|
har. beating a dead horse. Agreed.
btw, as an aside, I encourage you all to consider the cycles of an engine, and how those cycles change in all three scenarios - stoichiometric, lean burn, and deactivation (fuel-based, without changing valve operation). "Pumping loss" is a phrase that seems to be thrown around on this forum quite a bit, without realizing that it is purely a mechanical function. Whether a cylinder is running at 9:1 or 19:1 AFR, its pumping losses are identical. The only difference in the entire cycle occurs in the power stroke (when it goes bang), which, still, does not affect pumping loss.
I understand that keeping the valves closed (i.e. an air spring, or "boing boing boing") will reduce pumping losses on the "dead" cylinders, but it's not, theoretically, a requirement (just a "better?" way to do it with unlimited funding). Then you only have to worry about warping cylinder heads and exhaust manifolds.
There is SO MUCH more involved in how an engine works that I can't and won't type it here. I started this thread assuming that people here would know the intricacies, and was sorely mistaken. For that I apologize.
I appreciate the people who tried to give helpful advice (2000Neon, you're one of them, so don't worry about being bulked in with the others), but I think I'm going to start brainstorming with people I know who, like me, actually have experience with enginebuilding, fuel and spark tuning, and diagnostics, instead of coming to forums like this one. After all, it's literally 5 clicks of a mouse to test either method and come up with a conclusive answer..... and a year of driving to see if either method will damage anything (which is really the important reason for starting this thread in the first place).
As I said, I trust that you will all continue doing whatever suits you best, and I will do the same. I'll cross my fingers that you don't break anything, even if you won't give me the same courtesy.
Have fun.
|