Quote:
Originally Posted by mpg_numbers_guy
This sounds interesting, as I love working with computers  but the software is probably 100s of $$ and I'd probably program it wrong lol. |
I was just reading recently about the shop in Florida, LHT, which does Honda K20 swaps into Insights. Even with a very short transmission (probably 3000-3500rpm at 65mph as opposed to ~2100rpm) in the much larger 2 liter engine, they're claiming to see as much as 48mpg on the highway by tuning in lean burn with the Insight body, running as lean as 19:1 AFR.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpg_numbers_guy
If only the Insight could carry at least 4 people like the 2nd gen one did, and I could actually find a decent one, I would've bought one.
|
I don't have kids so I don't feel the need for back seats. If friends want to go out to movies with me, they can drive their own damn cars. I'm not paying the other 364 days of the year for them to ride around with me once in a blue moon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpg_numbers_guy
That makes sense seeing that pretty much all CVTs and even automatics are rated at better mpg than their manual counterparts.
Do you think paddle shifters on CVTs and automatics makes up for this?
|
Not really. Paddle shifters don't let you run outside of the RPM range the transmission computer would allow, and CVTs normally maintain the lowest RPM possible anyway. Paddle shifters are really only there to rev the engine up unnecessarily.
My issue with automatics isn't as much the gearing, as it is the durability/reliability and the drivetrian losses. Someone has in their signature various transmission efficiencies, and I believe it was written that a manual is about 98% efficient, whereas a CVT is ~88 and a traditional auto is ~86. On top of that, you don't see any automatic transmissions with half a million miles on them; most cars I see in junkyards (that haven't been claimed by rust) are there because their automatic transmission failed long before anything else did.