perhaps with regenerative braking and heat to electricity transfer could help with the HH2 system. but my question is, will there be enough water on board to fully power(?) the HH2 system without additional water storage tanks?
and will the HH2 split enough hydrogen and oxygen gas fast enough to supply the engine all on its own?
by the way, how much hydrogen and oxygen gas are in 1 liter of distilled water?
1 liter=2.11...pints(US)=0.26...gallons(US)

Not to be a stickler for detail but I believe the point of HHO / HOH systems are that fractional amount of hydrogen gas acts as a combustion aid, burning more of the fuel present. No one has ever said it produces more energy than you put in, this is over-unity.
Comparing the resultant energy of the gas alongside the required energy to produce the gas fundamentally misses the point. The power gain is from the accelerant effect on the overall fuel usage.
Thus would you agree the statement \"HHO systems have also been exposed as a scam with that pesky first law of thermodynamics getting in the way.\" may be a little short-sighted or even mis-leading?
Further from what I understand HHO / HOH gas is a combustion aid and works with all fossil based fuels, so again the comparative claim of HH2 over other HHO / HOH systems could be considered more marketing than unique feature.
http://www.hohcells.com has a LOT of information on this if anyone wants to see more

I don\'t think the claim is to get more energy out than in, the claim is that adding a little H2 and O2 to the existing combustion makes it burn hotter and faster, extracting more energy from the fuel and reducing emissions.
A 12 volt battery cannot crack H2O that quickly so the volume of water needed is low. I suppose it could always capture water from the exhaust and re-crack it, although that would be a bigger, more expensive solution and would require regular cleaning of the other junk it would collect.
But I am sceptical if they do not have independent lab verification of their claims, still a nice idea in theory.

As we have progressed from carburetors to injectors to direct injection the results of aiding the combustion of the fuel mixture becomes less effective. I have yet to see a demonstration vehicle that did not involve some 1980\'s carbureted junk heap. Also, poor form gizmag for invoking the first law of thermodynamics to \'bust\' the myth.
The real questions are whether there is enough unburnt fuel in modern cars to make the added hydrogen and oxygen useful? Can modern cars and their computers handle in essence a vacuum leak? Would unintended acceleration be a problem?

i seem to have made an error in my question. what i meant to ask was can the system split hydrogen and oxygen gas fast enough to be the internal combustion engine\'s sole provider of air used when burning fuels? as i understand a normal car burns normal air(Nitrogen,argon,oxygen,co2...) which produces NOx and other pollutents when burned in a normal engine.

I think that the following sould be considered:
1. Validation of the claims 2. Equipment and installation costs 3. Effect on car or motor warrentees 4. Possible effects of temperature change on the equipment (very hot vs icy weather) and the overall efficiency of the system as compared to its functioning on liquid fuel alone. 5. Can one system do all? Will the improvement in efficiency be the same for motors requiring different amounts of fuel if the amount of gas introduced is the same? Varying amounts of fuel for the same amount of introduced gas may result in varying levels of efficiency. There should be a graphic representation presented that shows increased efficiency/power of the motor vs the amounts of gas introduced. The system being sold may only work well with relatively small motors but not with larger ones. More systematic studies should be presented.
If the method of more complete combustion of fuels is enhanced by the introduction of hydrogen, then a more careful analysis should be presented. What specific volumes of hydrogen at varying temperatures would work best with different types of fuel to promote the most efficient combustion.
adrianakau2aol.com

Snake. Oil.
The hypermiling community has repeatedly asked these people to submit a system for scientific testing. For some reason they just don\'t want an unbiased person to do a public test.
go to http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums and search on snake oil.

In my studies, the creation of the hydrogen takes more energy than it provides. Besides, there is no \"excess\" in the 12v battery, rather it is stored for the next time your turn the car on! I read a great article \"HHO or HHype?\" http://economicefficiency.blogspot.com/2008/07/hho-or-hhype.html and its link to a companion piece, spell out how these hydrogen claims are misleading at best and fraudulent at worst.
Perhaps we should be focused on flywheels or hydraulics as stores of energy to suppliment our vehicles instead of hydrogen or chemical batteries? http://economicefficiency.blogspot.com/2009/10/more-efficient-hybrid.html

Didn\'t Mythbusters do an episode on gas mileage claims and they completly busted Hydrogen? http://mythbustersresults.com/episode53 Check out the section \"You can \'stick it to The Man\' and get cheap uber-fuel efficiency with a hydrogen fuel cell\" You can read that yes, they were able to get a car to start on Hydrogen, but it wasn\'t very good... ed

We manufacture a very efficient HHO cell series- what we call a Hybrid cell. It is NOT dangerous because you do not store anything- it is merely hydrogen on demand. The articles claims that HHo doesn\'t work, yet the same amount of energy is used in the HH2 systems- this is nonsense. First of all, HHO, Oxyhydrogen,Hydroxy, or the rest of the terms given to electrolyzed molecules of water NOT separated by a membrane, is only used as a catalyst, not a supplanter of fuel. It burns 10 times quicker than gasoline and so is able to extract more energy out in the same 16 degrees of piston travel, before it is exhausted out the tailpipe. We recently had a dual system hooked to our project car and you could stick your nose up against the tailpipe- it was fresh smelling, like Ozone. Second of all, there are many of us that are in the process of external and independent testing and verification. Lastly, Most of the poorly researched scam articles are written by those who have either NOT tested a system or have tried to install really BADLY designed systems, and then when they didn\'t get it to work started madly claiming all of them were a scam. Our systems work, and are some of the best ones out there. Do they replace gas? NO! But they do result in an average increase of 20-40% which can quickly add up, especially overseas where gas is almost $2.00 a liter ($7.00 a gallon). One of our customers just wrote us that he put our new Hybrid cell in his \'92 Ford Explorer with a 4.0 liter engine and 150,000 miles on it. He went from 17 mpg to 23.8mpg, fully a 40% increase. Another customer in Dublin Ireland went from 300 miles a tank to over 420 miles a tank (his words, not mine). If you\'d like more info- get my free 7 day course on becoming an expert here: http://www.hhokitsdirect.com you can email from there and I will answer your questions... Thanks, Bob