The BSFC chart thread (post 'em if you got 'em)

[abently]

5E-FHE Engine, in Japanese, and grams/Ps.H so you'll need to convert Ps to Kw or HP, but that's not hard.

Working on getting the 4E-FE one... I'll see if I can get the 5E-FE as well.

[RobertSmalls]

It shows BSFC versus RPM, but how hard to you have to press the throttle to get those numbers? We'd really like to know BSFC vs RPM and torque.

[Daox]

True, a load based BSFC is much more ideal. However, this is better than nothing.

If you could get a 2nd generation 5E-FE that would be great!

[IsaacCarlson]

Originally Posted by tasdrouille

Might be a dumb question, but what is a Graham scanner?

It scans graham crackers so you know the best way to dunk them in milk to get the best possible absorption without making the cracker soggy.....

[abently]

Originally Posted by RobertSmalls

It shows BSFC versus RPM, but how hard to you have to press the throttle to get those numbers? We'd really like to know BSFC vs RPM and torque.

I get the impression they potentially got that output running it in 4th gear from 1000-7000rpm, and I am assuming they got that result on the road, not off some engine or vehicle dyno test.

Would make logical sense, to have vehicle weight and aero drag factored in to that chart, but then again, if you wanted to show min fuel consumption, you wouldn't want it tested that way....

[dremd]

I can assure you that the numbers are created with the use of an engine dyno, Load depends on the manufacturer.
Being that these charts are very rarely published I doubt they go through much trouble "marketing" the numbers.

[abently]

Originally Posted by dremd

I can assure you that the numbers are created with the use of an engine dyno, Load depends on the manufacturer.
Being that these charts are very rarely published I doubt they go through much trouble "marketing" the numbers.

I suspect thats the case on both accounts.

[abently]

A quick question regarding live BSFC data.

Is it possible relatively speaking, to judge whether BSFC is better or worse, by comparing RPM and duty cycle change?

I.e, say at 60km/hr, rpm is 1800, and duty cycle is 14% in 5th gear, and in 4th gear, rpm is 2000 and duty cycle 13%, therefore an increase in rpm of 11%, and a decrease in duty cycle of 8%.

Meaning, on those relative changes, 5th gear, cruising at 60km/hr would be more fuel efficient?

I should point out, that these numbers are just out of thin air... and I'm assuming fuel pressure doesn't rise, with different load?

I'm also assuming the instrument error margin is constant and linear across the range being measured, for rpm and duty cycle.

Any potential holes you guys can see?

[RobertSmalls]

You need to know horsepower (RPM is insufficient) and fuel consumption in real time. The charts we see here could be made with a dyno, an MPGuino, and a datalogger.

http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...ncy-12478.html

[slowmover]

Cummins 235-ISB