View Single Post
Old 03-12-2012, 02:54 PM   #5 (permalink)
Frank Lee
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
wd, rooster: there are articles here and online explaining cylinder deactivation. Would the manufacturers close off both valves if closing one or none worked better? Really? You are missing a major part of the whole theory and that is reduction in pumping losses. Think about why air compressors require so much power.

I've played with this at home and was hoping someday they'd get it to work on a 4 cylinder. Mine sounded like it wanted to start but it just couldn't quite do it. Of course one of the key things might be to start on 4 then switch off at higher rpm as there just isn't quite enough inertia to get 'er going on 2, but I had to try starting on 2 because my deac scheme was under the hood, not on the go.

Thanks for the figures metro; some rough extrapolating says maybe +15% could be expected on average... that's about what DoD for larger engines gets too... so for the Tempo I'd be looking at +5 or 6 mpg. Nice, but perhaps I won't be pulling those two pistons after all. :/
__________________


  Reply With Quote