View Single Post
Old 10-31-2014, 09:43 AM   #55 (permalink)
Big Dave
Master EcoModder
 
Big Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Steppes of Central Indiana
Posts: 1,319

The Red Baron - '00 Ford F-350 XLT
90 day: 27.99 mpg (US)

Impala Phase Zero - '96 Chevrolet Impala SS
90 day: 21.03 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 186 Times in 127 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daox View Post

I'm going to have to say Frank is right in that just because it has a 30% lower BTU content doesn't mean it gets 30% lower fuel economy.
Big Dave asks:
What turns the wheels? Answer: Heat.

I recently looked into jacking up the compression on my Impala to take advantage of the honest 120 octane of natural gas. By going up to 13.5:1 compression (you can be pretty fearless with 120 octane) and maximizing spark advance an 11% efficiency improvement. In a mature technology like spark-ignition engines 11% is HUGE.

Assuming that 100 octane E85 would work OK at 13.5:1 compression, an 11% improvement in efficiency cannot overcome a 34% loss in heat content and a 27% deficit in $/MMBTU.

It's not some deep dark conspiracy. It's just thermodynamic fundamentals. Heat turns the wheels. Period. End of story. It ain't octane. It ain't spark advance or some other electronic gimmick.

The notion of getting better MPG than heat content would indicate is just unicorn manure. The great cosmic search for "something for nothing."
__________________
2000 Ford F-350 SC 4x2 6 Speed Manual
4" Slam
3.08:1 gears and Gear Vendor Overdrive
Rubber Conveyor Belt Air Dam
  Reply With Quote