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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05-28-2012, 06:38 PM   #1 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orange Country, CA
Posts: 102

Fiesta - '12 Ford Fiesta SE
90 day: 31.45 mpg (US)
Thanks: 36
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
High Compression Low Octane

I recently got a 2012 Ford Fiesta (2 year lease) and it has a 1.6L 4cyl engine with a quite high compression ratio, 11:1. A few months ago I got a repair manual for my old car that I'm selling, 97 Chrysler Sebring Convertible. It has a 2.5L V6 with a compression ratio of 9.4:1. There is a side note in the manual that CR a little above 9:1 usually requires premium gas to operate correctly, the Sebring gets away with 87 octane due to timing adjustment and other stuff.

In the owner's manual for my new Fiesta there are 2 sections about gas, 1 says 87 octane is the minimum, while the other says it's the recommmended gas. Since it has such a high CR, I was wondering if there would be any benefit to using higher octane gas. I know higher octane would have anywhere from absolutely none to no benefit in my Sebring, but considering the Fiesta has such a high CR, maybe the timing and other stuff would be adjusted by the car's computer to use the higher octane.

I calculated the benefit and with gas at about $4.34/gal the 91 octane would have be about 5% more efficient that 87, with a 20 cent difference in price and originally getting either 30 or 33mpg.

Unfortunately my Ultraguage was stolen so I can't use it to see the actual timing advance with the different octanes, will just have to use avg mpg.

I'm just curious that if one works should the reverse:
hi CR - hi octane needed - low octane used = less power/efficiency
hi CR - low octane needed - hi octane used = ?

The dealer gave me a full tank of gas when I got my car and got 30 mpg on that. I'm going to use 2 tanks of Shell 87 octane (almost done with the 1st) then try 1 on 91, see if there is a noticeable difference with similar driving styles.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 05-28-2012, 08:37 PM   #2 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
mechman600's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Langley, BC
Posts: 1,228

Fusion - '16 Ford Fusion Hybrid SE
Thanks: 190
Thanked 275 Times in 168 Posts
Different cars react differently to high octane gas. It makes no difference what gas I put in my Matrix, so I go with the lowest octane. The best way to find out is to try it, so it looks like you are on the right track.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2012, 10:10 PM   #3 (permalink)
...beats walking...
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,190
Thanks: 179
Thanked 1,525 Times in 1,126 Posts
...they (Ford) are playing with the valve-timing so as to vary the effective-CR (which is functional combination of static-CR & dynamic-CR) as engine load and speed change.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2012, 10:47 PM   #4 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,927
Thanks: 877
Thanked 2,024 Times in 1,304 Posts
Both camshafts can be controlled independently on the Fiesta with throttle by wire and electronic timing control. My last tank in my Fiesta was 47 MPG on cheap Wal Mart gas ($3.409 a gallon). My gauge read 51 when I refilled. I tried 91 octane 0 alcohol gas and got about 2-3 MPG better per tank average, but it cost $4.199 a gallon. When the regular was $3.909 a gallon 6 weeks ago the difference in mileage just about covered the difference in cost, but now that regular E10 has dropped to the point where the difference is 70 cents a gallon it is not even close.

The difference in technology between the Fiesta and your old Chrysler is like the difference in the first us jet, the P80 and a F15. Look at the new SKYACTIV tech from Mazda to see the next step in engine technology.

regards
Mech
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to user removed For This Useful Post:
capnbass91 (05-30-2012)
Old 05-29-2012, 09:57 AM   #5 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
mechman600's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Langley, BC
Posts: 1,228

Fusion - '16 Ford Fusion Hybrid SE
Thanks: 190
Thanked 275 Times in 168 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Tele man View Post
...they (Ford) are playing with the valve-timing so as to vary the effective-CR
Almost Atkinson-esque, no? Probably close, but not close to enough to have to say it out loud.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2012, 03:55 PM   #6 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 1,756

spyder2 - '00 Toyota MR2 Spyder
Thanks: 104
Thanked 407 Times in 312 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechman600 View Post
Almost Atkinson-esque, no? Probably close, but not close to enough to have to say it out loud.
Well, all cams have their natural peak volumetric efficiency speed, and most engines with 1 cam profile have this peak rather high in the rev range, so basically all engines have some sort of Atkinson-esque stuff going on at low engine speed. With cam phasing I believe what happens is that at lower rpm they advance the intake cam so that it closes earlier if you need more power, although if you have too much overlap then you end up with a lot of fresh, hot exhaust trapped in the cylinder and you have a knock problem.

As an example, I think the new Subaru FA20 (on the BRZ/FRS, and some variant will appear in the new WRX) the intake cam seems to have a volumetric efficiency peak in the 6000s rpm, so it's very possible that the actual cam duration is longer than the cam duration on a Prius for example.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2012, 04:01 AM   #7 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: winterpeg, manisnowba
Posts: 211

clank - '99 jeep tj sport
90 day: 17.32 mpg (US)
Thanks: 9
Thanked 18 Times in 18 Posts
it may also have to do with most newer cylinder heads having a spherical-ish, non-protruding combustion chamber

reminds me of "l heads" of the flat head fords 6.0:1cr on 87(i think?; wasn't born) vs. lead fuel of the 60's 10:1 or more; vs 80' 8.0-9.0:1 cr
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2012, 05:04 PM   #8 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,927
Thanks: 877
Thanked 2,024 Times in 1,304 Posts
Green Car Congress: Details on Nissan

This gives you some ideas about high compression ratio with 13 to 1 and supercharging in a 3 cyl 1.2 liter engine.

regards
Mech
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to user removed For This Useful Post:
mechman600 (05-30-2012)
Old 05-30-2012, 08:00 PM   #9 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
mechman600's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Langley, BC
Posts: 1,228

Fusion - '16 Ford Fusion Hybrid SE
Thanks: 190
Thanked 275 Times in 168 Posts
Good read.
Quote:
The main concept for reducing pumping loss is the late intake valve closing (LIVC) Miller cycle with high compression ratio. This enables a high expansion ratio even in LIVC state. In the HR12DDR, intake valve closing (IVC) is retarded until 100 ° after bottom dead center (ABDC)—corresponding to an effective CR of about 7:1. To reduce the rest of the pumping loss on un-boosted partial load, Nissan combined internal EGR with exhaust continuously variable valve timing (CVTC) and external EGR.
And a magnetic clutch driven supercharger. Like Mad Max?
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 12:25 AM   #10 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
mwebb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 513

no nickname , it's just a car - '04 volkswagen golf tdi
Thanks: 2
Thanked 101 Times in 74 Posts
EGR reduces "knock"

although if you have too much overlap then you end up with a lot of fresh, hot exhaust trapped in the cylinder and you have a knock problem.

those "hot gases" are inert and do not support combustion , they reduce combustion pressure and by so doing reduce
Combustion Temperature
they absolutely do not cause "ping" or "knock"
they reduce it

they effectively reduce engine displacement by diluting the available combustion chamber size with inert gases , creating a kinda of a cushion of a compressible gas that does not combust inside the combustion chamber

they are EGR
having said that
cooler temperature EGR is better than hotter temperature EGR

for the reduction of
NOX

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




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