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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 06-13-2008, 12:33 AM   #1 (permalink)
Master of 140 hamsters
 
superchow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Lacey, WA
Posts: 183

Hamster - '07 Honda Civic EX
90 day: 29.41 mpg (US)

Whooshy Wagon - '04 Volvo V40
90 day: 23.33 mpg (US)

Minotaur - '09 Ford Taurus X SEL
90 day: 19.05 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts
High Altitude FE?

Being currently in Wyoming at a relatively high altitude (6000+ ft.) I noticed that my 07 Civic EX is accelerating very slowly. Well, makes sense, no? Less air, less power. But now I am viewing this from a different perspective (thanks to EM):

Less air should also mean less fuel injected, correct? Stoichiometric ratios should still apply? I understand that "the nut behind the wheel" is revving the engine more to get the car moving at a similar rate as at sea level, which will definitely ruin gas mileage.

But say I was stubborn and would drive the same as at sea level and just get used to the reduced power output? (Shifting early, accelerating slowly, engine braking, DWB, etc)

And taking it one step further, what if I restricted the air intake when back at sea level to artificially reduce the maount of air the engine can "inhale"?


__________________
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 06-13-2008, 08:35 AM   #2 (permalink)
Administrator
 
Daox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Germantown, WI
Posts: 11,203

CM400E - '81 Honda CM400E
90 day: 51.49 mpg (US)

Daox's Grey Prius - '04 Toyota Prius
Team Toyota
90 day: 49.53 mpg (US)

Daox's Insight - '00 Honda Insight
90 day: 64.33 mpg (US)

Swarthy - '14 Mitsubishi Mirage DE
Mitsubishi
90 day: 56.69 mpg (US)

Daox's Volt - '13 Chevrolet Volt
Thanks: 2,501
Thanked 2,585 Times in 1,553 Posts
Restricting the intake will definitly not help your FE. The engine will have to work harder to overcome this restriction. Its not the same as having less dense air.

Also, accelerating slowly is a good entry level driving technique. But, if you want to bring it up to the next level you'll need to change how you accelerate. The most efficient way of accelerating with a manual transmission is keeping rpms low but almost flooring the gas pedal. If you have a scangauge, engine loads of around 80% on average show the best results. This is usually around 1/2 to 3/4 throttle from my experience. I try to keep my rpms between 2000 and 3000, again an average that I have seen work. You can play around with the rpm range and load once you are comfortable with the new technique to see where you get the best mileage from your engine as they'll all be different. Using this technique gets you going fairly quick so you need to be careful not to go too crazy lest you find yourself using the brakes a lot (which negates any benefits you just gained). Try this out and see how it works for you.
__________________
Current project: A better alternator delete
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2008, 06:55 PM   #3 (permalink)
Master of 140 hamsters
 
superchow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Lacey, WA
Posts: 183

Hamster - '07 Honda Civic EX
90 day: 29.41 mpg (US)

Whooshy Wagon - '04 Volvo V40
90 day: 23.33 mpg (US)

Minotaur - '09 Ford Taurus X SEL
90 day: 19.05 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts
I understand the low rpms/"wide-open-throttle" scenario, and it seemed to work fine in my old car (2002 Nissan Sentra) but I know the '06+ Civics have throttle-by-wire. (This creates some smoothness issues, but that's another topic. )

I think I read that the ECU opens the buttefly all the way in low load conditions and pushes some of the air sucked in back out (reducing the volume of air compressed to about the equivalent of a 1.5 liter vs 1.8 liter) and at the same time using some recirculated exhaust gases too.

I haven't consistently tried the fullt throttle/low rpm technique, but that may (I emphasize MAY) not work in this vehicle.

However - I have refueled here in high altitude Wyoming, and low and behold, ~36 mpg! OK, not great, but considering we didn't drive economically at all, I am quite happy about that.

The engine must (MUST) be above 2000 rpm to have any torque whatsoever, preferably above 2500-3000 rpm. Passing on the highways here is truly a minute long endeavor!

So maybe we should have CO2/nitrogen injection instead of nitrous oxide. Any ideas on what gas to let into the intake that would reduce the O2 in the engine that would stay stable?
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2008, 09:49 PM   #4 (permalink)
Batman Junior
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 22,515

Blackfly - '98 Geo Metro
Team Metro
Last 3: 70.09 mpg (US)

MPGiata - '90 Mazda Miata
90 day: 52.71 mpg (US)

Even Fancier Metro - '14 Mitsubishi Mirage top spec
90 day: 70.75 mpg (US)

Appliance car - '14 Mitsubishi Mirage ES (base)
90 day: 52.48 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4,062
Thanked 6,959 Times in 3,603 Posts
I like the idea of inert gas injection. You could do the same thing with EGR too. The trick is knowing at what proportion you're going to start adversely affecting combustion and making things worse!

You're right that higher altitudes should be better for fuel economy. Less aero drag too.
__________________
Project MPGiata! Mods for getting 50+ MPG from a 1990 Miata
Honda mods: Ecomodding my $800 Honda Fit 5-speed beater
Mitsu mods: 70 MPG in my ecomodded, dirt cheap, 3-cylinder Mirage.
Ecodriving test: Manual vs. automatic transmission MPG showdown



EcoModder
has launched a forum for the efficient new Mitsubishi Mirage
www.MetroMPG.com - fuel efficiency info for Geo Metro owners
www.ForkenSwift.com - electric car conversion on a beer budget
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 11:00 AM   #5 (permalink)
Manic Rabbit
 
Southcross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 134

Slow-n-Low - '81 Volkswagen Rabbit S
TEAM VW AUDI Group
90 day: 33.97 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daox View Post
If you have a scangauge, engine loads of around 80% on average show the best results. This is usually around 1/2 to 3/4 throttle from my experience. I try to keep my rpms between 2000 and 3000, again an average that I have seen work. You can play around with the rpm range and load once you are comfortable with the new technique to see where you get the best mileage from your engine as they'll all be different. Using this technique gets you going fairly quick so you need to be careful not to go too crazy lest you find yourself using the brakes a lot (which negates any benefits you just gained). Try this out and see how it works for you.
I know this is an old OLD thread... I'm back searching/researching and since I too live at altitude, I thought this may be beneficial.

since I drive a pre-OBD car and I can not hook anything remotely like a ScanGauge up, can anyone confirm this acceleration technique?
__________________
-Edward

Driven on Colorado roads, where NOTHING is flat
Present City 3x / Highway 4x
Goal: 4x / 5x
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 11:43 AM   #6 (permalink)
DieselMiser
 
ConnClark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Richland,WA
Posts: 985

Das Schlepper Frog - '85 Mercedes Benz 300SD
90 day: 23.23 mpg (US)

Gentoo320 - '04 Mercedes C320 4Matic
90 day: 22.44 mpg (US)
Thanks: 46
Thanked 231 Times in 160 Posts
In a gasoline powered car at high altitude, less air means less fuel burned but it also means less EGR. This all translates to less trapped mass in the cylinder and more heat of combustion going into the engine block and head. At a lower altitude the ECU would compensate by increasing EGR flow to increase the trapped mass in the cylinder. This extra mass will absorb heat that would otherwise heat the block and head and allows more work to be extracted by the piston.

So at higher altitudes your economy drops.

EDIT: Also inert gas injection will work better than EGR. Gases like helium and argon will raise the specific heat ratio of the combustion gasses during the power stroke. This results in more power being extracted by the piston. This is not cheap however.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 01:18 PM   #7 (permalink)
Moderate your Moderation.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Troy, Pa.
Posts: 8,919

Pasta - '96 Volkswagen Passat TDi
90 day: 45.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,369
Thanked 430 Times in 353 Posts
RE: Argon -

What percentage of your total intake flow would have to be argon to see a gain? How much of a gain could you see? What could the adverse effects be?
__________________
"¿ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"

  Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 03:54 PM   #8 (permalink)
DieselMiser
 
ConnClark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Richland,WA
Posts: 985

Das Schlepper Frog - '85 Mercedes Benz 300SD
90 day: 23.23 mpg (US)

Gentoo320 - '04 Mercedes C320 4Matic
90 day: 22.44 mpg (US)
Thanks: 46
Thanked 231 Times in 160 Posts
Figuring out the percentage of flow where you would see a gain is kind of hard. To get the maximum gain you would simply replace your entire EGR flow with the inert gas.

The link below has some formulas (in the blue text) where you could come up with numbers if you were able to figure out what you changed the specific heat ratio to.

Improving IC Engine Efficiency

In general it won't help at full power.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 08:41 PM   #9 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
basjoos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate SC
Posts: 1,088

Aerocivic - '92 Honda Civic CX
Last 3: 70.54 mpg (US)

AerocivicLB - '92 Honda Civic CX
Team Honda
90 day: 55.14 mpg (US)

Camryglide - '20 Toyota Camry hybrid LE
90 day: 62.77 mpg (US)
Thanks: 16
Thanked 676 Times in 302 Posts
The FE boost you see when driving when the humidity is high is the equivalent of inert gas injection, since water molecules take the place of some of the oxygen that the engine could have been sucking in if the humidity was low.
__________________
aerocivic.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 09:19 PM   #10 (permalink)
Moderate your Moderation.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Troy, Pa.
Posts: 8,919

Pasta - '96 Volkswagen Passat TDi
90 day: 45.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,369
Thanked 430 Times in 353 Posts
So what if I just inject steam into the intake? (Steam, scavenging heat from exhaust.)

__________________
"¿ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Tags
altitude



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why the Civic VX is a superior highway fuel economy (FE) machine MetroMPG General Efficiency Discussion 9 10-10-2010 05:26 AM
Driving the Scanguage for FE Harry6 Hypermiling / EcoDriver's Ed 12 04-02-2010 12:51 PM
Skeptical of "blade" exaust tip FE / emissions claims Cd EcoModding Central 42 01-14-2010 10:44 PM
How Many Automatics out There? (FE techniques discussion) RH77 EcoModding Central 18 02-07-2008 10:50 PM
Basic EcoDriving Techniques and Instrumentation SVOboy Instrumentation 2 11-17-2007 11:38 AM



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com