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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 10-28-2010, 12:32 AM   #21 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: belgium, wi
Posts: 262

Bus - '94 Ford School Bus huge

Stupid - '01 Chevy Blazer LS
90 day: 21.38 mpg (US)

hawk - '00 Honda Superhawk
Thanks: 2
Thanked 24 Times in 19 Posts
Well, like my students, this has gotten unreasonable. Good luck, I will wait to see the patents.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 10-28-2010, 02:08 AM   #22 (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 145 Times in 97 Posts
The way I look at it even if you get past the valving and ECU O2 sensor issues you have a couple hurtals to over come.

The balance of the engine is engineered for all 8 jugs functioning, it may/will run rough. (this may or may not be an issue mechanical and would be up to you if it is a comfort/annoyance issue)

The biggest one efficient wise is that you are still accelerating and stopping and accelerating a bunch of mass in the pistons and the of scrapping the rings along the cylinders of the deactivated jugs several thousand times a second.

Got anything against pulse and glide?
__________________

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
Old 10-28-2010, 08:01 AM   #23 (permalink)
MPGuino Supporter
 
t vago's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 1,766

The Karen-Mobile - '05 Dodge Magnum SXT
Team Dodge
90 day: 26.72 mpg (US)

Fiat Dakota - '00 Dodge Dakota SLT RWD Quad Cab
90 day: 16.67 mpg (US)

The Red Sled - '01 Dodge Durango SLT 4WD
90 day: 16.96 mpg (US)
Thanks: 799
Thanked 681 Times in 437 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by bestclimb View Post
The balance of the engine is engineered for all 8 jugs functioning, it may/will run rough. (this may or may not be an issue mechanical and would be up to you if it is a comfort/annoyance issue)
I expect to feel some difference from the engine if 4 cylinders are deactivated. However, I don't think this is such a big issue from a mechanical longevity standpoint, as the Chrysler 5.7L MDS system shuts off the exact same cylinders as I had considered, and the only thing I have read about is that some drivers complain of a low vibration between 1100 and 1800 RPMs when MDS is engaged.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bestclimb View Post
The biggest one efficient wise is that you are still accelerating and stopping and accelerating a bunch of mass in the pistons and the of scrapping the rings along the cylinders of the deactivated jugs several thousand times a second.
It's called friction losses. Can't get around that.

However, it's not much of a concern. If the Big 3 can make variable displacement work on their production engines, and can get significant improvements in fuel economy, even with friction losses of the deactivated cylinders, then it's not much of a problem.

I think you meant to say "minutes" instead of "seconds," though. If my V8 were somehow able to make its pistons reciprocate thousands of times per second, I don't think it'd live for much longer than a few seconds.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bestclimb View Post
Got anything against pulse and glide?
It's unrealistic for a daily commute.
__________________
The Fiat Dakota


The Karen-mobile


The Red Sled
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2010, 09:35 AM   #24 (permalink)
Mechanical Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 190

The Truck - '02 Dodge Ram 1500 SLT Sport
90 day: 15.15 mpg (US)

The Van 2 - '06 Honda Odyssey EX
90 day: 22.63 mpg (US)

GoKart - '14 Hyundai Elantra GT base 6MT
90 day: 29.92 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by t vago View Post
where would I find a decent diff gear that will fit my truck without me having to do a lot of machining work to make fit, and without having to spend a total of much more than $1000? I've got the tallest available 3.55 gear already.
Try the following:
Chrysler / Dodge / Plymouth Dakota Rear Differentials Chrysler 9.25 Ring & Pinion Sets Auto Parts: YUKON GEAR,YUKON AXLE,YUKON,RING PINION,RING,PINION,GEAR,DIFFERENTIAL,CROWN WHEEL,CROWN PINION,CROWN,CHRYSLER 9.25,CHRYSLER 9 1/4,CHRYSLER,RICHMOND GEA

They list a 3.21 gearset for the 9 1/4 axle for less than $300, and I seriously doubt a shop would charge more than $300 to do an install. I have that ratio in my 1988 Ramcharger with 235/75r15 (and 275/50r15) tires, but it's in an 8 1/4 axle. The 9 1/4 in my Ram has the 3.55 like yours, but with 265/65r17 tires.

I honestly think you're barking up the wrong tree if you want cost-effective efficiency improvements that will be reliable. As you state the valve arrangement of the 4.7L isn't suited to tried-and-true methods of variable displacement. Any home-brewed solution for the existing valve arrangement is likely to be insanely expensive or unreliable enough to cause major engine damage, or likely both. You may be-LIE-ve you can do it, but I wish you luck while recommending you divert attention elsewhere. Maybe modifying the heads to accept the double-rocker style actuators would have potential for reliable success, but again it would be quite expensive.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2010, 07:10 PM   #25 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Big Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Steppes of Central Indiana
Posts: 1,313

The Red Baron - '00 Ford F-350 XLT
90 day: 27.99 mpg (US)

Impala Phase Zero - '96 Chevrolet Impala SS
90 day: 21.03 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 182 Times in 123 Posts
This is soooo beyond the shade-tree mechanic on so many levels.

If you want displacement on demand, go find a 5.3 or L92 GM engine. Their system works really well. Don't expect more than a 3-5% improvement in MPG.

You want mileage, swap in a Cuymmins 4BT3.9 diesel. There are now commercially available kits for that swap. Expect a 25-50% improvement in MPG.
__________________
2000 Ford F-350 SC 4x2 6 Speed Manual
4" Slam
3.08:1 gears and Gear Vendor Overdrive
Rubber Conveyor Belt Air Dam
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2010, 10:01 PM   #26 (permalink)
MPGuino Supporter
 
t vago's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 1,766

The Karen-Mobile - '05 Dodge Magnum SXT
Team Dodge
90 day: 26.72 mpg (US)

Fiat Dakota - '00 Dodge Dakota SLT RWD Quad Cab
90 day: 16.67 mpg (US)

The Red Sled - '01 Dodge Durango SLT 4WD
90 day: 16.96 mpg (US)
Thanks: 799
Thanked 681 Times in 437 Posts
In order to test whether variable displacement will or will not work on my engine, I will move ahead on my own. I will fabricate spacers out of 16 ga Home Depot sheet steel that will simulate the closure of the intake ports of cylinders 1, 4, 6, and 7. I will then install said spacers onto the engine of my truck, with gaskets. I will then electrically disconnect the fuel injectors for cylinders 1, 4, 6, and 7. I will then perform an A-B-A test with this setup. I will then figure out what fuel economy gain I received, if any, and will report back here.

I do appreciate the advice and suggestions you all have given, though. Thank you. However, I do ask that from now on, that any advice or suggestions given in this thread directly relates to supporting this project.
__________________
The Fiat Dakota


The Karen-mobile


The Red Sled
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2010, 08:20 PM   #27 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Silly-Con Valley
Posts: 1,417
Thanks: 173
Thanked 226 Times in 174 Posts
It will be interesting to see the results! It's a neat project to tinker with, regardless of how much or how little it saves you.

-soD
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2010, 09:54 PM   #28 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
roflwaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,490

Camryaro - '92 Toyota Camry LE V6
90 day: 31.12 mpg (US)

Red - '00 Honda Insight

Prius - '05 Toyota Prius

3 - '18 Tesla Model 3
90 day: 152.47 mpg (US)
Thanks: 349
Thanked 120 Times in 79 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by t vago View Post
In order to test whether variable displacement will or will not work on my engine, I will move ahead on my own. I will fabricate spacers out of 16 ga Home Depot sheet steel that will simulate the closure of the intake ports of cylinders 1, 4, 6, and 7. I will then install said spacers onto the engine of my truck, with gaskets. I will then electrically disconnect the fuel injectors for cylinders 1, 4, 6, and 7. I will then perform an A-B-A test with this setup. I will then figure out what fuel economy gain I received, if any, and will report back here.

I do appreciate the advice and suggestions you all have given, though. Thank you. However, I do ask that from now on, that any advice or suggestions given in this thread directly relates to supporting this project.
Try it w/o the spacers first. I have a feeling putting spacers to close off the intake port will simulate the highest pumping losses you could see for those cylinders (throttle is not open). Just disconnect the FIs for whatever cylinders and see if there is any improvement. Make sure you can keep test conditions as consistent as possible. For instance if your Dakota stays in third w/ the TCC unlocked after the FIs are disconnected during a highway run, when you're doing the run w/ the FIs connected do it in third w/ the TCC unlocked.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2010, 08:48 AM   #29 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: ireland
Posts: 86
Thanks: 7
Thanked 43 Times in 26 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by roflwaffle View Post
Try it w/o the spacers first. I have a feeling putting spacers to close off the intake port will simulate the highest pumping losses you could see for those cylinders (throttle is not open). Just disconnect the FIs for whatever cylinders and see if there is any improvement. Make sure you can keep test conditions as consistent as possible. For instance if your Dakota stays in third w/ the TCC unlocked after the FIs are disconnected during a highway run, when you're doing the run w/ the FIs connected do it in third w/ the TCC unlocked.
Just disconnecting the four FIs will not work as the oxygen sensor will pick up on a lean AFR and the engine management will try to adjust by adding extra fuel.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2010, 07:52 AM   #30 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
comptiger5000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 544

RaceJeep - '98 Jeep Grand Cherokee (ZJ) 5.9 Limited
90 day: 13.62 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 26 Times in 23 Posts
Even if 3.55s are the tallest factory gearing, there may be other gearsets available to fit your axles. Do you know offhand what axles are in that truck?

__________________
Call me crazy, but I actually try for mpg with this Jeep:



Typical driving: Back in Rochester for school, driving is 60 - 70% city
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Thoughts on Direct Injection (New Camaro, Hyundai Sonata) RH77 The Lounge 3 05-27-2010 09:24 PM
thermal thoughts owly Introductions 8 01-27-2010 11:29 PM
Honda is developing a variable compression automobile engine: MPG up 7.4% MetroMPG EcoModding Central 22 04-23-2009 10:59 PM
Variable reluctance VSS mossman OpenGauge / MPGuino FE computer 12 03-30-2009 07:42 AM
MetroMPG.com mailbag: is lowest RPM really best for max MPG with big displacement? MetroMPG Hypermiling / EcoDriver's Ed 20 01-06-2008 01:00 PM



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