1997 Civic CX to HX engine/VX trans swap! 63 MPG @ 62 MPH

[hackish]

Trying not to sound like a total ass here but a bunch of guys making suggestions and trying to justify their opinions about the pollution increases from their mods is not what I would consider informed.

There is lots of peer reviewed and published research on pollution and managing cat temp. Carmakers also spend millions on fuel economy and meeting EPA targets. That is well informed info. Unfortunately much of what is known is proprietary and specific to a platform.

If you would like to do some of your own study then install an egt probe in the cat. Sadly 5 gas analyzers are expensive. I paid almost 5k for mine. This is going to be a good solid feedback source as to how you are really doing. Without this stuff you may as well be shooting in the dark and theorizing about if you hit the target or not.

[vrmouseyd15b]

I read thru the thread, but didn't notice what ecu TURBOVR is running. did anybody catch it?

I met TURBOVR in Cincinatti a few weeks ago and bought a vx tranny from him, he might still have another one, ready to go! - http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...ale-28931.html (THANKS, TURBOVR!!! )
I'm curious about the whole " are we in lean burn quesion " because my p2j ecu does have a lean burn indicator light.

37820-P2j-j62 in my case. I'm pretty sure the whole p2j ecu family uses the lean burn indicator light.
IT IS A SWITCHED GROUND FROM PIN A30, A30 TO THE INDICATOR BULB, SWITCHED 12V POWER TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BULB. (most pinout diagrams call this pin "un-used")

My "lean burn indicator" is a custom "happy light" above 4500 rpm on my gauges. "check engine" is above 5500 rpm's. here is a shot with key on, engine off:



as far as the "rules of lean burn" go, it seems they change quite a bit from ecu to ecu.. In my minion, I've noticed that I can lean burn at speeds AS LOW AS 20MPH WITH RPM'S JUST OVER 1000!!!

AND I CAN ENTER LEAN BURN ANYWHERE BETWEEN 1000 - 2800 RPM WITHOUT ANYTHING OTHER THAN LETTING OFF THE GAS FOR A SECOND, AND GOING BACK INTO IT NICE AND EASY, IT JUST WONT COME ON BELOW 20MPH / 1000RPM.

I think this is beacuse my ecu is a JDM example, and the JDM stuff doesn't seem to worry about pollution, or HURTING ANYBODY'S FEELINGS LIKE THE AMERICAN'S!!!

My switch to the vx tranny has been my greatest economy mod since the d15b dual vtec motor. ( I'm following anything regarding the d15z1 or similar now, since that will be the next mod to hit my minion )

The taller gearing of the VX tranny makes getting into lean burn much easier versus the lx manual tranny i started with...

71ish mph VX: about 2350 rpm


70mph LX: about 2850 rpm


With the rpm drop at the same speeds, I can lean burn almost anywhere!

MY BIGGEST PROBLEM IS A HEAVY FOOT, and lack of aero / EOC / weight reduction!

case in point:


so, what ecu's are you guys running?

[California98Civic]

Originally Posted by hackish

Trying not to sound like a total ass here but a bunch of guys making suggestions and trying to justify their opinions about the pollution increases from their mods is not what I would consider informed.

There is lots of peer reviewed and published research on pollution and managing cat temp. Carmakers also spend millions on fuel economy and meeting EPA targets. That is well informed info. Unfortunately much of what is known is proprietary and specific to a platform.

If you would like to do some of your own study then install an egt probe in the cat. Sadly 5 gas analyzers are expensive. I paid almost 5k for mine. This is going to be a good solid feedback source as to how you are really doing. Without this stuff you may as well be shooting in the dark and theorizing about if you hit the target or not.

Nah. You don't sound like an ass at all. It's just a debate. I think you missed part of what I was saying. My claim was that the total pollution is more complicated than your first post, and that my total pollution profile for transportation should be more broadly considered than the narrower focus of the EPA's estimates. I'm not suggesting that a car burning fuel through an unlit, cold CAT is by some magic less polluting. I've been driving this same car since 2001, a timeframe in which most Americans would have replaced the vehicle how many times? What's the pollution profile of the production of a new car and its transportation to market? But you're right, P&G can burn fuel in a more polluting manner. So, I try to warm my engine quickly when first started, to get the CAT lit. With my grill blocking, and given the short duration of my EOC cycles, and the location of my cat attached to the exhaust manifold, I am not persuaded there are relevant studies from which I should conclude that I'm doing pulse and pollute at something like 10x the normal emissions, as you say. Especially given the wider transportation pollution context I am considering. Yes, I am theorizing. But theorizing on a known context is a part of empirical inquirytoo and should 't be dismissed so readily. Yes, testing the theory would be best. But I don't have access to the equipment you suggest, and can't afford it as you might guess. Results from that equipment would be interesting, but it would not tell the whole, relevant story. BTW, you reference an arsenal of peer-reviewed studies... if you can get access to some of them, I love to see 'em.

Thanks,
James

[hackish]

Originally Posted by Ecky

I haven't read the thread, but that's an excellent point. There's definitely a problem with emissions testing methodology when it looks at PPM and not the actual amount of pollution.

Emissions programs define limits based on the engine so it really isn't a shortcoming of the system. If you want to know the total pollution you simply multiply by airflow. The newer test cells all do this automatically if you care. As a calibrator my objective is simply to minimize the output in a fixed set of conditions.

-Michael

[Baltothewolf]

Originally Posted by vrmouseyd15b

I read thru the thread, but didn't notice what ecu TURBOVR is running. did anybody catch it?

I met TURBOVR in Cincinatti a few weeks ago and bought a vx tranny from him, he might still have another one, ready to go! - http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...ale-28931.html (THANKS, TURBOVR!!! )
I'm curious about the whole " are we in lean burn quesion " because my p2j ecu does have a lean burn indicator light.

37820-P2j-j62 in my case. I'm pretty sure the whole p2j ecu family uses the lean burn indicator light.
IT IS A SWITCHED GROUND FROM PIN A30, A30 TO THE INDICATOR BULB, SWITCHED 12V POWER TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BULB. (most pinout diagrams call this pin "un-used")

My "lean burn indicator" is a custom "happy light" above 4500 rpm on my gauges. "check engine" is above 5500 rpm's. here is a shot with key on, engine off:



as far as the "rules of lean burn" go, it seems they change quite a bit from ecu to ecu.. In my minion, I've noticed that I can lean burn at speeds AS LOW AS 20MPH WITH RPM'S JUST OVER 1000!!!

AND I CAN ENTER LEAN BURN ANYWHERE BETWEEN 1000 - 2800 RPM WITHOUT ANYTHING OTHER THAN LETTING OFF THE GAS FOR A SECOND, AND GOING BACK INTO IT NICE AND EASY, IT JUST WONT COME ON BELOW 20MPH / 1000RPM.

I think this is beacuse my ecu is a JDM example, and the JDM stuff doesn't seem to worry about pollution, or HURTING ANYBODY'S FEELINGS LIKE THE AMERICAN'S!!!

My switch to the vx tranny has been my greatest economy mod since the d15b dual vtec motor. ( I'm following anything regarding the d15z1 or similar now, since that will be the next mod to hit my minion )

The taller gearing of the VX tranny makes getting into lean burn much easier versus the lx manual tranny i started with...

71ish mph VX: about 2350 rpm


70mph LX: about 2850 rpm


With the rpm drop at the same speeds, I can lean burn almost anywhere!

MY BIGGEST PROBLEM IS A HEAVY FOOT, and lack of aero / EOC / weight reduction!

case in point:


so, what ecu's are you guys running?

Now this interests me, one can add a L/B indicator by simply adding an ECU that supports it? Is there already the wiring behind the cluster that allows plug and play or do you have to wire it yourself from the ECU to the cluster?

[vrmouseyd15b]

Originally Posted by Baltothewolf

Now this interests me, one can add a L/B indicator by simply adding an ECU that supports it? Is there already the wiring behind the cluster that allows plug and play or do you have to wire it yourself from the ECU to the cluster?

Not in my case, the car is a 96 lx civic. I added the lean burn indicator light to meet my ecu's capabilities. Had to pull the Gauge cluster and pay around in there to get it to work, but the stock ecu does support that function. I'm trying to see if there is an up shift light I can pin next, but I'm pretty comfortable with my "ear shift sounder" until then

[vrmouseyd15b]

Click on my minion under my avatar and check it out, I think I pretty well explain what I've done in there. The big Rick with this ecu is that it's for a cvt tranny, and I've fooled it with a3 wire idle air control valve. You can see here if you're curious:For the ecomodders!: http://youtu.be/XRLtgu7iqa0

The 3 wire iac is now right next to my ecu. ..

[hackish]

Originally Posted by California98Civic

My claim was that the total pollution is more complicated than your first post, and that my total pollution profile for transportation should be more broadly considered than the narrower focus of the EPA's estimates. I'm not suggesting that a car burning fuel through an unlit, cold CAT is by some magic less polluting.

I understand your point and it is also often used by ICE producers as an argument against electric cars. Isn't it horrible that some places burn coal to generate electricity? So gasoline must be better than electric right?

I was not able to get accurate test results because it would go off the scale on my analyzer. Needless to say burning a liter of fuel with a cold cat was worse than burning 10 liters of fuel with a functioning cat. That was HC and CO. How much worse I can't say. That was a late 1990's era honda civic.

Originally Posted by California98Civic

I've been driving this same car since 2001, a timeframe in which most Americans would have replaced the vehicle how many times? What's the pollution profile of the production of a new car and its transportation to market? But you're right, P&G can burn fuel in a more polluting manner. So, I try to warm my engine quickly when first started, to get the CAT lit. With my grill blocking, and given the short duration of my EOC cycles, and the location of my cat attached to the exhaust manifold, I am not persuaded there are relevant studies from which I should conclude that I'm doing pulse and pollute at something like 10x the normal emissions, as you say. Especially given the wider transportation pollution context I am considering. Yes, I am theorizing. But theorizing on a known context is a part of empirical inquirytoo and should 't be dismissed so readily. Yes, testing the theory would be best. But I don't have access to the equipment you suggest, and can't afford it as you might guess. Results from that equipment would be interesting, but it would not tell the whole, relevant story. BTW, you reference an arsenal of peer-reviewed studies... if you can get access to some of them, I love to see 'em.

Theorizing is fine but just because you think really hard about it doesn't make it correct. Take for example the idea of blocking your grille to help the car heat up faster. In theory this sounds like a great idea - after all the rad cools the engine right?

In a cold engine, the thermostat will be closed and the coolant in the radiator remains cold until it opens. At the outset the theory falls because the system the theory was created about was not properly understood.

In the case of P&G the theory was that by burning less fuel the driver is being more ecological and reducing pollution. In fact the opposite is true since the majority of short drive pollution comes out of the tailpipe before the cat lights off. Generally it is about 70% but if you're accelerating to keep in the max BSFC of the engine it will be even higher.

While I am definitely in support of techniques to reduce fuel consumption that do not adversely impact emissions you do have to realize that building calibrations and getting them certified is a very complex and time consuming task. Many highly educated engineers work on this process and the technologies and standards are continuing to evolve. An enthusiast with no formal training in the area is not likely to improve on their work.

-Michael

[Baltothewolf]

All this debating. Forget emissions bring down fuel costs to 50% of what they are now, and I'll have no need to save money on gas, therefore I won't P&G. Until then, I don't care how badly I pollute I'll continue doing what I'm doing, personally. I know it sounds bad but, well it is Oh well.

[Ecky]

It's definitely true that smog levels have decreased drastically since emissions laws have tightened.