Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > The Unicorn Corral
Register Now
 Register Now
 


Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 07-02-2015, 01:14 AM   #71 (permalink)
EV convert
 
oil pan 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico (USA)
Posts: 9,056

Sub - '84 Chevy Diesel Suburban C10
SUV
90 day: 19.5 mpg (US)

camaro - '85 Chevy Camaro Z28

Riot - '03 Kia Rio POS
Team Hyundai
90 day: 30.21 mpg (US)

Bug - '01 VW Beetle GLSturbo
90 day: 26.43 mpg (US)

Sub2500 - '86 GMC Suburban C2500
90 day: 11.95 mpg (US)

Snow flake - '11 Nissan Leaf SL
SUV
90 day: 141.63 mpg (US)
Thanks: 215
Thanked 2,962 Times in 2,306 Posts
Using that flawed logic you shouldn't be even considering propane or gasoline engines.
Diesels typically get 10% to 20% better fuel economy per gallon than their gasoline counter parts.

No ignore the "36% more energy" nonsense.
This was a comparison of BTUs per mile.

1 BTU of propane = 1 BTU of gasoline

When comparing BTUs per mile there is no deceptive energy per volume advantage. BTU per mile levels the playing field when comparing different fuels when trying to accomplish the same work.

__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 07-02-2015, 03:05 PM   #72 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Ivins UT
Posts: 212

the green machine :P - '97 Jeep Grand Cherokee ZJ
90 day: 20.92 mpg (US)

Thee s10 - '00 Chevy S10
90 day: 24.27 mpg (US)

Freedom - '05 Kawasaki Ninja 250EX
90 day: 75.55 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2
Thanked 22 Times in 20 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by oil pan 4 View Post
Using that flawed logic you shouldn't be even considering propane or gasoline engines.
Diesels typically get 10% to 20% better fuel economy per gallon than their gasoline counter parts.

No ignore the "36% more energy" nonsense.
This was a comparison of BTUs per mile.

1 BTU of propane = 1 BTU of gasoline

When comparing BTUs per mile there is no deceptive energy per volume advantage. BTU per mile levels the playing field when comparing different fuels when trying to accomplish the same work.
Being the op of this thread I was taking the discussion back to what I was talking about. I really don't care about BTU's and all that. I just know that having to richen a engine to drop temperature and leaning it out raises temperature sounds completely backwards to me and the excuses I hear about why that is make absolutely no sense at all.

If you were to take a container and put a 16 ft flue on it, then put a line in for fuel and a line for air you can have the fuel turned all the way up and control the burn in the container by controlling the air input alone. That's pretty much how a car is in the end, an enclosed container.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2015, 03:51 PM   #73 (permalink)
In the fasting lane
 
RedDevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
Posts: 3,854

Red Devil - '11 Honda Insight Elegance
Team Honda
90 day: 48 mpg (US)

It - '09 Hyundai I10 Active Cool
Team Hyundai
90 day: 29.76 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,605
Thanked 2,127 Times in 1,371 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by stovie View Post
I just know that having to richen a engine to drop temperature and leaning it out raises temperature sounds completely backwards to me and the excuses I hear about why that is make absolutely no sense at all.
At the danger of sounding like another excuse, I'll try explain the way I see it:

When you increase the amount of fuel for the same amount of air, you do increase the total volume of the exhaust gas (as the fuel will vaporize, whether completely burnt or not).
In a rich mixture you get more volume but as all the oxygen is used up, you won't produce more heat than is possible for that amount of oxygen.

In a perfect mixture most of the fuel gets burned and most of the oxygen is used up - but not all. The heat production is nearly the same as with the rich mixture, but as that heat is concentrated on a lesser volume of exhaust gas that gets hotter.

in a slightly lean mixture pretty much all the fuel gets burned, so the (even smaller volume of) exhaust gas gets as hot as it can be.

In an overly lean mixture the amount of heat produced drops faster than the total exhaust volume, I'd expect the temperature to finally drop again then.
__________________
2011 Honda Insight + HID, LEDs, tiny PV panel, extra brake pad return springs, neutral wheel alignment, 44/42 PSI (air), PHEV light (inop), tightened wheel nut.
lifetime FE over 0.17 Gmeter or 0.1 Mmile.



“We all know that light travels faster than sound. That's why certain people appear bright until you hear them speak.” ― Albert Einstein

Last edited by RedDevil; 07-02-2015 at 06:29 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2015, 06:23 PM   #74 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
IamIan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: RI
Posts: 690
Thanks: 371
Thanked 226 Times in 139 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by stovie View Post
I really don't care about BTU's and all that.
I think that might possibly be the underlining disconnect / breakdown in communication .. I don't see the benefit in trying to avoid the energy (BTUs) part of the topic.

BTU's , Joules, Wh , etc .. are units of energy.

Energy is the capacity to do work .. any kind of work.

Heat the air = a type of work
Heat the engine = a type of work.
Move the piston = a type of work.
Move air in the piston = a type of work.
Turn the shaft = a type of work.
Move the car = a type of work.
Make sound = a type of work.
etc... etc.

If you are talking about or thinking about .. the ability to do work .. any type of work .. you are talking about energy .. weather you intended to be or not... weather you like thinking about energy or not .. that is what is being described.
__________________
Life Long Energy Efficiency Enthusiast
2000 Honda Insight - LiFePO4 PHEV - Solar
2020 Inmotion V11 PEV ~30miles/kwh
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2015, 07:24 PM   #75 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,927
Thanks: 877
Thanked 2,019 Times in 1,302 Posts
I think I'll just tell gravity to leave me alone, been fighting it for 64 years.

regards
mech
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to user removed For This Useful Post:
pgfpro (07-03-2015), UFO (07-07-2015)
Old 07-02-2015, 07:37 PM   #76 (permalink)
herp derp Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Lawrence, KS
Posts: 1,044

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

Yukon - '03 GMC Yukon Denali
90 day: 15.11 mpg (US)
Thanks: 43
Thanked 324 Times in 229 Posts
On fuel to air ratios and temperatures-
I've known for a long time that an engine running lean runs hotter, but I wasn't ever very satisfied with the fuel cooling type answers. Today I found an answer that makes more sense to me.

Lean ratios burn slower, and expose the engine to combustion temperatures for longer durations.

While I prefer this explanation, I'm still looking for more supporting info. Using this idea, I would think that leaning out mixtures wouldn't have a direct corellation to fuel savings in part to more energy being wasted as heat.
Does anyone know how the ignition timing differs in cars w/ lean burn at a given rpm and map?
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2015, 12:18 AM   #77 (permalink)
EV convert
 
oil pan 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico (USA)
Posts: 9,056

Sub - '84 Chevy Diesel Suburban C10
SUV
90 day: 19.5 mpg (US)

camaro - '85 Chevy Camaro Z28

Riot - '03 Kia Rio POS
Team Hyundai
90 day: 30.21 mpg (US)

Bug - '01 VW Beetle GLSturbo
90 day: 26.43 mpg (US)

Sub2500 - '86 GMC Suburban C2500
90 day: 11.95 mpg (US)

Snow flake - '11 Nissan Leaf SL
SUV
90 day: 141.63 mpg (US)
Thanks: 215
Thanked 2,962 Times in 2,306 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by IamIan View Post
Heat the air = a type of work
Heat the engine = a type of work.
Move the piston = a type of work.
Move air in the piston = a type of work.
Turn the shaft = a type of work.
Move the car = a type of work.
Make sound = a type of work.
etc... etc.
Exactly why we should use units of volume to compare work being done. Makes perfect sense.
__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2015, 01:32 AM   #78 (permalink)
In Lean Burn Mode
 
pgfpro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 1,428

MisFit Talon - '91 Eagle Talon TSi
Team Turbocharged!
90 day: 41.03 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,031
Thanked 484 Times in 316 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Mechanic View Post
I think I'll just tell gravity to leave me alone, been fighting it for 64 years.

regards
mech
LMAO Awesome mech!!!!
__________________
Pressure Gradient Force
The Positive Side of the Number Line

  Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2015, 08:15 AM   #79 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
IamIan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: RI
Posts: 690
Thanks: 371
Thanked 226 Times in 139 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2000mc View Post
Lean ratios burn slower, and expose the engine to combustion temperatures for longer durations.

Does anyone know how the ignition timing differs in cars w/ lean burn at a given rpm and map?
When my Gen1 enters LB the ignition timing advances .. thus tiny bit more time .. I have not logged the exact map of it .. but yes .. at the same 2,000 RPMs LB or non-LB .. the LB has slightly advanced ignition timing for each combustion event portion.

Ignition timing is retarded when my Gen1 enter rich AFR... thus slightly less time.

- - - - -

Caution however in this line of thinking .. the combustion event might be a fraction of a second longer in LB and shorter in Rich... but the total time of that power stroke per ICE cycle (for the same RPM) is not changed.

- - - - - -

I find it also useful to think of more 'complete' combustion .. closer to stoich and in Rich there are enough unburned hydrocarbons (un-used fuel energy) in the exhaust ... to be used as fuel energy for the NOx Cat .. in LB there are not enough unburned hydrocarbons (unused fuel energy) in the exhaust to be used as fuel energy for the NOx Cat.

2nd thing I find useful .. is ICE efficiency .. the Gen1 Insight ICE was tested and shown that the LB operation improved the BSFC (efficiency) by ~20% .. soo more of the fuel energy was being efficiently converted to shaft work by the ICE while in LB.
__________________
Life Long Energy Efficiency Enthusiast
2000 Honda Insight - LiFePO4 PHEV - Solar
2020 Inmotion V11 PEV ~30miles/kwh
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2015, 09:20 AM   #80 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,927
Thanks: 877
Thanked 2,019 Times in 1,302 Posts
Would you attribute the 20% improvement to more efficient combustion, or greater throttle opening, or a combination of both in what Percentage?

regards
mech

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


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