Wai

[MGB=MPG]

Old Yellar .. its in the garage 1979 MGB 1800 CC /SU HIF 44
old English Iron
Details: Old Yellar - 1979 MGB Tourer Drop-Hood Coupé Fuel Economy - EcoModder.com

engine bay over view

[BHarvey]

My car is MAP. I don't have conclusive results that the warmer intake temp is correlating to increased efficiency other than what the UG tells me. Here's the test criteria for the block, which also increases the AI temp.

Ran a 10 mile stretch at 55 on cruise both ways, twice. With and without block.
Without averaged 41.6, AIT was 65F.
With averaged 44.6, AIT was 85F.

Since it was done purely on cruise I am inclined to believe that the benefit is purely aero, especially since seeing that the AIT needs to be above 100F to come down .05 gph.

[Tygen1]

GTStanger, make sure you control as many variables as you can for your expirement. Do as many ABABABABABABA's as you can to average out the variables. No doubt that a few of the A's and B's will range out but you just want some consistancy. If it's totally random, then you can't claim any benefit. It's tough testing, that's why more people don't do it. I did some aero testing once, it took a long time and the results were not conclusive, so it felt like wasted time. You gotta be pretty serious about ecomodding to do a lot of expirements. I just take what's proven and apply it.
I have a MAF system and have observed what appears to be a benefit, although I don't care to test for it, I keep it on for it's preceved benefits.

LOD is what I use these days to judge fuel economy potential of mods I'm looking to raise my lOD

[California98Civic]

I built a basic WAI for my 98 Civic DX Coupe. I am not running fully scientific tests, and I have no plans as of yet to buy and install any gauges. What I am doing is driving my real world commute with Tae Kwon Do focus on speed, route, traffic, hypermile techniques, and etc... I calculated 45.26 MPG on my last tank. I think I am pulling about the same this time. I'll know soon. One confound: I also reduced the weight 114 lbs at the same time, but all indications are that such a weight reduction would mean only about .5% in efficiency gains. Yet I picked up about 7% on that last tank. If I confirm it this time, I might feel pretty convinced. I know there are those on this forum who are "haters" of WAI or unconvinced. I wonder if anyone would like to discuss my empirical but not precisely scientific, fully controlled variable, results so far?

[SentraSE-R]

Cali, your improvement is real, but your testing is uncontrolled. Variables include fuel formulations, tank fill, gas quality, ambient temperature, dry/wet road conditions, traffic conditions, driver concentration, driver desire to see improvement, tire pressure, and much more. Let's just put up a number like 20 variables in your tank to tank observations.

ABA testing with instrumentation like a Scangauge or Ultragauge can eliminate almost all of those variables. When I did my WAI testing, I drove the same round-trip test loop on the same day with no traffic, using cruise control, using the same tire pressure. Temperatures and wind conditions were the same. Your tank to tank observations let all of those variables fly out (or in) the window.

[California98Civic]

Originally Posted by SentraSE-R

When I did my WAI testing, I drove the same round-trip test loop on the same day with no traffic, using cruise control, using the same tire pressure. Temperatures and wind conditions were the same. Your tank to tank observations let all of those variables fly out (or in) the window.

Thanks for this reply. I have been aware of these variables. I drive strictly the same speed, through the exact same traffic conditions, on the exact same 12 mile trip, round and round, until the tank is near empty (lot's of fun, huh?). I leave at a regular time and return at a regular time--I'm a rat on a tread mill! I live in Southern Cali, where temps range in the same ways day in and day out for weeks at a time. I have had a couple rainy days and one windy day and that is it for variation. So I take the point about controlling variables, and I do not claim to have fully controlled, but I think my conditions are quite a lot better than chaotically uncontrolled. Anyway, thanks, and I'll post further results with descriptions of conditions later, for the heck of it...

[SentraSE-R]

You're averaging out most of the variables, and doing a good job, from your description. But we're trying to measure a 2-3% change, and all it takes to toss that away is a couple of stabs on the brakes when someone merges in front of you, or one stomp on the gas pedal to pass someone going slower, on your daily commute.

I used to be a backup driver in a vanpool, doing the same route every day. Most days, our afternoon drive was an hour and ten minutes, but one accident, or one slow driver on the hills and curves, could turn any day's commute into a 2 hour drive, and one day/year on average, the sea would part, and we'd find ourselves home in 45 minutes. Tank to tank variability was well over 5%, regularly.

[BHarvey]

More data for you.

At an AI of 50F my gph is .3

[California98Civic]

Here's a photo of my beta version of the WAI I am adjusting. Seems to work quite well.

[suspectnumber961]

Originally Posted by MGB=MPG

where can i find a durable light weight cable controlled 2 inch pipe mixer valve ? any help?

One solution might be an 80's toyota carbed vacuum controlled flapper (vac motor) that uses manifold vacuum controlled by a sensor located in the bottom of the air filter housing. This setup is supposed to keep the intake temp at around 100F. I'd guess that you could move the sensor around so that you might be able to control your IAT in a range from under 100 F to over 100F? If the sensor was in ambient air it would try to raise the IAT temp under any conditions other than 100F ambient. If it was mounted on a coolant hose...it would only raise the IAT temp until the engine was halfway warmed up?