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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 11-08-2010, 02:28 PM   #31 (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 122 Times in 80 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by cr45 View Post
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.
Remove the O2. Closed loop versus open loops shouldn't result in a huge difference in fuel consumption.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 11-08-2010, 07:34 PM   #32 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Big Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Steppes of Central Indiana
Posts: 1,319

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 186 Times in 127 Posts
The GM AFM system works very well, but required enormous engineering resources and two decades to develop.

You think you can DIY, you are kidding yourself.

It would be far easier and cheaper to find a 5.3 GM engine and swap it in.
__________________
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 11-08-2010, 08:39 PM   #33 (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
positive thoughts, dave, positive thoughts.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2010, 08:47 PM   #34 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Silly-Con Valley
Posts: 1,479
Thanks: 201
Thanked 262 Times in 199 Posts
Chances are it won't see the kind of gains that the factory setup did/does. It may not even work. But much will be learned. Hopefully the knowledge will be shared with us.

So it won't be a waste, no matter what, and it could be really very cool. As long as the expectations are reasonable, and it's an enjoyable thing to put together, I fail to see a downside.

Even blowing up a motor usually teaches you something; and it's not exactly as if Dodge V8 motors are that rare. And odds of that happening are pretty small if you pay attention to what the motor is actually doing.

-soD
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2010, 10:19 PM   #35 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 66

Moostange - '07 Ford Mustang GT
Last 3: 21.8 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
The OEMs see a 5% improvement because they hardly use the cylinder deactivation. They don't use it at idle, or under moderate load. Mostly just during cruising. An ecomodder would use it much more often.

They deactivate the valves so that they can run the 4 cylinders with the best balance, so that the customer only sees a little vibration at certain rpms. They have to keep the air from coming in or out of the chamber so it doesn't mess with sensors.

On my Mustang, there are separate O2 sensors for each bank, so I could turn off fuel injectors from one bank, fake the signal from the O2 sensors, and the ECU would stay happy. The air from each bank joins after the sensors, so O2 from the one bank shouldn't get to the other bank. Honestly, the only problem I see is how bad the vibration is.

For your project, what you are looking at I think is basically individual throttle bodies, maybe sealed up better. The 3 valve 4.6l has flaps inline (Charge Motion Control Valves - Tumble generators) that could be turned into full fledged valves/throttles.

  Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2010, 11:10 PM   #36 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
5speed5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Los Alamos, NM
Posts: 134

TBSS - '08 Chevrolet Trailblazer SS 2WD
90 day: 19.36 mpg (US)

Wife's car - '09 Chevrolet Impala SS
90 day: 22.96 mpg (US)

Big Blue Hippo - '06 Chevrolet HHR 2LT
90 day: 45.99 mpg (US)
Thanks: 8
Thanked 20 Times in 11 Posts
I didn't realize you already had the 3.55 gears. I say go for the cylinder deactivation if you feel you are up to it. It sounds like you have the skill set needed, and what a feeling of accomplishment it would give you to finish it and have it work.

SlideWRX has a good point about the OEMs under-utilizing it. They have to be very conservative to prevent the owners from thinking something is wrong with the engine, whereas an ecomodder is much more forgiving.
__________________
Daily driver:
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2010, 11:16 PM   #37 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
I sure wish I could see results of "motoring" an engine- reverse dyno'ing it by spinning it with an electric motor and measuring power requirements to spin it. Data that shows how much power it takes to move that piston with valves going and with valves disabled would be most useful.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Frank Lee For This Useful Post:
user removed (11-12-2010)
Old 11-12-2010, 02:55 PM   #38 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Silly-Con Valley
Posts: 1,479
Thanks: 201
Thanked 262 Times in 199 Posts
That would be cool! I bet the OEMs do it, at least every once in a while.

It could be inferred from how much current it takes for a given-sized electric motor to spin the combustion engine to a given RPM. A motor intended for small EVs might be ideal.

You would, ideally, want to have the engine parts at their operating temperatures. You could run the engine for a while until it got to operating temp, then shut down the fuel and ignition and let the electric motor go.

This is sounding like something that a resourceful person could do at home...

-soD
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 04:44 PM   #39 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
The OEM I used to work at did that for the entire driveline.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 09:23 PM   #40 (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
Quote:
Originally Posted by some_other_dave View Post
That would be cool! I bet the OEMs do it, at least every once in a while.

It could be inferred from how much current it takes for a given-sized electric motor to spin the combustion engine to a given RPM. A motor intended for small EVs might be ideal.

You would, ideally, want to have the engine parts at their operating temperatures. You could run the engine for a while until it got to operating temp, then shut down the fuel and ignition and let the electric motor go.

This is sounding like something that a resourceful person could do at home...

-soD
Do you mean something like a starter motor with a disabled ignition and injection system? Yeah, its on the motor already.

  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 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com