View Single Post
Old 03-15-2012, 02:44 AM   #133 (permalink)
t vago
MPGuino Supporter
 
t vago's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Hungary
Posts: 1,808

iNXS - '10 Opel Zafira 111 Anniversary

Suzi - '02 Suzuki Swift GL
Thanks: 831
Thanked 709 Times in 457 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by shovel View Post
Well, kinda, yeah. Like the E85 kit I installed on my blazer a few years ago just intercepts the injector signal, extends its duration a bit, and lets the car's ECU make up the difference. Dead simple in theory, and whaddayaknow? It just plain works. I understand that DCD isn't exactly the same as enriching to compensate for an oxygenated fuel but it's not so drastically different either.
Still seems like you're a). comparing apples to oranges, here; and b). you have no idea what you're talking about. To wit,

Quote:
Originally Posted by shovel View Post
My employer manufactures a lot of electronics, and our engineers come up with all sorts of neat features we could add to them. In the end, we don't really add most of the features our engineers come up with.
[sarcasm]Which is the perfect reason as to why vehicle manufacturers would not pursue a completely software-based cylinder deactivation scheme which would only cost the amount of software/firmware engineering needed to support it, in favor of multimillion dollar hardware design and re-tooling for hardware changes IN ADDITION TO the software/firmware changes that would go along with the new hardware so that it would support the "outmoded" yet somehow viable proven-to-work cylinder deactivation mechanisms that seem to be so popular with all of the major car manufacturers.[/sarcasm]

Or, supposing that you actually read those 7 pages you claimed to have read, you would have understood that it takes energy to pump air through an air pump, and that said energy is not expended when the intake and exhaust valves are left closed in deactivated cylinders. But I guess that thermodynamics and fluid dynamics are a bit beyond your comprehension.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shovel View Post
My guess is, the engineers who have the luxury of designing a vehicle system like cylinder deactivation at the OEM stage can design a complete system which includes the valve deactivation, and since they can, they do. If you're going to call that a conspiracy theory... well, rock on dood. I'm not here for "points"
I'm not drinking the hee-hee-tech kool-aid like you obviously did.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shovel View Post
Beats me, what makes you think this is impossible? The stock ECU's expecting a signal, you give it a signal, it's happy. People spoof devices and translate data all the time. I spoofed my jeep radio to think it still has a CD changer so I could hijack the cd changer input for mp3.. machines are just machines.
Spoken like somebody who has absolutely no clue about what goes on under the hood. Tell me, genius, how is a modern OBD II-compliant vehicle supposed to test its catalytic converter(s) with this hee-hee-tech garbage installed? You know, the one that is mandated? And tell me, brain, how would it be if the algorithm, that the engine controller uses that does the actual testing, fails out because it can't see the cycle-by-cycle variations in fuel delivery that it intentionally makes, because that flim-flam device is masking out said cycle-by-cycle variations?

Quote:
Originally Posted by shovel View Post
Business is rough like that, where's your product? I tried to open up a coffee shop when I was 18, and now it's not in business anymore - doesn't make me an a-hole.
Me? I have no product. I just managed to get better fuel savings than hee-hee-tech claims for his rip-off-o-matic gadget, using tried and tested "outmoded" principles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shovel View Post
What's your beef, anyway?
Every so often, some snake-oil salesman comes along and tries to sell some sort of fraud gizmo here in an effort to try to get some veneer of respectability.

As to the rest of hee-hee-tech's claims, I say they're unequivocal bull turds. A device that supposedly saves at least 10% in fuel economy should be wildly popular right now. It should be flying off the shelves, so to speak, in this $4/gallon gasoline we're seeing. People should be clawing their way to the person who can actually demonstrate that such a device works for aftermarket retrofit. But, as with that other snake-oil device that had the CARB EO number, this DCD that hee-hee-tech puts out will be shown to be nothing but a fraud.

This thread really needs to go into the Unicorn Corral, now.
  Reply With Quote