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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 08-13-2019, 07:07 AM   #381 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ecky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3,677

Gaptooth (retired) - '00 Honda Insight
Team Honda
Gen-1 Insights
90 day: 54.26 mpg (US)

Such Fit - '07 Honda Fit Sport
90 day: 41.27 mpg (US)

Connect - '15 Ford Transit Connect XL
90 day: 21.19 mpg (US)

K-sight - '00 Honda K-sight
90 day: 38.53 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,420
Thanked 1,538 Times in 972 Posts
Speed, and current mpg (since reset or starting driving). It also calculates other nifty things like miles driven EoC, there are 7 (?) different displays in total.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 08-14-2019, 05:31 PM   #382 (permalink)
Batman Junior
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 21,309

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

MPGiata - '90 Mazda Miata
90 day: 52.8 mpg (US)

Winter beater Metro - '00 Chevrolet Metro
90 day: 73.57 mpg (US)

Fancy Metro - '14 Mitsubishi Mirage top spec
90 day: 58.53 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3,084
Thanked 5,963 Times in 3,088 Posts
Where did you end up getting the MPGuino?
__________________
Latest mods test: 15 mods = 15% MPG improvement: A-B test, 2007 Honda Civic 1.8L, 5-speed
Ecodriving test:
Manual vs. automatic transmission MPG showdown: Nissan Micra 1.6L



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 08-14-2019, 06:23 PM   #383 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ecky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3,677

Gaptooth (retired) - '00 Honda Insight
Team Honda
Gen-1 Insights
90 day: 54.26 mpg (US)

Such Fit - '07 Honda Fit Sport
90 day: 41.27 mpg (US)

Connect - '15 Ford Transit Connect XL
90 day: 21.19 mpg (US)

K-sight - '00 Honda K-sight
90 day: 38.53 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,420
Thanked 1,538 Times in 972 Posts
Sendler had one. I bought the parts to assemble one and then he came along and offered to sell me an assembled one.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Ecky For This Useful Post:
MetroMPG (08-14-2019)
Old 08-29-2019, 09:20 AM   #384 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ecky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3,677

Gaptooth (retired) - '00 Honda Insight
Team Honda
Gen-1 Insights
90 day: 54.26 mpg (US)

Such Fit - '07 Honda Fit Sport
90 day: 41.27 mpg (US)

Connect - '15 Ford Transit Connect XL
90 day: 21.19 mpg (US)

K-sight - '00 Honda K-sight
90 day: 38.53 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,420
Thanked 1,538 Times in 972 Posts
Looks like I had a fuel economy break-through today. It's a bit early to say, but the theory is sound. And, I'm going to need to talk a little about ignition timing and cam phasing.

Ignition timing refers to when the ignition event is started in the cylinder. This can be advanced (happen sooner) or retarded (happen later). In engines with a distributor this is done by rotating the distributor, physically turning it, say, 5 degrees so that it trips 5 degrees sooner or later and fires the spark plug correspondingly. In engines with coil packs, ignition timing is 100% computer controlled and can happen any time.

After ignition it takes a brief period of time for the flame to propagate - ignition doesn't happen throughout the cylinder simultaneously, and it takes time to build up to peak pressure. There is an ideal crankshaft angle for peak cylinder pressure to happen, so you can start ignition sooner or later to try and hit this mark. If it happens too late, part of your "boom" goes out the exhaust, never having actually pushed the piston. This can lead to very hot exhaust gas temps and things like burnt valves. If you start it too soon, you're pushing straight down on a crankshaft which isn't yet at enough of an angle relative to the piston and you beat the crap out of your bearings.

I was surprised to learn in my research that ignition actually starts during the compression stroke, before the piston gets to the top, so for a brief period of time you actually have negative work, where the ignition event is starting but the piston is still traveling upward. Advance ignition too far and in addition to beating up your bearings, you have a lot of negative work happening, literally part of the combustion event is trying to spin the engine backward.

There's also the risk of detonation: since ignition happens during the compression stroke, the piston is still compressing the contents of the cylinder while the flame is propagating and pressure is building, and if cylinder pressure gets too high too soon (e.g. ignition is too early) you can cause the entire contents of the cylinder to auto-ignite just from heat and compression, much like how a diesel engine works. This is also called "knock".

Peak cylinder isn't just at a fixed number of degrees after ignition. Flame speed gets slower when you have a leaner or richer mixture than stoichiometric, and also gets slower when you have lower cylinder pressure, e.g. at part throttle. So, at part throttle you need more advanced (sooner) ignition than at full throttle to get peak cylinder pressure at the right time. Additionally, flame speed is basically the same whether you're running at 500rpm or 5000rpm, but since the piston is moving faster you need more advance to get it at the right time at higher RPM. I'm sure other factors can also impact it, such as humidity, temperature, etc., but the takeaway is that you need an ignition map which takes into account at the very least RPM and throttle.

It's generally considered more safe to have ignition timing that's too retarded than too advanced. Retarded ignition timing results in poor fuel economy, hot exhaust and less power. Slightly too advanced ignition timing can silently destroy your engine, even if you don't have any knock/detonation happening, though the risk is far higher at full throttle where the forces are greater. So, most advise NOT touching ignition timing without a dyno to measure power output, and to set ignition timing to the least amount of advance needed to make the most power (and then maybe back it off a degree or two).


~

In addition to fully adjustable ignition timing, K series engines also have the ability to rotate the intake camshaft forward or backward (up to 50 degrees total adjustment) on the fly. The main use of this, as I understand it, is to take advantage of resonance points and allow you to stuff more (or less) air into the cylinders. Typically you'll want much less cam advance at low throttle, increasing as throttle increases. You'll want the most advance at low RPM high throttle, decreasing as RPM increases.

A lot of advance at low throttle causes some overlap, where both intake and exhaust valves are open at the same time. Normally exhaust scavenging creates vacuum and pulls most of the spent combustion gasses out of the cylinder before the intake valves open to let fresh air in. However, when there's a lot of manifold vacuum and both sets of vales are open, manifold vacuum prevents all of the hot exhaust gasses from making it out of the cylinder.

This has a sortof similar effect to running lean burn; you end up filling the cylinder with a lot of inert gas and it has another chance for the heat in it to do useful work. It also allows for the throttle plate to be a lot more open, since there's a bunch of exhaust gas that's keeping some of your intake charge from getting into the cylinder. Essentially, it reduces pumping and vacuum losses.

HOWEVER, at a given manifold vacuum, you have a much leaner and less dense air and fuel mixture, the more intake cam advance you have. Which means, a timing map that works at 0 degrees intake cam advance does not apply to, say, 40 degrees of cam advance. You need a lot more ignition advance at higher MAP.

~

This brings me to this morning. I'm still in the process of re-tuning all of my fuel maps after fixing my temperature compensation curves, and yesterday I averaged ~38mpg on my way to work while running 40 degrees cam advance across the entire rev range. This morning I had the idea to advance timing at part throttle based on how much more throttle I had observed I needed to make the same power at higher cam advance. I arrived at work today with my MPGuino showing just under 50mpg, and saw as high as 55mpg cruising @ 68mph.



EDIT: It's worth noting that at 40 degrees intake cam advance, the engine stumbles and runs rough (probably from too much EGR) at very low RPM low throttle, and my timing maps are probably nowhere near ideal, but it was fun to see that such improvement is on the table.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_20190829_070512.jpg
Views:	33
Size:	40.0 KB
ID:	26778  

Last edited by Ecky; 08-29-2019 at 10:07 AM..
  Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Ecky For This Useful Post:
Daox (08-29-2019), elhigh (09-09-2019), Gasoline Fumes (08-29-2019), mpg_numbers_guy (09-08-2019), Pressingonward (09-08-2019)
Old 09-08-2019, 01:04 PM   #385 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Washington State
Posts: 8
Thanks: 4
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Well written post with great info. It will be cool to see your fuel economy numbers as you get your timing tuned in.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2019, 10:21 PM   #386 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ecky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3,677

Gaptooth (retired) - '00 Honda Insight
Team Honda
Gen-1 Insights
90 day: 54.26 mpg (US)

Such Fit - '07 Honda Fit Sport
90 day: 41.27 mpg (US)

Connect - '15 Ford Transit Connect XL
90 day: 21.19 mpg (US)

K-sight - '00 Honda K-sight
90 day: 38.53 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,420
Thanked 1,538 Times in 972 Posts
I'm noticing it takes a very long time to get the engine fully warmed up. After a cold start I might see cruising at 38-42mpg, and it will gradually creep up (after an hour and a half or so) to 60-65mpg. 90% of my trips are 30 minutes or less. I'd love to get the oil warmer from the RSX but that will require a different water pump housing as well as a different length serpentine belt. This one will probably get put off until next year.

Going to see about taking my transmission to someone smarter than me soon, and getting it made right. I'm fairly certain the countershaft has play in it.

In other news I did my first (7500 mile) oil change and adjusted the valve lash in this and my Honda Fit today. The Fit engine is pretty darn clean for its 220k miles.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_20190908_082402.jpg
Views:	40
Size:	103.2 KB
ID:	26817   Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_20190908_113502.jpg
Views:	40
Size:	101.5 KB
ID:	26818  

Last edited by Ecky; 09-08-2019 at 10:28 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2019, 10:34 AM   #387 (permalink)
Master Novice
 
elhigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SE USA - East Tennessee
Posts: 2,283

Josie - '87 Toyota Pickup
90 day: 27.51 mpg (US)

Felicia - '09 Toyota Prius Base
90 day: 47.77 mpg (US)
Thanks: 403
Thanked 591 Times in 433 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecky View Post
I'm noticing it takes a very long time to get the engine fully warmed up.
If I had to guess I would say your K engine has nearly nothing to do; unless you're flogging it with dyno or drag pulls it's going to run super cool most of the time.

This engine came out of what again, an Accord? TSX - same thing, essentially. A car which weighs literally twice what the K-sight does, and has poorer aero to boot. No wonder the engine runs cool.

I wonder if you even need the radiator fan.
__________________




Lead or follow. Either is fine.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to elhigh For This Useful Post:
Ecky (09-09-2019)
Old 09-09-2019, 11:33 AM   #388 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ecky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3,677

Gaptooth (retired) - '00 Honda Insight
Team Honda
Gen-1 Insights
90 day: 54.26 mpg (US)

Such Fit - '07 Honda Fit Sport
90 day: 41.27 mpg (US)

Connect - '15 Ford Transit Connect XL
90 day: 21.19 mpg (US)

K-sight - '00 Honda K-sight
90 day: 38.53 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,420
Thanked 1,538 Times in 972 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by elhigh View Post
If I had to guess I would say your K engine has nearly nothing to do; unless you're flogging it with dyno or drag pulls it's going to run super cool most of the time.

This engine came out of what again, an Accord? TSX - same thing, essentially. A car which weighs literally twice what the K-sight does, and has poorer aero to boot. No wonder the engine runs cool.

I wonder if you even need the radiator fan.
I'm running the stock 1.0L radiator, which I believe is half the size of the TSX rad. On a warm day if I'm idling, the fan does cycle. Driving, never.

Typical driving the TPS usually reads 3-5% even with my tall gearing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2019, 03:20 PM   #389 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
mpg_numbers_guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Michigan/Virginia
Posts: 1,160

Insight - '06 Honda Insight MT
Team Honda
Gen-1 Insights
90 day: 81.29 mpg (US)

Mom's Prius (my driving) - '08 Toyota Prius
Team Toyota
Last 3: 60.96 mpg (US)

Insight Delivery Driving Log - '06 Honda Insight MT
90 day: 70.7 mpg (US)
Thanks: 274
Thanked 383 Times in 293 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecky View Post
Typical driving the TPS usually reads 3-5% even with my tall gearing.
Curious, have you ever tried P&G once to see what kind of mileage you get? 80% load 6th gear, then EOC, etc.
__________________
2006 New Formula Red Honda Insight MT, 267k: (Build thread)
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2019, 04:17 PM   #390 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: WV
Posts: 1,117

IGL - '04 Saturn Ion
Team Saturn
90 day: 56.19 mpg (US)

grayOS (personal use) - '19 Mitsubishi Outlander Sport ES
90 day: 30.71 mpg (US)
Thanks: 46
Thanked 259 Times in 202 Posts
He can’t use 6th gear at the moment but I imagine the numbers would be amazing

__________________
My current Ecotec project...


My last Ecotec project...
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com