Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-07-2014, 11:33 AM   #71 (permalink)
Aero Deshi
 
ChazInMT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Vero Beach, FL
Posts: 1,065

MagMetalCivic - '04 Honda Civic Sedan EX
Last 3: 34.25 mpg (US)
Thanks: 430
Thanked 669 Times in 358 Posts
Uh...I think if you get one of these and use the "Torquening Slotted Camshanks" feature on your #4 Cylinder Camshank, that would make it stop working.



Alternatively, you could refer to the picture below and pick which one is the #4 fuel injector and simply unplug the control wire to it. That'll stop the fuel flow.



Hope this helps, and don't be tempted by the Bono Safety Glasses, they're crap. Besides, who wants to look at the world through rose colored lenses anyway??

  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ChazInMT For This Useful Post:
yoyoyoda (03-08-2014)
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 03-07-2014, 01:38 PM   #72 (permalink)
eco....something or other
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Colfax, WI
Posts: 724

wood hauler - '91 Ford F-250
Team Pontiac
90 day: 26.69 mpg (US)

Rav - '06 Toyota Rav4 Base
90 day: 26.52 mpg (US)
Thanks: 39
Thanked 67 Times in 50 Posts
I have driven a chevy silverado for work, and the 4 cylinder feature nearly doubled economy. I was looking at 14 mpg in v8 mode and 30 in 4 cyl mode.

It would switch over at about 8 inches of vacuum if I remember correctly.

I was able to coax 30 mpg out of one of the chevy diesel work trucks one day as well. The guys riding with me had to pick their jaws off the floor. They made it their mission to get the lowest mileage they could from that day forward. I never saw those trucks get above 14 mpg ever again. They beat on em hard.
__________________



1991 F-250:
4.9L, Mazda 5 speed, 4.10 10.25" rear
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 01:44 PM   #73 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

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: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
That ain't gonna happen here.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 02:02 PM   #74 (permalink)
Not Doug
 
Xist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Show Low, AZ
Posts: 12,240

Chorizo - '00 Honda Civic HX, baby! :D
90 day: 35.35 mpg (US)

Mid-Life Crisis Fighter - '99 Honda Accord LX
90 day: 34.2 mpg (US)

Gramps - '04 Toyota Camry LE
90 day: 35.39 mpg (US)

Don't hit me bro - '05 Toyota Camry LE
90 day: 30.49 mpg (US)
Thanks: 7,254
Thanked 2,234 Times in 1,724 Posts
Would a deactivated cylinder run rougher or smoother than my car while it was misfiring on one cylinder? If it is anywhere near as bad, I would not recommend that to anyone!
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 09:33 PM   #75 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 2,643
Thanks: 1,502
Thanked 279 Times in 229 Posts
Xist, depends on the harmonics of the engine. You find the right rpm and it will rattle itself apart.

IsaacCarlson, the commercial truck company I worked for would install a anti starter grind so people couldnt purposely ruin the starter. People just abuse the hell out of a work truck unless its a one man owner/business.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2014, 02:53 PM   #76 (permalink)
eco....something or other
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Colfax, WI
Posts: 724

wood hauler - '91 Ford F-250
Team Pontiac
90 day: 26.69 mpg (US)

Rav - '06 Toyota Rav4 Base
90 day: 26.52 mpg (US)
Thanks: 39
Thanked 67 Times in 50 Posts
Properly deactivated cylinders run as smooth as they originally did. I have turned off 3 cylinders on my truck and it ran fine and sounded like a perkins 3 cyl diesel.
__________________



1991 F-250:
4.9L, Mazda 5 speed, 4.10 10.25" rear
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2014, 03:04 PM   #77 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

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: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
We are not going to have any properly deactivated cylinders here.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2014, 08:08 PM   #78 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 2,643
Thanks: 1,502
Thanked 279 Times in 229 Posts
FYI, driving the truck in this manner is similar to how people abuse the lean burn mode in the Insight and Civics to get supreme fuel economy. In many cases the power generated is not enough to sustain highway speeds so they drive slower like 50 mph or do a modified pulse & glide using lean burn in the glide part to extend the coasting aspect til they hit the bottom speed and reaccelerate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IsaacCarlson View Post
I was able to coax 30 mpg out of one of the chevy diesel work trucks one day as well.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2014, 09:58 PM   #79 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: NSW, Aus
Posts: 116
Thanks: 61
Thanked 18 Times in 16 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cobb View Post
FYI, driving the truck in this manner is similar to how people abuse the lean burn mode in the Insight and Civics to get supreme fuel economy. In many cases the power generated is not enough to sustain highway speeds so they drive slower like 50 mph or do a modified pulse & glide using lean burn in the glide part to extend the coasting aspect til they hit the bottom speed and reaccelerate.
Define "abuse", We're all driving around in boxes of steel with even tinier boxes of steel which have explosive petrol and air and spark mixes, and to top it off we "abuse" the internals by skimping on oil changes, and by throwing all of this at other objects at 60-120km/h.

Most of us don't even wax the outer part of our steel boxes to keep the paint job in check.

Other people (not me) then neglect to do regular life-saving changes on the lifeblood which permits these flying bits of metal to run smoothly and operate as it was designed to.

If you ask me the human race needs to be abused for a while, poor things.

If it were up to me no engine would ever go above 1,200 rpm in any gear, it would last for 2 million miles and the body would be made from stainless steel.

But its just not practical. Can't hurt to try though on the way to church :P

Other traffic is what prevents me from driving at <40km/h speeds (25mph), I've been known to even tell my neighbours that I want the residential speed limit reduced to 25-30km/h.

Drool:



What we need is really really big flywheels.


Last edited by yoyoyoda; 03-08-2014 at 10:35 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2014, 11:20 PM   #80 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: NSW, Aus
Posts: 116
Thanks: 61
Thanked 18 Times in 16 Posts


Maybe the reason why these engines run so well is because they have a lower compression ratio, so therefore are less prone to be rattling like crazy because there is less power per stroke pushing onto the crank.

Firing order has something to do with it too.

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pulse and Glide Fuel Economy Calculator 4 valve / Cylinder newtonsfirstlaw DIY / How-to 25 11-04-2008 04:32 PM
How Many Automatics out There? (FE techniques discussion) RH77 EcoModding Central 18 02-07-2008 11:50 PM



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