Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > General Efficiency Discussion
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 08-14-2009, 01:39 AM   #41 (permalink)
In Lean Burn Mode
 
pgfpro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 1,427

MisFit Talon - '91 Eagle Talon TSi
Team Turbocharged!
90 day: 41.03 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,031
Thanked 483 Times in 315 Posts
Lots of great info.^^^^^^ Thanks again guys!!!

After looking at all this I think I will stay with my original plain and stay focus on the easier modifications.

__________________
Pressure Gradient Force
The Positive Side of the Number Line

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 08-14-2009, 05:33 AM   #42 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,732

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,571
Thanked 3,507 Times in 2,194 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2000mc View Post
nope, didnt, looked like re hashed version of

http://www.ethanol.org/pdf/contentmg...yStudy_001.pdf
Well... it usually helps some to look at something before you comment on it??? Not only did you blow my link off, you evidently failed to take the time to comprehend the material in YOUR links! (BTW- good finds! )

The studies mirror my experience with the stuff.

It is very safe to say that:

1) claims of fe reduction 1:1 with BTU content are false

2) one should not automatically assume that the presence of ethanol will lower fe

3) non flex-fuel vehicles can function quite well on far higher ethanol blends than E10.

Now what is all that about the Chevy? I didn't see any "excitement" about it.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 05:12 PM   #43 (permalink)
herp derp Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Lawrence, KS
Posts: 1,044

Saturn-sold - '99 saturn sc1
Team Saturn
90 day: 28.28 mpg (US)

Yukon - '03 GMC Yukon Denali
90 day: 13.61 mpg (US)
Thanks: 43
Thanked 322 Times in 229 Posts
#1 and #2 are very similar

#1 if you take out the flex fuel chevy from the report( i'll explain why i have a problem with that vehicles results) the general trend tends to follow the mpg:btu expected mileage, the non flex fuel chevy barely deviates from it

#2 true, but looking at the other vehicles the toyota and ford, they achieved thier best mileage with e30, why that mixture? why not e10, e20 and e40? what is the scientific cause? running lean? if it does hold up, is each vehicle different?

#3 absolutely yes, but i thought the reason for e10 and not more was because of the corrosive nature of the fuel, and that in time various components of your fuel system would fail one after another.

i thought the 15% improvement was suppose to be the excitement.

the flex fuel chevy had the most significant result of +15%. the next most significant result was only +1%. i took issue with the chevy result because the manner that the flex fuel chevy is tested, because it would not be able to correctly learn the fuel content. causing how the chevy ran to be a crap shoot, too rich, too lean, incorrect timing, drivability issues.

i figure if you got a considerable mileage increase from running lean, it would probably show up in emissions...

last line of page 7 from http://www.ethanol.org/pdf/contentmg...inal_12507.pdf

The flex-fuel Chevrolet Impala exceeded the NMOG standard for the FTP-75 on E20 and Tier 2 gasoline.

regflag, what? failed emmisions on straight gas? combine that with the fact that the nonflex fuel chevy had better mileage on straight gas, and i would guess that the flexfuel chevy ran rich on the straight gas and lean on e20. with the straight gas as the baseline figure for comparision, that then gives a bump to all the other ethanol mixtures on the flexfuel chevy.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 12:29 PM   #44 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I have experimented with regular 87 and mid-grade 89. They say the best economical speed is around 88 km/h. I assume that is with regular. I have this theory that higher octane raises your best economical speed since it provides more horse power. The reason I say this is because I noticed that going at 100 km/h on mid-grade 89, the rate of liters of fuel burned was the same as going 88 km/h on regular. Liter for liter, I covered more distance on 89 octane. I assume that for those who did not see much gains is because they travelled the same speed for both 87 and 89. My next experiment, I will be using 91 octane, and I will again increase my speed to see if this trend of increasing the best economical speed continues.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 12:51 PM   #45 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
razor02097's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: ohio
Posts: 306

Tetanus - '95 Geo Tracker 4WD Base
90 day: 29.43 mpg (US)

300 - '82 Suzuki GS300 L
Last 3: 60.78 mpg (US)

Jeep - '98 Jeep XJ Cherokee Limited
90 day: 12.82 mpg (US)
Thanks: 28
Thanked 50 Times in 37 Posts
Unless your vehicle pulls timing when you use lower octane fuel you will not benefit from using a higher octane. Period. If the engine runs with full advance on 87 octane, using higher octane fuel will make zero difference.
__________________



Project Avalon: E bike build
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 01:06 PM   #46 (permalink)
home of the odd vehicles
 
rmay635703's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere in WI
Posts: 3,279

Silver - '10 Chevy Cobalt XFE
Thanks: 340
Thanked 646 Times in 481 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by razor02097 View Post
Unless your vehicle pulls timing when you use lower octane fuel you will not benefit from using a higher octane. Period. If the engine runs with full advance on 87 octane, using higher octane fuel will make zero difference.
Most vehicles now days are 10:1 + compression, my vehicle will run full advance on 87 octane but bucks at low RPM and then pulls timing until my rpms increase.

Most new vehicles benefit from higher octane due to the way they can alter timing (OBDII anyone) but the benefit may not be significantly better FE, for me it was about 2mpg going from 87 e10 to 89e10, but on 48-52mpg that is only about 4% or so. It was about the same differance as going from 87e10 to 87e0
Cheers
Ryan
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 01:14 PM   #47 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
razor02097's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: ohio
Posts: 306

Tetanus - '95 Geo Tracker 4WD Base
90 day: 29.43 mpg (US)

300 - '82 Suzuki GS300 L
Last 3: 60.78 mpg (US)

Jeep - '98 Jeep XJ Cherokee Limited
90 day: 12.82 mpg (US)
Thanks: 28
Thanked 50 Times in 37 Posts
Car manufacturers tell you what octane they recommend. That is what one should go with. Going higher will just cause you to pay 10-15c per grade per gallon extra. Might not sound like much but if you fill 15 gallons with high octane and pay 20c extra per gallon you pay an extra $3 for absolutely nothing.... instead take the $3 and give it to the homeless man at the end of the fuel station driveway... at least he could put that toward buying himself some booze.
__________________



Project Avalon: E bike build
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 01:23 PM   #48 (permalink)
...beats walking...
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,191
Thanks: 179
Thanked 1,521 Times in 1,122 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by razor02097 View Post
Car manufacturers tell you what octane they recommend. That is what one should go with. Going higher will just cause you to pay 10-15c per grade per gallon extra. Might not sound like much but if you fill 15 gallons with high octane and pay 20c extra per gallon you pay an extra $3 for absolutely nothing.... instead take the $3 and give it to the homeless man at the end of the fuel station driveway... at least he could put that toward buying himself some booze.
..sorta like: put the ethanol in the homeless man and let him burn it up (wink,wink)?
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 02:16 PM   #49 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmay635703 View Post
Most vehicles now days are 10:1 + compression, my vehicle will run full advance on 87 octane but bucks at low RPM and then pulls timing until my rpms increase.

Most new vehicles benefit from higher octane due to the way they can alter timing (OBDII anyone) but the benefit may not be significantly better FE, for me it was about 2mpg going from 87 e10 to 89e10, but on 48-52mpg that is only about 4% or so. It was about the same differance as going from 87e10 to 87e0
Cheers
Ryan
Maybe I should have stated what vehicle I used. Lol! I used my 2012 F150 for my analysis. My manual also states that it runs at a minimum of 87 octane, which is why I went higher. The bare bone results I received on my 500km rides were this. Regular 87, 74 liters equally $74 at a controlled speed of 95km/h... Midgrade 89, 59 liters equally $62 at a controlled speed of 105km/h. That being said I saved twelve loonies and got to where I wanted to get, sooner... Spend more to save more...

Last edited by Firestone66; 02-13-2013 at 02:19 PM.. Reason: Wrong info, readjusted correctly
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 10:34 PM   #50 (permalink)
EcoModding Newb
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,899

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 25.55 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Prius Plug-in - '12 Toyota Prius Plug-in
90 day: 57.64 mpg (US)

Mazda CX-5 - '17 Mazda CX-5 Touring
90 day: 23.74 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,606
Thanked 3,110 Times in 2,314 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by razor02097 View Post
Unless your vehicle pulls timing when you use lower octane fuel you will not benefit from using a higher octane. Period. If the engine runs with full advance on 87 octane, using higher octane fuel will make zero difference.
I have an UG and have it setup to show the timing advance. How do I know if it's at full advance?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Firestone66 View Post
The bare bone results I received on my 500km rides were this. Regular 87, 74 liters equally $74 at a controlled speed of 95km/h... Midgrade 89, 59 liters equally $62 at a controlled speed of 105km/h. That being said I saved twelve loonies and got to where I wanted to get, sooner... Spend more to save more...
There is zero chance that going faster, regardless of octane, results in better fuel economy unless your truck shifts to a lower gear between 95kph and 105kph.

__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to redpoint5 For This Useful Post:
Frank Lee (02-14-2013)
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com