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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05-06-2013, 03:19 PM   #11 (permalink)
Eco-ventor
 
jakobnev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: sweden
Posts: 1,559

Princess - '92 Mazda MX-3 GS
House of Tudor
Team Mazda
90 day: 53.54 mpg (US)

Shirubāarō (*ω`*) - '05 Toyota Prius Executive
Team Toyota
90 day: 54.88 mpg (US)

Blue Thunder - '20 Hyundai IONIQ Trend PHEV
Team Hyundai
Plug-in Hybrids
Thanks: 68
Thanked 640 Times in 404 Posts
Send a message via MSN to jakobnev
Quote:
I would really like to go out and spend money on a scangauge and another throttle body but I don't have any extra.
This is were i start getting a bad vibe.

__________________




2016: 128.75L for 1875.00km => 6.87L/100km (34.3MPG US)
2017: 209.14L for 4244.00km => 4.93L/100km (47.7MPG US)
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 05-06-2013, 03:28 PM   #12 (permalink)
Smeghead
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Central AK
Posts: 933

escort - '99 ford escort sport
90 day: 42.38 mpg (US)

scoobaru - '02 Subaru Forester s
90 day: 28.65 mpg (US)
Thanks: 32
Thanked 146 Times in 97 Posts
A scan gauge or similar will NOT provide usable data.

It derives it's fuel consumption data from air flow. The premise of this mod is that it is doing things with airflow which means data that the scan gauge/ultra gauge or similar is suspect. Something that monitors the quantity of fuel injected directly is the only data source that is even close to reliable. That means graduated cylinder (both feed and return), super accurate fuel flow gauges comparing feed and return, or an MPguino or similar that measures fuel injector pulse width and frequency.

edited to add
There is WAYtoo much variation in tank to tank data for it to be valid. I have gone from 25-28 mpg just in the last couple months. Had I put some sort of mod on the car I could easily attribute that change to the mod when it is environmental. In tank to tank comparisons driver technique has a huge role to play. Did it rain slightly more this tank than last, was it cooler, did I get stuck in traffic, did I happen to hit a lucky bunch of green lights, etc all would invalidate a tanks usability as data.

I laid out a test in This post that could provide usable data without using a rolling road.
__________________

Learn from the mistakes of others, that way when you mess up you can do so in new and interesting ways.

One mile of road will take you one mile, one mile of runway can take you around the world.

Last edited by bestclimb; 05-06-2013 at 03:43 PM..
  Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to bestclimb For This Useful Post:
AndrzejM (05-07-2013), mcrews (05-06-2013), NachtRitter (05-06-2013)
Old 05-06-2013, 03:28 PM   #13 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
AndrzejM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Poland
Posts: 840

Berta - '97 BMW 318 tds Compact
90 day: 62.03 mpg (US)

Charlie - '07 Citroen C4 Grand Picasso Exclusive
90 day: 37.58 mpg (US)

Corsa - '05 Opel Corsa C
90 day: 53.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 185
Thanked 167 Times in 117 Posts
You can try to use ultragauge (it's cheaper than SGII) or you can go for MPGuino - I'm sure you can build one with ~20$ budget. Maybe it won't be pretty but it will do its job.

Anyway good luck with testing!
__________________


Quote:
Gerhard Plattner: "The best attitude is to consider fuel saving a kind of sport. Everybody who has enough money for a strong car, can drive fast and hit the pedal. But saving fuel requires concentration, self-control and cleverness. It's a challenge with the nice effect of saving you money that you can use for other more important things."
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 03:46 PM   #14 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
divedaddy03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 65
Thanks: 17
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by bestclimb View Post
I don't think a scan gauge or similar will provide usable data. It derives it's fuel consumption data from air flow. If this mod is doing anything the data that the scan gauge or similar is suspect. Something that monitors the quantity of fuel injected directly is the only data source that is even close to reliable. That means graduated cylinder (both feed and return), super accurate fuel flow gauges comparing feed and return, or an MPguino or similar that measures fuel injector pulse width and frequency.
Alright, here is where you are starting to talk over my head, not because I can't understand but because I haven't learned it and the "why" of it yet. So, you are saying that a scangauge measures the same way the computer in the call measures therefore it's just as inaccurate so...what's the point, right? I'm guessing that an MPGuino is a home built system using an Arduino board? I'm liking this idea....seriously! That said, can my 2005 know and monitor the fuel flow feed and return or do I need to then splice the fuel lines and install a flow sensor?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrzejM View Post
You can try to use ultragauge (it's cheaper than SGII) or you can go for MPGuino - I'm sure you can build one with ~20$ budget. Maybe it won't be pretty but it will do its job.

Anyway good luck with testing!
Thanks for the props, I'm all ears with this one! I really am... Any DIY hacks that I need to be aware of? I have a laptop!



Guys, I'm kinda rushing into it, I understand your skepticism. I'm a VERY methodical thinker and I REALLY, REALLY want to run these test before I modify. I want to do this the right way but I'm telling you, it's going to be two months until I can even think of buying anything more than $20 to test with so...I've got to think of my options. Why can't I monitor the fuel consumption along side of mileage on a large round trip route through the country and do this 3 times, then modify and do it all over again?

Or go ahead and modify and get an idea if it even seems viable based on my fuel usage and regular driving. Then, if it shows some improvements, go out and get that throttle body (will need it anyway either way) and locate the best testing equipment in the mean time and do some very calculated runs to come up with hard numbers in the rears? I know that this is ass backwards but I can't afford all the pretty toys today.

Thoughts?

Wayne, SC
__________________
An Idea:Open Source Hybrid/Hybrid Electric Car Project

Your mind is like a parachute, it only works when it's open.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 03:47 PM   #15 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
mcrews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,523

The Q Sold - '02 Infiniti Q45 Sport
90 day: 23.08 mpg (US)

blackie - '14 nissan altima sv
Thanks: 2,203
Thanked 659 Times in 474 Posts
bestclimb,
thanks for your input!

This goes back to my early post in the original thread about how smart ecomodders are!!
__________________
MetroMPG: "Get the MPG gauge - it turns driving into a fuel & money saving game."

ECO MODS PERFORMED:
First: ScangaugeII
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...eii-23306.html

Second: Grille Block
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...e-10912-2.html

Third: Full underbelly pan
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...q45-11402.html

Fourth: rear skirts and 30.4mpg on trip!
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...tml#post247938
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 03:54 PM   #16 (permalink)
Batman Junior
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 22,234

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

MPGiata - '90 Mazda Miata
90 day: 52.07 mpg (US)

Winter beater Metro - '00 Chevrolet Metro
90 day: 61.98 mpg (US)

Fancy Metro - '14 Mitsubishi Mirage top spec
90 day: 58.72 mpg (US)

Even Fancier Metro - '14 Mitsubishi Mirage top spec
90 day: 70.75 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3,796
Thanked 6,649 Times in 3,446 Posts
Wayne - can you point us to any other fuel economy testing that you've done?
__________________
Honda mods: Ecomodding my $800 Honda Fit 5-speed beater
Mitsu mods: Oops, I did it again! Bought another cheap, 3-cylinder Mirage. Mods in progress...
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 05-06-2013, 04:04 PM   #17 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
divedaddy03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 65
Thanks: 17
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrews View Post
bestclimb,
thanks for your input!

This goes back to my early post in the original thread about how smart ecomodders are!!
I agree, thank you all and bestclimb for you input! I see where you are coming from and can agree that you are right on (thanks for the edit).

Quote:
Originally Posted by MetroMPG View Post
Wayne - can you point us to any other fuel economy testing that you've done?
I have NOT done any other economy testing, no rolling tests or anything like that on this car. Frankly, I've never done it at all...I will and can though. Like I said above, I'm a very methodical person and I will make sure that when I do the testing, it's done right with a reduced amount of variables as possible.

I gotta start somewhere and since I already jumped off the cliff and bought this thing...I'm going to go ahead and run with what I have.

You guys are making me feel bad for not having more equipment! JK

Wayne, SC
__________________
An Idea:Open Source Hybrid/Hybrid Electric Car Project

Your mind is like a parachute, it only works when it's open.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 04:20 PM   #18 (permalink)
Smeghead
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Central AK
Posts: 933

escort - '99 ford escort sport
90 day: 42.38 mpg (US)

scoobaru - '02 Subaru Forester s
90 day: 28.65 mpg (US)
Thanks: 32
Thanked 146 Times in 97 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by divedaddy03 View Post
Alright, here is where you are starting to talk over my head, not because I can't understand but because I haven't learned it and the "why" of it yet. So, you are saying that a scangauge measures the same way the computer in the call measures therefore it's just as inaccurate so...what's the point, right? I'm guessing that an MPGuino is a home built system using an Arduino board? I'm liking this idea....seriously! That said, can my 2005 know and monitor the fuel flow feed and return or do I need to then splice the fuel lines and install a flow sensor?
The scan gauge, ultra gauge and the like (I have an ultra gauge and like it for what it is) get air flow (and other) data from the car's computer from the diagnostic port. Run it though some math and spit out a fuel consumption number. When calibrated they can be pretty accurate but that calibration is only valid for that specific engine configuration.

I would say that a Scan/Ultra gauge would be good enough to test non engine related mods.

The MPguino is an arduino project that splices to the car's speed sensor and fuel injector signal wires.

Fuel injectors are either on or off. rate of flow x time the injector is on gives you the quantity of fuel injected.

It does not matter what sensors are telling the computer what, the MPguino just counts how much time the injectors are injecting.


Having used both ultra gauge and MPguino. I find the Ultra Gauge more useful for all sorts of car data and for eco driving it's inaccuracy is acceptable. The MPguino gives less information but the data it gives can be more accurate.



Quote:
Originally Posted by divedaddy03 View Post
Guys, I'm kinda rushing into it, I understand your skepticism. I'm a VERY methodical thinker and I REALLY, REALLY want to run these test before I modify. I want to do this the right way but I'm telling you, it's going to be two months until I can even think of buying anything more than $20 to test with so...I've got to think of my options. Why can't I monitor the fuel consumption along side of mileage on a large round trip route through the country and do this 3 times, then modify and do it all over again?
Can you insure that you will take every corner exactly the same, apply the exact same amount of brake, and do it in exactly the same amount of time, with the same average, max, minimum speeds, with exactly the same amount of acceleration and verify that environmental factors have not effected you data?
__________________

Learn from the mistakes of others, that way when you mess up you can do so in new and interesting ways.

One mile of road will take you one mile, one mile of runway can take you around the world.
  Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to bestclimb For This Useful Post:
NachtRitter (05-06-2013), some_other_dave (05-06-2013), Xist (04-07-2021)
Old 05-06-2013, 08:55 PM   #19 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
JRMichler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Phillips, WI
Posts: 983

Nameless - '06 GMC Canyon
90 day: 37.45 mpg (US)
Thanks: 188
Thanked 415 Times in 266 Posts
AB testing has terrible potential for errors. See my sig line for summer and winter average mileage in my truck, and this thread for where those numbers came from: http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...yon-17070.html

I regularly make a 60 mile trip. My MPG for that particular trip ranges from 30 to over 42, depending on wind and temperature. I can get even lower mileage in a good snowstorm.

Look at my fuel log. You can easily see the seasonal variation and the tank to tank variation. For example, yesterday's fill was lower than normal for the range of temperatures because most of the miles (almost 90%) were against a headwind, while the previous fill had slightly warmer temperatures and no wind.

Yesterday's fill: Average temperature about 40 degrees and 31.6 MPG.
Previous fill: Average temperature about 65 degrees and 35.2 MPG.

A Scangauge or Ultragauge is useful for short tests on a straight stretch of road where you can test a change ABABAB several times before the temperature and wind change. Tank averages tell what happens in the real world, but it is difficult to control the variables well enough to truly measure the results of a change. I discuss this somewhat in my mod thread linked above.

Don't give up and please keep us updated.
__________________
The vacuum gauge plus wheel covers helped increase summer 2015 mileage to 38.5 MPG, while summer 2016 mileage was 38.6 MPG without the wheel covers. Drove 33,021 miles 2016-2018 at 35.00 MPG.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 09:40 PM   #20 (permalink)
herp derp Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Lawrence, KS
Posts: 1,049

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

Yukon - '03 GMC Yukon Denali
90 day: 13.74 mpg (US)
Thanks: 43
Thanked 331 Times in 233 Posts
2005 Throttle Body Ford Taurus 3.0L,OHV,SE $25 L and L Auto Parts, Inc. USA-NC(Grover) 1-704-487-7401 / 1-800-289-5474

Found with car-part

  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to 2000mc For This Useful Post:
Xist (04-07-2021)
Reply  Post New Thread


Tags
aworld4change, b.s., gadgetman, gadgetman groove, ron hatton

Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com