View Single Post
Old 06-13-2013, 09:34 PM   #17 (permalink)
mikeyjd
Master EcoModder
 
mikeyjd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 836

Matchbox - '93 Ford Festiva L
Team Ford
Last 3: 70.16 mpg (US)

Salamander - '99 Chrysler Concorde LXI
Team Dodge
90 day: 30.3 mpg (US)

Urquhart - '97 Toyota Tacoma 4x4 V6 3.4L DLX
Pickups
90 day: 25.81 mpg (US)

Smudge - '98 Toyota Tacoma
90 day: 40.65 mpg (US)

Calebro - '15 Renault Trafic 1.25 dci
90 day: 39.39 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,372
Thanked 208 Times in 154 Posts
7% seems promising

Quote:
Originally Posted by t vago View Post
A few updates:

The UltraGauge did indeed show a highly inaccurate average fuel economy figure. As was mentioned in this post, one should not rely on a ScanGauge or UltraGauge for noting fuel economy due to this sort of mod. This leads to the next update...

The MPGuino should hopefully ship today. If so, I'll install it next week.

First fillup since I did the EGR sensor modification. The results are shown below:

Date/Time
Miles
EngRunTime
Gallons
AvgSpeed (MPH)
FE (MPG)
FE (L/100km)
%diff
Notes
2013.06.05 12:41
334.4
06:06
14.011
54.8
23.9
9.9
2013.06.09 16:19
337.9
07:02
14.333
48.0
23.6
10.0
-1.2
2013.06.13 01:48
398.7
07:13
15.415
55.3
25.9
9.1
7.7
+EGR Mod


I think that a 7.7% increase in fuel economy is not bad.

I'm still considering installing a MAF sensor, and creating a circuit that will obtain a MAP signal for the engine computer. However, I'm also considering moving my IAT sensor so that it will be before my intake heater. This should maybe provide what I want to do, which is to advance ignition timing. Remember, a higher-than-normal EGR will require that ignition timing be advance to compensate for the higher amount of inert gas inside the combustion chamber.
good work ^
  Reply With Quote