0 votes

Oruval - cut to the chase

A few days ago a poster who appeared to know quite a bit about automobiles issued a challenge. You said you accepted. When is the test?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

we are trying it within the next few days

We bought an ancient VW deisel truck and have it mostly ready to run on veggie oil in the summers. But our other rig is a gas-sucking SUV, and unfortunately, we have need for it at least occasionally. We are trying the hydro-hybrid on it, we'll post results when we have them.

Truth exists, and it deserves to be cherished.

Is it a turbo diesel?

If so you need to feed the line right before the manifold on your air intake. You probably already knew that tho..=] Good luck I would like to hear your results.

Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/

Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/

This is a test that I'd like to see.

Install the HHO unit exactly as it is supposed to be.
Put the water in the jar, and install all the hoses, etc. just like the instructions tell you.
Except, DON'T hook up the electric to it.
Then run the car for a mileage test.

After comparing this mileage to your normal mileage, for comparision purposes, THEN hook up the electric to electrolyze the HHO, and do a mileage test. There may be a gain, or may not be.

My guess is that the HHO unit will give similar mileage results, whether the unit is generating any HHO or not.

If the mileage dramatically increases when the HHO is being generated, in comparison to when it's not, when the same hook-ups are present on the engine exactly the same, we can then deduce that there was some benefit from the HHO.

It's not good enough to just do a "before and after" because there may be something happening with that HHO device and its hose connections/plumbing which is NOT related to HHO being produced. You have to run the unit in place, when it is not generating, and when it is generating, to take any questions of the hardware installation out of the loop.
Do this test, and see.



Free Free Free

here is a sample of what is in the group emails....sorry for the copy and past..

Date: Saturday, July 05, 2008
> Time: 04:43:51 PM -0400
> Energy_Description:
> Advanced hydrogen extraction/water molecule fracturing/high [hydroxy]
> gas yield.
> create a vacuum in your fuel cell.
> Energy_body:
> What Stanley Meyer and a few others forgot???to mention was the
> vacuum
> created by the internal combustion engine is key to high [hydroxy]
> yields... Yes
> tuned circuits/complex wave forms/fuel cell resonance all have their
> place
> with this technology but one needs to exert extra stress on water
> molecules... one that just so happens to be freely available in the
> internal
> combustion engine cycle and to a large extent is wasted... vacuum!
> memo:

wonder if the Math dudes take vacuum in to their calculations...I think they must because they know it all! Do they?

Anyone know where I could get a good dyno reading

in central KY? You said you were a race car guy. Lead me in the right direction.

Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/

Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/

KY speedway would be willing to do this.

Got any contacts there?


Not really do you?

Oh and for further reference I think you are a useless piece of shit Rhino.


I know where it is I'll contact them.

Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/

Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/

They could use it as a pr ploy.

I'll bet the challenger would be able to get this done for free. He probably has contacts at the speedway. Put the ball in his court.

I do have contacts there, but I am not going to waste a favor on something I still don't believe will happen.

Look at the bright side. If you win, you will be famous and probably rich and I will have serious egg on my face. If you lose, you will simply be a little lighter in the pocket.

I bet your challenger would not even accept your money. It would be taking candy from a baby. So you can not lose.

Don't back down now, maybe the challenger was just talking smack. He may be a bigger hot air balloon than you.


I don't want to be famous.

And I don't gamble money. I however would love to dyno test my car to show the results I am experiencing. P.S. I am not materialistic. So your tickle to get me to to put myself out there as a target is easily recognized. The guy can keep his money I'll still do the test. Principle is what I am in it for. So if I can boost peoples gas mileage and help stick it to big oil all the better.

You are such a shill it's not funny. You think I am here everyday to get famous or rich? This tells much about your character Rhino epically since you like to not only disgrace my heritage that fought in the Revolutionary war but are trying your damnedest to make me look bad instead of trying to help people.

Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/

Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/

But you have said that you

But you have said that you want to promote getting better MPG and helping others, no?

If you are sure that your claim of doubling your MPG is true, then it is not gambling, is it? If your claims are correct, you would end up with several thousand dollars to continue your HHO testing and promotion. Maybe you could even buy some test equipment to help determine what is really going on.

As I said, I would like to see this turn out to be true, and wouldn't mind spending several thousand dollars to see it demonstrated (doubling your MPG, that is). However, I think we both know that your 98 Eclipse is not really getting double the MPG it would normally produce if the engine was running properly and the test conditions are carefully controlled to minimize measurement error.

Have you determined yet why your check engine light was coming on? What is (are) the trouble code(s)? Do you feel that evaluating your MPG and claiming that there is a dramatic improvement, while the engine computer is indicating a malfunction of some kind, is a good way to get accurate results and convince others that your test methods are credible?

Even if you didn't want the money, you had an opportunity to get a significant amount of publicity for the HHO "cause". And you seem to devote quite a bit of time to defending and repeating your claims here... Wouldn't it have been helpful (if your claims are accurate) to do a credible test with video, real measurements, etc. that would settle it?

Why waste your money on dyno testing when you apparently haven't done any no-cost tests like 0-60 or 0-100 times to test for increased HP? If you have done those tests (as I previously suggested), what are the results?

"The guy can keep his money I'll still do the test." Do you really know what and how to test? Does the guy with the dyno? (Maybe not.)

Other posters can't make you look bad, but if you want to promote the increased MPG cause, there are some things you could do differently to make your claims (if true) appear more credible.

I offered you a chance to prove your claims and make some money for your trouble. You declined. I'm not surprised.

Have fun tinkering... I'm outta here. Got better things to do.

Randy Jones

I would prefer to be wrong on this one ...

but somehow I do not see that happening.

If you lead thirsty people to a dried up well, your intentions are pure, but you are not helping.


Egg on your face,

Good grief Rhino, you have the entire hen house on your face! Oruval is getting positive results. What more could you possibly want?
Thick Thick Thick.

Hey Archons', we are taking our planet back and there's nothing you can do about it!

Okay, I went to the Stan Meyer

process link that was provided by Gary Nelson below, and read the whole thing, which by the way has only the remotest(and I do mean remotest) similarity to the HHO devices being sold today commonly. They both have some form of electrolysis of hydrogen, and that's about the only similarities there. The Stanley Meyer process is Hydogen Injection with a very sophisticated set of other processes that aren't even attempted to include on these backyard HHO devices.

Be that as it may, I read thru it, and I came across this statement in the PDF which I cut and pasted here from page 7-16 of the Meyers document:
"In terms of thermal explosive energy-yield (gtnt) under dynamic pressure of compression
approximately 7.4 (μl) microliter of a liquid-volume of a water droplet per injection cycle is all that ~s
required to run the Dune Buggy 1600cc 50hp VW I.C. engine at 65 m.p.h. on the open road; whereas,
a typical 325 hp diesel I.C. truck-engine would require about 48.1 (μl) microliters of a water droplet
per injection cycle to accomplish the same open road performance. (see WFC Water vs Gasoline
Energy Content Equations (memo WFC 429)."

Well, I found that interesting, to say the least.
The hydrogen content of.0074 cc(7.4microliters) of liquid water volume PER INJECTION CYCLE for cruising a 50hp VW at 65mph.
Now, we have something to go on.

Okay, since 1 cc of water = 1 gram, then .0074 cc of water = ..0074 gram.

1 gram of hydrogen occupies 11 liters of volume. so 11 liters times .0074 would equal .08 liters

Still with me?
Okay .08 liters PER INJECTION CYCLE would be the amount of hydrogen that would be required under the Stan Meyer process, to run this little 50hp VW dunebuggy in a direct-injected Stan Meyer type system, according to Meyer's documentation.

Now, how much HHO do we get from these mason jar devices being used?
Alright, let's use Smack's popular model which produces 1.7 liters of HHO per minute, according to Smack's website.
1.7 liters per minute is .028 liters per second at max production capability.
Sounds ok so far?
Now, how many "injection cycles" or breathing strokes per second will this volume of HHO have to serve?
Well, let's assume a typical rpm for cruising at 65mph of about 2000rpm. Different cars will vary, but that's a good general figure.
Now, there's only 1 breathing cycle per 2rpms, so we'll have 1000 breathing cycles per minute in that circumstance.
Knock that down to seconds, and you have16.66 breathing cycles per second at that cruising rpm.
So, we can take that .028 liters per second being produced, and divide it by 16.67 cycles per second, and we get .0016 liters per breathing cycle for available hydrogen in Smack's system.
That comes out to 2% of what is required, according to Stan Meyers' own figures.
And that is assuming 100% efficiency of producing hydrogen from electrolysis, which we don't have, but we'll allow here for sake of discussion. And also assuming that no power is being used by the alternator to produce it, when we certainly know that 1/3hp is being used up in the electrolysis project.
However, we'll allow this and continue.

So, if 2% of the necessary hydrogen to run this 50hp VW engine is being produced, and we're supplementing a gasoline-fueled engine with it, it can be expected to provide about 2% of the necessary fuel, with the other 98% being supplied by the gasoline.
Of course, if you have more than a 50hp VW, then the fuel needed will be more, and be a much smaller percentage of the available fuel for the vehicle, just as Stan's quote above shows about 7 times the amount is needed for a 325 hp engine to perform the same cruising speed.
Not to mention that a "vacuum induction system" into an intake manifold is not nearly in the same ballpark as direct injection.

But, even so, under perfect circumstances, with perfect conversion processes, both of which actually will never occur, you could hopefully expect to see a 2% change by using this 1.7 liters per minute hydrogen augmentation to the fuel.

Not by my figures, mind you.
This is Stan Meyer's data I'm working with here, and the poplular Smack's generator system, both of which are apparenlty well-regarded by HHO users.

Please let me know if you spot any calculation errors, because I did this on the fly.

did you look at the last 15 pages of this 225 or so..

file that you were able to read, understand and analyze this fast?

did you understand how he made the gas?

adapt the last pages to your car... the simple stuff..(never mind) stay in the dark...

Do you work for the oil companies?

and last but not least.... do you watch alll star wrestling? thats what this thread sounds like....

Not everyone is technologically/mathematically impaired, Gary.

You're the one who runs an HHO website, and stands to gain from promoting this stuff.
Not me.

I don't work for any oil companies, nor do I particularly like any of them.
Neither do I like HHO scam artists who are out to fleece the unsuspecting public.

But I do find it interesting to see the subject matter changed to "working for Big Oil" or implying I'm stupid, instead of a simple math refutation of my post above. Should be no problem to do, if the system works as you say.

I just a dummy

who aint got no schoolhousin in math...

as far as making a profit off this thats a joke, I given away more than I made so thats why I'm a loser.

to tell you the truth I was a Charles Nelson Pouge man all my life, well 35 years of it at least, In fact, I was so dumb, I ran my 1973 Audi for 20 minutes with out a gas line hooked up to the carb using his principals ... Yes vapor..It's been just the last 2 I found out the truth about water.

your right about the websites they are a scam, thats why in all my post I say Don't buy, it's free... and if you know how to do it you can find out who is paying for the sites and making money, I don't how too but it isn't me.

anyway did you really read the complete file or was that just.....? your fast and great so thanks again for helping me believe my savings on fuel is just "Fish Poop". oh and to all who read this....don't believe the guys who are using this and saving....believe the ones who are not using it and telling you it wont work! I'm just trying to cheat you....for free!

Someday the sheeple will wake up and smell the fish frying and know it ain't poop!

What ya think of Al? it was a scam too?


Gary quick question. I went to KOH and am producing more HHO. Where would be a good link to get an idea of how to build an O2 sensor relay so I can back off my fuel pump? Also I have been running directly into my vaccum line before my PCV valve. Would a subsequent line to the front of my throttle body be necessary for low RPM's like when sitting in traffic?

Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/

Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/

do it!

Go here it's FREE, FREE, FREE!
Join the group FREE FREE FREE!

in the file section you will find how to build the O2 fooler that is adjustable.
also many designs for different HHO generators and post from all the members, Bob Boyce is the moderator.


Download the Newbie pdf and learn how to post....its not like RP Daily.

There is so much info! FREE FREE FREE!!!

ps. I am not making money from this, just saving it!

If for some reason your mom won't let you join, I will download it for you and email it to you....ask her and tell her it's FREE!

Let me know if she said its ok?

I did not see where he accepted the challenge.

Where did he accept it?

He would never accept, because he will be exposed as a fraud.

Not to mention be a little lighter in the pocket.

The challenge is now on page three of Oruval's HHO thread, but he never accepted the challenge.


I am the one who issued the

I am the one who issued the challenge, and I am not aware that he accepted it. I see him talking about wanting to get a dyno test, but I doubt he even knows how to run a useful, valid test - at least in relation to MPG.

He did claim a major power improvement, in addition to doubling his MPG, so maybe he's concentrating on the alleged HP increase. My challenge was specifically related to the claim of doubling his MPG.

It was really intended as a friendly "put up or shut up" challenge, but it appears that he doesn't want to do either. I'm not surprised. If I look at all his claims in various discussions, they are inconsistent, contradictory, and in some cases he makes statements that are technically a joke.

I am not opposed to the idea that there might be some phenomenon that could allow a HHO generator to increase MPG. However, after watching hours of online videos and reading hundreds of posts, I have not seen one case where any credible methods of testing and data collection/analysis were employed.

This does not require expensive equipment, just a logical approach and a desire for accuracy instead of wishful thinking. I have spent considerable time replying to some of the absurd comments from the HHO crowd - such as the notion that their HHO generators use "wasted electricity" from the alternator (and how they can verify the truth for themselves), but they ignore them and keep spewing their ignorant nonsense.

There are two areas where claims are made that could easily be verified:

(1) Videos related to Meyer's HHO generating method seem to indicate that he claims to have gotten far more HHO than standard electrolysis would produce for the amount of current he was using. Is anyone anywhere getting similar results? I see many claims that sound like they would be more at home in a carnival than a lab, but no videos showing the current and gas volume measurements that would confirm or deny this. A decent high school chemistry student (at least when I went to high school) should be able to do this.

(2) Even if no one is getting a "magical" (more than expected from standard electrolysis calculations) amount of HHO from their HHO generators, is there a real, useful MPG improvement which can be confirmed under carefully controlled test conditions? I see tons of claims and hype, but not one case where they make any serious effort to accurately document fuel consumption with and without the HHO generator operating.

Set up a course of several hundred miles, returning to the beginning (a complete loop). Use the same gas pump to fill the tank each time. Take video (borrow a camera if you need to). Use the cruise control. There are still variables that might introduce several percent error (wind, fuel expansion in tank due to temperature change, etc.), but if someone is getting 30 or 50 or 100 percent MPG increase, that will be far more significant than the measurement errors. Tell and show us what happened.

Better yet, go to Pep Boys (or eBay, or wherever) and get a "scan tool" so you can read fuel injector duration. Or rent one for a few hours. Set up your HHO generator so you can turn it on and off when you are driving. While driving at a constant speed over level road, turn the HHO system on and off. If there is a significant MPG increase, you will see the injector duration decrease accordingly, since at a constant load and RPM, the only way the engine can use less fuel is to reduce the injector duration.

Without a scan tool, an analog voltmeter connected to an injector and set to DC volts will visually "average" the pulses into a voltage reading, and should be able to provide at least some indication that the injector duration is or is not changing significantly.

Naturally, the engine should be checked to make sure it is in proper running condition and that there are no fault codes set in the engine computer before any testing is conducted.

I think I'm pretty well done participating in these "discussions"... Every minute I spend here trying to help those who seem not to want any help, I could be instead working on a fun consulting job that pays $100/hour. And they appreciate what I'm doing for them (in addition to paying pretty well).

So... Adios HHO boys. Have fun tinkering, but if you want anyone who understands this stuff to take you seriously, make the effort to learn a little about what you are trying to do, and keep accurate records so you can see whether it really works. I hope it does work, but childish comments, wild claims that show you know little or nothing abut how engines and fuel systems work, and MPG claims with no credible data to back them up won't help your cause any.

Have fun.

Randy Jones

Randy ...

If Oruval gets it together would you participate? After all you issued the challenge.

If not, then you are no better than Oruval. You were untruthful.


>> You were

>> You were untruthful.

Really? When?

I offered a challenge several days ago. Today is the first time I've seen him indicate his decision, and it wasn't a reply directly to me.

Are you surprised he declined? Do you really think he can prove under carefully controlled test conditions that his 98 Eclipse is able to produce double the MPG of a properly operating stock Eclipse with only the addition of his $80 HHO gizmo?

I am clearly wasting my time here, and need to take care of more important things in my life. Oruval has declined to take me up on the challenge, and I accept that. I really didn't think he would or could accept it.

Don't know why you made the nasty comment about me, but I don't really care either. No need to reply; I don't expect to return again to this discussion.

Randy Jones

Peace ...

I meant no harm.

Go out and achieve your goals.


Excellent post

Only thing I'll add is that I'd like the test to be done on a dyno. Set the car up so it can freewheel and run the test w/ the HHO device un-energized but fully installed. Log time histories of torque output. Monitor fuel consumption. Repeat the test with the HHO device energized and log the same data. Be sure to run for 50 miles or better so that there's plenty of time for any differences to show up in the fuel usage.

Running on a dyno like this is vastly preferable to an actual road course because it takes a lot of variables out of the equation and allows us to isolate what we really want to study.

Yep, I agree. That's why I

Yep, I agree. That's why I spent the money in 1978 to buy my own Clayton chassis dyno and also a Stuska engine dyno. You can have much more controlled and repeatable test conditions in the shop/lab than on the road. I have spent countless hours doing performance and MPG testing.

Looks like oruval doesn't have the stomach or the money to have his claims tested under accurate, controlled conditions with everyone watching. I'm not surprised.

I appreciate the posts you have been making recently. I made some similar observations in similar discussions several weeks (months?) ago.

I'm getting behind on other projects and am outta here. If you continue, have fun with the HHO boys. I don't think they even get what you are trying to explain to them.

Randy Jones


Pat yourself on the back much?


"controlled scientific conditions" - ?

What a crock, the only thing it takes to test properly is a full tank of gas 50 miles driven fill up again divide the miles driven "50" by the gallons need to fill up. This gives you you base milage. Activate your fuel cell and the key electrical componet which thins you fuel out so the criminal system inplace in you car does not tell your vehical to enrich the fuel. "Many of the componets in your car are designed to make you waste fuel" Then drive fifty miles yet again then fill up and again dived by the gallons to fill up.

I have personally seen from 25% all the way up to 140% depending on vehical make up and city or highway.

There are many factors involved and the technology has much room for improvement, but the fact is it works far FAR better than the car companies and the oil cartel whats you to believe.

But it doesnt matter, their time is out the truth is loose and the information has already been to widely disiminated over the internet by to many people.

The Abuse of Greatness is when it disjoins remorse from power. - Shakespeare

What was the challenge?

What was the challenge?