MAFS Enhancer Hook up

[Rdavis3411]

I bought a MAFS enhancer recently so I can make my hho generator effective. I have a 1997 ford explorer sport with a V-6 sohc. I tried to use the multimeter to find which wire to tap into and could not find which one. I was wondering if anyone knows which wire I should put it on or has put one of these on an explorer and can offer any advice.
Thanks,
Ryan Davis

[msirach]

Welcome to CleanMPG!

My advice would be to forget HHO and enhancers. Read Beating the EPA and use these tips for FREE.

I get 25 mpg with a 4.0 AT 4x4 Mazda truck with tools and trailer.
Also look at what nerousmini has done with his Chevy Blazer.

The only item I recommend to purchase is a ScangaugeII.

[Rdavis3411]

I do hypermile and would like to get the scangauge II. But on their website it says that for a 1997 explorer it doesn't give fuel economy info which is the whole reason I would get it.
Does anyone know if the explorer sport is different than the regular explorer?

[xcel]

Hi Rdavis:

___Doubtful. I connected up a 98 Explorer Sport at a gathering down south last year and it was a no-go

___Good Luck

___Wayne

[Elixer]

I'll be more direct.

See the wiki:

This effectively increases the octane rating of the fuel, meaning that performance gains can be obtained when used in conjunction with a supercharger or turbocharger, altered spark ignition timing, and other modifications.

Fuel economy can be improved with water injection, although the effect on most engines with no other modification, like leaning out the mixture, appears to be rather limited or even negligible in some cases.

So Wikipedia tells, which corresponds to logical physics, is that without other (major) engine modifications water injection will not improve FE. HHO is not different from H2O, and the main thing you can expect it to do it to mess up your vehicle emissions.

[brick]

Let me tell this story in two movements. First, what they want you to think will happen:

First, they want you to think that the hydrogen generator can produce enough gas to have a significant impact on combustion. They also want you to think that this gas will somehow replace gasoline while producing more enerergy (enough to drive the car plus run the generator). But wait, there's more! They want you to think that, since it isn't working, you just need to buy one more part to fix it: a MAF spoofing device that will make the car think there's less air coming in than really is, reducing fuel input and increasing fuel economy.

Now the reality.

First, these home-built generators produce a very small amount of gas. (I used to build them as a kid...it took fifteen minutes to fill a test tube with H2. You need much higher currents than a 12V electrical system will allow.) Second, when you burn the hydrogen it just recombines with the additional oxygen that was trickled into the intake with it. As far as the cylinder is concerned it may as well not be there. Then comes the MAF thing, which won't work because the engine will be running closed-loop (getting feedback from the O2 sensor) most of the time. The MAF only comes into play during open-loop operation during warmup and at full throttle. And even if it worked, you can't just run an engine lean that wasn't designed for it. Best case it will ping, run poorly, and belch NOx emissions.

I have said it before and I'll say it one more time: there are benefits to hydrogen injection in gasoline ICEs designed to take advantage of it. The primary benefit is reduced emissions during lean combustion, and I have seen that first-hand in the lab. One could design an engine for on-road use, and I think that manufacturers would do it if the hydrogen system were more economical than a high-performance catalytic converter. But the engine has to be mechanically different in order to run properly and see a benefit.

[paratwa]

Originally Posted by brick

Let me tell this story in two movements. First, what they want you to think will happen:

First, they want you to think that the hydrogen generator can produce enough gas to have a significant impact on combustion. They also want you to think that this gas will somehow replace gasoline while producing more enerergy (enough to drive the car plus run the generator). But wait, there's more! They want you to think that, since it isn't working, you just need to buy one more part to fix it: a MAF spoofing device that will make the car think there's less air coming in than really is, reducing fuel input and increasing fuel economy.

Now the reality.

First, these home-built generators produce a very small amount of gas. (I used to build them as a kid...it took fifteen minutes to fill a test tube with H2. You need much higher currents than a 12V electrical system will allow.) Second, when you burn the hydrogen it just recombines with the additional oxygen that was trickled into the intake with it. As far as the cylinder is concerned it may as well not be there. Then comes the MAF thing, which won't work because the engine will be running closed-loop (getting feedback from the O2 sensor) most of the time. The MAF only comes into play during open-loop operation during warmup and at full throttle. And even if it worked, you can't just run an engine lean that wasn't designed for it. Best case it will ping, run poorly, and belch NOx emissions.

I have said it before and I'll say it one more time: there are benefits to hydrogen injection in gasoline ICEs designed to take advantage of it. The primary benefit is reduced emissions during lean combustion, and I have seen that first-hand in the lab. One could design an engine for on-road use, and I think that manufacturers would do it if the hydrogen system were more economical than a high-performance catalytic converter. But the engine has to be mechanically different in order to run properly and see a benefit.

This is a great post! I haven't looked seriously at HHO injection, but your post seems to sum up all the claims and the realities. Thanks for sharing this.

[msirach]

Tim: Very good clear concise explanation. Thanks!

[diamondlarry]

Originally Posted by brick

Let me tell this story in two movements. First, what they want you to think will happen:

First, they want you to think that the hydrogen generator can produce enough gas to have a significant impact on combustion. They also want you to think that this gas will somehow replace gasoline while producing more enerergy (enough to drive the car plus run the generator). But wait, there's more! They want you to think that, since it isn't working, you just need to buy one more part to fix it: a MAF spoofing device that will make the car think there's less air coming in than really is, reducing fuel input and increasing fuel economy.

Now the reality.

First, these home-built generators produce a very small amount of gas. (I used to build them as a kid...it took fifteen minutes to fill a test tube with H2. You need much higher currents than a 12V electrical system will allow.) Second, when you burn the hydrogen it just recombines with the additional oxygen that was trickled into the intake with it. As far as the cylinder is concerned it may as well not be there. Then comes the MAF thing, which won't work because the engine will be running closed-loop (getting feedback from the O2 sensor) most of the time. The MAF only comes into play during open-loop operation during warmup and at full throttle. And even if it worked, you can't just run an engine lean that wasn't designed for it. Best case it will ping, run poorly, and belch NOx emissions.

I have said it before and I'll say it one more time: there are benefits to hydrogen injection in gasoline ICEs designed to take advantage of it. The primary benefit is reduced emissions during lean combustion, and I have seen that first-hand in the lab. One could design an engine for on-road use, and I think that manufacturers would do it if the hydrogen system were more economical than a high-performance catalytic converter. But the engine has to be mechanically different in order to run properly and see a benefit.

Let me start off by saying that these will not significantly improve the average persons FE and the money would probably be better spent on replacing the oil with synthetics.

Most of the setups I've run across don't claim that the unit can produce enough to replace gasoline as the fuel. It seems that critics always jump to the conclusion that these units claim to put out more energy than they use. There may be a very few that do but, for the vast majority of them, that isn't at all what they claim. As for increasing the efficiency of the burn, that's really not even what they are after. The hydrogen doesn't increase the efficiency but rather it speeds up the burn of the fuel. The benefits of this would be that if, you could gain control over the engines ignition timing, you could wait to fire the mixture until closer to top-dead-center of the combustion stroke. By doing this, you reduce the amount of time that the engine is working against itself by firing on the upstroke. Now this hydrogen would of course cost a little fuel to be produced but I think of it more along the lines of the EBH in the Prius; it takes some electricity to work but, the fuel saved ends up being a net gain at the end. I think the science is good on this but putting it in to practice would be the prohibitive part.

Again, most home built systems are very weak as far as hydrogen output goes. However, there are a few designs out there that can produce in excess of 2L/min at under 15 amps of current. These involve circular multi-conductor/plate units. I like to follow developments in this area because of a system I saw on the Science Channel where a person had installed a huge solar array and he also had it set up to divert any electricity that the house didn't consume to producing hydrogen gas. He would then use this hydrogen to power the house in the event that the sun didn't shine enough to keep the banks of storage batteries sufficiently charged.

Once again, you will be wasting your money if you don't have a way of controlling ignition timing (which this would apply to 90+% of everyone out there) and you would be better off to drive to Wayne's, got to a Milwaukee Hybrid Group meeting, or find a local hypermiler and get some clinic time on how to improve your driving techniques.

Now back to the test studying.

[nervousmini]

Originally Posted by msirach

Welcome to CleanMPG!

My advice would be to forget HHO and enhancers. Read Beating the EPA and use these tips for FREE.

I get 25 mpg with a 4.0 AT 4x4 Mazda truck with tools and trailer.
Also look at what nerousmini has done with his Chevy Blazer.

The only item I recommend to purchase is a ScangaugeII.

Thanks for the plug Mike

As has been stated by those who are much more specifically knowledgeable on the subject HHO is a waste of time and money - there are no free rides, especially in chemistry/physics.

The best I have found for better mileage in my Blazer is the following.

1. Slow down - the aerodynamic hit to your mpg over 50 mph is a killer to fe. Take some time and PLAN a commute route, not just the most direct or easiest but one that keeps your speeds lower and avoids stoplights/signs whenever possible.

2. Tire pressures up - I run mine at the sidewall max (51psi for michelin mxv4s)

3. Eliminate any excess weight - if you don't need it, don't carry it. If you have a roof rack and don't plan on using it see if it comes off easily - there is allot of aero drag here you can eliminate.

4. Use of the following techniques: dwl, dwb, pulse and hangtime - seemed to bring the best results for me.

Good luck and be sure to start a mileage log and keep all of us update with your progress and any questions.