is injected into the fuel system. It is interesting to see an engine and hear it before/after as hho is injected then remove, then reinjected and the engine noticeably changes as a result. This is certainly a repeatable effort but it lacks the metrics needed to gauge true impact. Thirdly, there are road tests out there. Oftentimes, these come from trucking companies that have drivers driving routes every day. They know their mileage from careful and repeated record keeping. They put a unit on a vehicle and compare before/after. But even these tests might be flawed if the driver knows that a device is on the system---at least that's what critics will say. Fourthly, there is testing that takes place on a dynamometer. Hydrogen Boost has some test results from Purdue on this but I can't find the names of the original researchers on the website. WPTV in Florida ran two tests using a dynamometer and in the first one, the car more than doubled gas mileage but in the second test, it only jumped 10% and the underlying investigator, Amir Abtahi believes the testing was too flawed for the results to be useful. Ultimately, the EPA and it's independent 3rd party labs have a process that allows a device like this to be tested thoroughly. The problem is that no one has stepped up to take the test.

There's a 5th type of proof that is out there which probably annoys me most of all. This is the type of proof that comes from appeals to authorities in the field of mechanics or physics, etc and often consists of citing the 2nd law of thermodynamics. This type of proof is often sought by journalists who are writing a piece on HHO gas. So, the journalist calls up their local Professor of ABC and asks them what they think. I hate it when a Professor says something like this, "If this technology works so great, why isn't Ford or General Motors using it?" This type of analysis of HHO gas is a bit too snarky for me. It goes beyond what is needed which is a simple test on a dynamometer.

My personal opinion is that a good test would consist of 2 identical cars of the same year having their mileage calibrated so that both cars, in various loads, have the same mpg performance. Then you would strap on an HHO generator on one of the cars and run the tests again. To me, this would settle the human aspect of the test as well as teh variability of engine performance to a reasonable degree. If this type of test yielded results, then I think we'd all be in a much better place.