Honda Insight w/Acura TSX engine - Ecomodding

[mpg_numbers_guy]

In that case, wouldn't reusing the wiring in the Insight cluster to the K engine be simpler than redoing everything with a MPGuino?

[MetroMPG]

The original Insight ECU is what does the fuel economy calcs. The cluster is just the output.

[Ecky]

Ordered parts to assemble a be MPGuino yesterday.

[Ecky]

Got the EVAP system working! Now to have 100% federally compliant emissions I just need to get the downstream O2 sensor wired up. I believe that is normally on the body harness of an RSX or TSX, while it's on the engine harness for the Insight, so that will need to be made from scratch.




Also installed a transmission brace between engine and transmission. I had a hard time finding this part, and when it arrived it was filthy.




Also had a chance to look into the temperature gauge. The sensor itself is a varistor, and the ECU measures resistance over it to determine temperature. The gauge cluster is not connected directly to the sensor though, and instead receives an analog PWM signal from the ECU over (Insight) ECU plug B15 (red/grn) "MTRTW". The RSX has a multiplexer which feeds its cluster, so I have no way to feed the Insight cluster the correct signal.

So I have two choices: 1) I write some Arduino code and see if I can figure out the signaling myself, or 2) See if any of the S2000 dashboard converters work, since its cluster is very similar.

This should be a super valuable resource should I choose to build my own converter:

https://github.com/pablobuenaposada/...-in-civic/wiki

[California98Civic]

I'm really glad that you're going for completely legal emissions.

[Ecky]

Put the new Vredestein Quatrac 5 (185/60r14) tires on the front today. My first impression on my drive home from the tire shop:

They're squishy, soft feeling tires, like halfway between my rock-hard RE92s and my floaty, squishy Nokian Nordman snow tires. They didn't wallow on my drive home despite feeling like they should. They're a bit quieter than RE92s, but the pitch is different, easier on the ears as well. NVH was better. Steering was noticeably heavier, and it felt like there was more turn-in on moderate cornering, rather than having neutral handling with a slight tendency to understeer. Surprisingly, they have less grip on acceleration than my low-treat RE92s, though it's probably not fair to compare brand new tires to worn ones. Overall I was unimpressed, as my reason for going wider was to improve grip.

After getting home I aired them up from 32PSI to 50PSI and after a short test drive, decided I do in fact like them. Handling sharpened, coasting seems subjectively as good or better than RE92s but I have no data so far to confirm this, and ride quality is a lot better than RE92s with that pressure. It looks like these tires squish less, my headlight beams are up a bit.

The one thing I didn't get is more grip, they still spin in 1st gear. But maybe that'll improve as the surface layer of rubber wears off.

[mpg_numbers_guy]

185/60R14 is slightly taller than 165/65R14; maybe that's making the headlights appear higher?

Is your speedo recalibrated yet for the new tire size?

Definitely following to see how these new tires do.

[19bonestock88]

Originally Posted by Ecky

Put the new Vredestein Quatrac 5 (185/60r14) tires on the front today. My first impression on my drive home from the tire shop:

They're squishy, soft feeling tires, like halfway between my rock-hard RE92s and my floaty, squishy Nokian Nordman snow tires. They didn't wallow on my drive home despite feeling like they should. They're a bit quieter than RE92s, but the pitch is different, easier on the ears as well. NVH was better. Steering was noticeably heavier, and it felt like there was more turn-in on moderate cornering, rather than having neutral handling with a slight tendency to understeer. Surprisingly, they have less grip on acceleration than my low-treat RE92s, though it's probably not fair to compare brand new tires to worn ones. Overall I was unimpressed, as my reason for going wider was to improve grip.

After getting home I aired them up from 32PSI to 50PSI and after a short test drive, decided I do in fact like them. Handling sharpened, coasting seems subjectively as good or better than RE92s but I have no data so far to confirm this, and ride quality is a lot better than RE92s with that pressure. It looks like these tires squish less, my headlight beams are up a bit.

The one thing I didn't get is more grip, they still spin in 1st gear. But maybe that'll improve as the surface layer of rubber wears off.

Longitudinal grip (acceleration/braking) comes as much from tire height and tread compound as it does from width, you may try something stickier?

[Ecky]

Originally Posted by mpg_numbers_guy

185/60R14 is slightly taller than 165/65R14; maybe that's making the headlights appear higher?

Is your speedo recalibrated yet for the new tire size?

Definitely following to see how these new tires do.

I thought about recalibrating the speedo, but it's not actually off from GPS by a single mph at highway speeds so I probably won't bother. And yes, they're a hair taller, but they also visibly don't deform as much. It takes less air pressure to get the same contact patch with larger tires, if my understanding is correct, so 50psi in these should be equivalent to much higher in RE92s.

Now, fuel economy is yet to be seen...

Originally Posted by 19bonestock88

Longitudinal grip (acceleration/braking) comes as much from tire height and tread compound as it does from width, you may try something stickier?

I expected these would be stickier; RE92s have a reputation for trading everything for rolling resistance, but seemingly that may not be the case.

Going to put a few hundred miles on these tires today.

[California98Civic]

Originally Posted by Ecky

... RE92s have a reputation for trading everything for rolling resistance, but seemingly that may not be the case. ...

If the Bridgestones turn out to be better at traction than casual rep in the USA, that would be consistent with Bridgestone's EU rolling resistance and traction ratings. The EU gives the Bridgestone low-rolling-resistance tires top ratings in both rolling resistance and wet traction.