Quote:
Originally Posted by JQmile
I'm not saying I buy into this, but there are things that sound impossible that are true, like Mike Wood's Mustang with a Duramax diesel that makes 810 hp at the rear wheels and got 38 mpg on drag week. Sure it's using nitrous to make that power level, but it's still c. 550 rwhp without it, and during weenie driving it's got as good as 45mpg.
Cylinder deactivation works, but not that well because there's still the rotating mass and drag of the other cylinders. I'm sure you could use an electric motor to send a "pulse" to overcome that force, but whether you'd be able to recoup that loss without draining the batteries is what I wonder about. Still an interesting theory.
|
Deactivating cylinders can only affect one source of inefficiency - throttling losses. The vehicle's mass, rotating masses, and aerodynamic drag are obviously unchanged. But, done correctly, cylinder deactivation allows operation with smaller throttling losses.
Here's Wikipedia's (the source of all truth) write up on it. They state gains of 8% to 25% in fuel economy are possible in highway conditions. I assume the high end would be applicable here since it's a large engine with lots of horsepower. Even taking it to the extreme and saying 50% increase in fuel economy wouldn't get us into the three digit range.
All that said and as skeptical of Pelmear as I've always been and still am, I agree that it's an interesting concept.