Reading through many of the Ecomodder threads, it has become obvious to me that popular modifications trend towards things folks can visualize. If you reduce weight, you get better fuel economy (and you can physically see the weight removed). If you improve aerodynamics, fuel economy improves (and we can watch a river, stream, or leaves blowing in the wind to visualize how that is possible). I have seen a select few individuals that have tackled (with commendable effort I might add) the engine efficiency side of fuel economy; though they seem to be the exception. What is seriously lacking in this form is the knowledge of how to work with the factory ECU to get mileage gains. (More later.)
My uncles trained me to think of terms of engine performance. They all had iconic Mopar muscle cars while I was growing up, and all their cars were better than any amusement park ride! Naturally, when I got interested in fuel economy back in 1991, I started with what I knew -- engine efficiency. Well, let me qualify that; I started with what I
thought I knew. As of this post, my fuel economy journey officially started 31 years ago (1991).
Back in 1991 I got interested in fuel economy out of necessity; I was driving 51 miles one-way back and forth to work (102 miles round trip). As a young 20-something, I wasn't earning a whole lot of $money. Exxon (or Sunoco, Amoco, or whoever) was getting way too much of my precious limited pay check each and every week! I decided that it
was possible to improve the fuel economy of my 1971 Dodge Demon, and I was going to do it!!
I started by adjusting the valves on the 225 slant 6, replaced the spark plugs with brand new Champion 65 plugs (after all, that was what the owner's manual recommended), replaced the ignition wires with store-brand specials (they were brand new after all!)... and working with what little else I knew. As a mechanic, I had access to shop equipment, like the Allen Testproducts Engine Analyzer with 4-gas capabilities and automotive scope.
One day (after hours) my boss asked me, "I see you pulling your car in several nights per week and working on it. What are you doing?" I told him I was trying to improve fuel economy. After a brief pause, he recounted a Harrisburg Patriot News article he remembered from a year or three ago with the headline, "
This Car Gets 72 MPG!" It was a 1972 Oldsmobile Tornado with a 455 V-8 engine. The picture for the newspaper article showed the car smoking the tires so badly that you could barely make out the car through all the smoke. My only response was, "
TELL ME MORE!!"
He said it had been awhile, and he didn't remember any details. DOH!! The next day, he said he still didn't remember
much detail, but that the inventor said, "If you understand what a carburetor is
supposed to do, and you understand how an engine works, you should be able to duplicate my results; although your hardware will most likely look different than mine." I had rebuilt several engines and carburetors. What was I missing???
I later learned the name of that inventor; Arthur Sgrignoli, from Enola, PA (I checked the post twice+, not a misspelling). Through a chain of events I learned about H&A Industries out of Bowling Green, Missouri. Harold Kneiss (the "H" in "H&A") was selling literature mostly devoted to getting better fuel economy. Over the course of 2+ years I sent Harold much of what was left over from my weekly paychecks in return for his information. I found the most value in the materials originally published by Allan Wallace (1980-2). His premise was that liquid fuel doesn't burn. He published numerous inventions that vaporized the fuel. (One of the photos included in this post is a picture of me, Allan Wallace, and my best friend at the time Grant Goldade.)
From Allan Wallace's "200 MPG" books, I built the "Air Cleaner Vapor Carb" which didn't work worth a sh!t (at least the way I attempted it). I then built 2 versions of the "Nay Box" developed by Elmer Nay. The first one actually worked better than the 2nd one, delivering ~60 MPG in my 1970 Duster (built 225 slant-6). I later connected with Paul Pantone and adopted his Geet Fuel Processor to the Duster and managed a best of 92 MPG! (Though not reliable, nor repeatable.) The issue with all of these experimental systems is that I was the only person that could drive the car. My wife had no clue what to do when the accumulation chamber overflowed and flooded the engine.
At some point I became intrigued with a product called the Power Plate. It was a 1" aluminum spacer that mounted between the carburetor and intake manifold. It featured engine coolant jackets that heated the passageway between the carburetor and manifold. This passageway was cone shaped, with about an 8 degree taper. The interior of the cone sported 20-pitch "screw threads". I already had heavily modified my Duster; rebuilt engine with increased compression, slightly hotter cam, free-flowing exhaust, electronic ignition with MSD-5 capacitive discharge box, 2 barrel Super-6 intake with a 318 Carter 2-bbl carburetor, and finally, a Carb Screen that I tweaked to no end to get proper screen angles and such. Oh, and I swapped the automatic transmission for a manual overdrive 4-speed (common mid-70's item).
With all those other modifications, I was able to get a best of 29.9 MPG (killed me that I couldn't crest that illusive 30 MPG!). I had to remove the carb screen when I installed the Power Plate. Immediately afterwards, my wife & I made a 70+ mile trip. I couldn't help but notice that the fuel gauge simply wasn't dropping as it normally would. Furthermore the tip-in throttle response was better than it ever was. (I found I was hammering on it and enjoying the rush!) After our trip, I asked her if she was up for a mileage run; she said "yes". We ran my traditional route from Duncannon to Sunbury and back (Pennsylvania); very flat, shielded by trees much of the way, no stops, 55 MPH speed limit -- perfect fuel economy test route. We recorded 44.7 MPG at a steady 55 MPH! Woah! How can I incorporate this into modern PFI engines?!?
The X-Prize Sonata head port work illustrated in a previous post is the result of this thought process. I developed the Powre Lynz that put the screw threads from the Power Plate directly into the intake ports. I had to have special tools made to do this. The cylinder head is relatively hot, which fulfilled the requirement the coolant jacket served in the Power Plate. By gently tapering the intake ports with head porting, I was able to replicate the 8 degree taper from the Power Plate. Later research on 4-Valve-per-Cylinder engines taught me how to bias one port over the other to create swirl.
Though not directly related to the X-Prize Sonata, this head porting design work delivered 430 HP from a Chrysler 2.5 Turbo (factory rated at 156 HP) while yielding 42 MPG on the highway! An otherwise stock Plymouth Sundance 2.5 TBI AT went from 26 MPG HWY to 44 MPG with only the head swap. Believe me, I could go on and on, but the punch line is that these techniques delivered the goods -- improved fuel economy and improved performance -- so many times that statistically there is no room for error. It Works!! This is what I did with the head porting work on the X-Prize Sonata. (I wrote "
Head Porting for Performance & Economy" which covers these topics and so much more.)
When something intrigues me, I become fascinated with the back story. This is just some of my back story for the X-Prize Sonata modifications.
