Dynamic Cylinder Deactivation

[Heihetech]

Originally Posted by shovel

I just stumbled on this thread and got to about page 7 before getting bored of the negativity being thrown at this guy.

We're his intended market, and he's trying to make something commercially viable and he was all but attacked over it.

I think a product like this should work - not as well as an OEM solution that addresses the valve opening/closing, but still it should work quite well. Perhaps I misread something but I don't see how this would put the engine in open loop mode, if the engine's ECU believes it fired the injector, and the DCD box takes input from the wideband o2 sensor, compares it against the number of deactivations it knows it made, and produces a voltage the ECU was expecting from its ordinary o2 sensor... then what's the problem? Sounds like a closed feedback loop to me.

I hope this product gets made, and I may just buy one if/when it's available for my car.

5% to 15% Fuel Savings Could be Yield from DCD ----- This result is from
DCD-440 product running on 1.6L 4-cylinder vehicle with AT. The result is
based on professional comparative fuel consumption meter test. Real world
MPG could have a gain of 20% to 24%, but this includes the drive habit
change forced by DCD's power reduction, keep cruising under cruise control.

Trying is believing. For those who don't believe DCD, the fact is here waving
to you. I have saved some gas by DCD, while others who don't have DCD
may not.

[Heihetech]

Originally Posted by Ecky

Forgive me for my ignorance, but was the o2 sensor issue ever addressed? It would seem that this could work perfectly on OBD-1 and older vehicles, and on OBD-2 vehicles as long as the knock sensor doesn't pick it up, but wouldn't the computer still flip out over the o2 in exhaust? Might still be worth it if your open loop maps were good, but it's very far from a good implementation.

As I have posted previously, ECU will still close the fuel loop, knowing nothing
from human cheating. It's smart human invention called DCD to GUIDE the ECU
to close fuel loop at the new points.

Open loop still runs the engine, but in a bad shape that wastes fuel, could
never save fuel. OBD-2 will not open the loop as long as the loop can be
normally closed.

[t vago]

Originally Posted by shovel

Well, kinda, yeah. Like the E85 kit I installed on my blazer a few years ago just intercepts the injector signal, extends its duration a bit, and lets the car's ECU make up the difference. Dead simple in theory, and whaddayaknow? It just plain works. I understand that DCD isn't exactly the same as enriching to compensate for an oxygenated fuel but it's not so drastically different either.

Still seems like you're a). comparing apples to oranges, here; and b). you have no idea what you're talking about. To wit,

Originally Posted by shovel

My employer manufactures a lot of electronics, and our engineers come up with all sorts of neat features we could add to them. In the end, we don't really add most of the features our engineers come up with.

[sarcasm]Which is the perfect reason as to why vehicle manufacturers would not pursue a completely software-based cylinder deactivation scheme which would only cost the amount of software/firmware engineering needed to support it, in favor of multimillion dollar hardware design and re-tooling for hardware changes IN ADDITION TO the software/firmware changes that would go along with the new hardware so that it would support the "outmoded" yet somehow viable proven-to-work cylinder deactivation mechanisms that seem to be so popular with all of the major car manufacturers.[/sarcasm]

Or, supposing that you actually read those 7 pages you claimed to have read, you would have understood that it takes energy to pump air through an air pump, and that said energy is not expended when the intake and exhaust valves are left closed in deactivated cylinders. But I guess that thermodynamics and fluid dynamics are a bit beyond your comprehension.

Originally Posted by shovel

My guess is, the engineers who have the luxury of designing a vehicle system like cylinder deactivation at the OEM stage can design a complete system which includes the valve deactivation, and since they can, they do. If you're going to call that a conspiracy theory... well, rock on dood. I'm not here for "points"

I'm not drinking the hee-hee-tech kool-aid like you obviously did.

Originally Posted by shovel

Beats me, what makes you think this is impossible? The stock ECU's expecting a signal, you give it a signal, it's happy. People spoof devices and translate data all the time. I spoofed my jeep radio to think it still has a CD changer so I could hijack the cd changer input for mp3.. machines are just machines.

Spoken like somebody who has absolutely no clue about what goes on under the hood. Tell me, genius, how is a modern OBD II-compliant vehicle supposed to test its catalytic converter(s) with this hee-hee-tech garbage installed? You know, the one that is mandated? And tell me, brain, how would it be if the algorithm, that the engine controller uses that does the actual testing, fails out because it can't see the cycle-by-cycle variations in fuel delivery that it intentionally makes, because that flim-flam device is masking out said cycle-by-cycle variations?

Originally Posted by shovel

Business is rough like that, where's your product? I tried to open up a coffee shop when I was 18, and now it's not in business anymore - doesn't make me an a-hole.

Me? I have no product. I just managed to get better fuel savings than hee-hee-tech claims for his rip-off-o-matic gadget, using tried and tested "outmoded" principles.

Originally Posted by shovel

What's your beef, anyway?

Every so often, some snake-oil salesman comes along and tries to sell some sort of fraud gizmo here in an effort to try to get some veneer of respectability.

As to the rest of hee-hee-tech's claims, I say they're unequivocal bull turds. A device that supposedly saves at least 10% in fuel economy should be wildly popular right now. It should be flying off the shelves, so to speak, in this $4/gallon gasoline we're seeing. People should be clawing their way to the person who can actually demonstrate that such a device works for aftermarket retrofit. But, as with that other snake-oil device that had the CARB EO number, this DCD that hee-hee-tech puts out will be shown to be nothing but a fraud.

This thread really needs to go into the Unicorn Corral, now.

[Heihetech]

The kitteh head could never understand modern engineering trick behind DCD.
But smart guy called "shovel" can. Some one don't understand how the sun is
shinning, yet the sun is still shinning there beautifully!

[shovel]

Originally Posted by t vago

blah blah you have no idea what you're talking about blah blah blah beyond your comprehension blah blah I'm not drinking the kool-aid like you obviously did blah blah Spoken like somebody who has absolutely no clue about what goes on under the hood. Tell me, genius, blah blah And tell me, brain, blah blah blah.

Damn, it's gotta feel awesome to be you

[Heihetech]

Originally Posted by shovel

Damn, it's gotta feel awesome to be you

Supported! That kitteh head sounds no word can be said! Just feels so bad??
Is he the king in cylinder deactivation kingdom? Never! GM is! but the crown
on king's head is DCD.

[reb01501]

Originally Posted by shovel

I just stumbled on this thread and got to about page 7 before getting bored of the negativity being thrown at this guy.

We're his intended market, and he's trying to make something commercially viable and he was all but attacked over it.

So you don't mind being targeted for a probable scam product?

If you didn't have so many posts I would suspect you of being a sock puppet breathing new life into a nearly dead thread.

[shovel]

Originally Posted by reb01501

So you don't mind being targeted for a probable scam product?
.

Actually I don't know enough about this product to be sure it is or isn't a scam. What I mind is when a forum for people ostensibly old enough to drive, has too many juvenile attacks in a thread for any meaningful discussion to take place.

I might even be inclined to agree with the points T Vago was trying to make but for all his confidence it seems he never bothered to observe that people tune out from conversations when it becomes apparent they're being needlessly insulted. Is it really necessary to pepper conversation with personal attacks?

[t vago]

Originally Posted by shovel

Actually I don't know enough about this product to be sure it is or isn't a scam. What I mind is when a forum for people ostensibly old enough to drive, has too many juvenile attacks in a thread for any meaningful discussion to take place

Hypocrite. I'm being an a-hole, right? I'm the one trying to sell something, right? Seems you're just not paying attention when you ask why I think this thingie that hee-hee-tech makes doesn't work. Oh, but you somehow actually read 7 pages of this thread before throwing up your hands in despair about having it be too negative. Hell, at that point, we were just asking the guy questions!

Originally Posted by shovel

I might even be inclined to agree with the points T Vago was trying to make but for all his confidence it seems he never bothered to observe that people tune out from conversations when it becomes apparent they're being needlessly insulted. Is it really necessary to pepper conversation with personal attacks?

Riiiiight... I can't do personal attacks, because it might make me not believed because people might tune out, but you're sure willing to believe hee-hee-tech even though he resorted to the same attacks first.

You want to believe hee-hee-tech's implausible claims about his gadget that somehow selectively deactivates cylinders without throwing multiple misfire codes and fuel injector open circuit codes and catalytic converter monitor codes, without throwing the engine computer into open loop, and somehow performs better than all of the cylinder deactivation mechanisms that Chrysler, GM, BMW, Mercedes, and VW have introduced? Fine. You want to waste your own money buying into hee-hee-tech's unworkable device because he says it somehow works? Fine. Just don't expect to find a receptive audience if all you can do is whine about negativity.

And why not answer my questions that I posed to you? Oh, that's right. You're going to use the excuse that I'm "personally attacking" you.

[shovel]

Originally Posted by t vago

Hypocrite.

What?

Originally Posted by t vago

Riiiiight... I can't do personal attacks, because it might make me not believed because people might tune out,

No, you "can't do personal attacks" because it undermines your attempts to persuade your audience. For someone who professes to understand machinery, you don't seem to have a very good grasp of conversation.

Originally Posted by t vago

hee-hee-tech's

Even this part, the name calling? Seriously? What part of this makes you look like a grown-up?

Originally Posted by t vago

You want to believe hee-hee-tech's implausible claims about his gadget that somehow selectively deactivates cylinders without throwing multiple misfire codes and fuel injector open circuit codes and catalytic converter monitor codes, without throwing the engine computer into open loop,

I don't find it implausible to trick an ECU into not throwing codes. People use computers to trick other computers all the time, it's actually quite a thriving practice, and one of the primary reasons an information security industry exists. You give a machine the data it's expecting, it proceeds as expected.

Originally Posted by t vago

and somehow performs better than all of the cylinder deactivation mechanisms that Chrysler, GM, BMW, Mercedes, and VW have introduced?

Wha? What part of your imagination put these words in my mouth?
No kidding, an aftermarket device that only addresses a portion of the situation isn't going to outperform or even match the performance of a holistically engineered system - I never argued to the contrary. Straw-man arguments don't bolster your credibility either.

Originally Posted by t vago

Fine. You want to waste your own money buying into hee-hee-tech's unworkable device because he says it somehow works? Fine.

I think you might be missing the point here.

Originally Posted by t vago

Just don't expect to find a receptive audience

... you're an interesting fellow to be talking about "expecting to find a receptive audience".

Originally Posted by t vago

And why not answer my questions that I posed to you? Oh, that's right. You're going to use the excuse that I'm "personally attacking" you.

I didn't come into this thread to describe the operation of this product. I came into this thread to learn about the operation of this product.
You might observe that my commentary on this thread has been largely aimed at the fact that it's an unpleasant thread to read because there was more aggression than discussion - and this has clearly not changed.

So I guess we're doomed to another round..