Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum - EcoModder.com

Page 1 of 2

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

EcoModder.com (https://ecomodder.com/forum/)

- DIY / How-to (https://ecomodder.com/forum/diy-how.html)

- - WPC Metal Treatment/Reduced Friction (https://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/wpc-metal-treatment-reduced-friction-32415.html)

Davo53209@yahoo.com

07-21-2015 08:43 PM

WPC Metal Treatment/Reduced Friction

When it comes to improving fuel economy, my overall goal has been to increase the efficiency of an engine. Recently, I came across a process known as WPC engine treatment which in summary, is micro-shot peening. Much like conventional shot peening, it makes the metal part stronger, while adding micro-dimples that act as oil reserves to the piece. This inherently makes the part slicker, whereby reducing friction.

My question to everyone is this; would increased friction add to fuel economy?

WPC - Metal Surface Treatment

http://ep.yimg.com/ty/cdn/twincamtec...011pricing.jpg

deejaaa

07-21-2015 09:38 PM

friction on the cylinder walls maybe. anywhere else i can't imagine. crank, cam ride on bearings. parasitic loss from oil slosh can't be fixed either.

Davo53209@yahoo.com

07-22-2015 05:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deejaaa (Post 487588)

friction on the cylinder walls maybe. anywhere else i can't imagine. crank, cam ride on bearings. parasitic loss from oil slosh can't be fixed either.

So what you're saying is that for the biggest bang for my buck would be to have the cylinder walls treated. That's interesting because the engine building instructor at the local tech college once told me that fuel economy can be improved by the cylinders.

What would you say about having the treatment applied to the pistons, wrist pins, and piston skirts as well?

deejaaa

07-22-2015 05:03 PM

those areas are not touching anything except wrist pins, in a VERY SMALL area... the only friction would be parasitic, such as splash.
i was hoping someone else would join in. your title sounded like unicorn material and i had to read it first to understand what you meant.

oldtamiyaphile

07-22-2015 08:05 PM

My little Fiat engine has 'plasma coated' cylinder walls using 'formula one' technology. With the aim of reducing internal friction, quite a few OEM's are doing it :D

Davo53209@yahoo.com

07-23-2015 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldtamiyaphile (Post 487717)

My little Fiat engine has 'plasma coated' cylinder walls using 'formula one' technology. With the aim of reducing internal friction, quite a few OEM's are doing it :D

That's interesting to hear because I investigated that option a few years ago. The problem was that each search on plasma coating seemed to lead me back to ceramic coating. Would you be willing to elaborate what exactly it was that you had done or even the process if possible? I've trying to determine if there's a distinction between the two.

darcane

07-23-2015 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davo53209@yahoo.com (Post 487582)

My question to everyone is this; would [reduced] friction add to fuel economy?

Quote:

The SKYACTIV-G engine reduces friction inside the engine by 30%, improves oil pump efficiency by 74%, improves water pump efficiency by 31% and reduces friction in pistons, rods and crank shaft by 25%.

The Skyactiv 2.0L uses 15% less fuel than the old 2.0L Mazda engine. Partially due to friction, but it is also direct injected, higher compression, and has improved VVT. So, who knows how much is due to friction. Also, I'm sure significant design changes were made to reduce friction rather than just a surface finish.

So, can it help? Yes. Is this particular process worth doing for improving fuel economy and an existing engine? Very unlikely, unless it is cheap and you are rebuilding the engine anyways. And the prices you posted don't look cheap to me...

Davo53209@yahoo.com

07-23-2015 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darcane (Post 487802)

Simple answer: yes.

This is a focus on modern engine design in order to improve efficiency. Mazda's claim for the Skyactiv-D engine is that they reduced friction by 30%

Mazda Engines - Skyactiv-G Gasoline Engines | Mazda Canada

The Skyactiv 2.0L uses 15% less fuel than the old 2.0L Mazda engine. Partially due to friction, but it is also direct injected, higher compression, and has improved VVT. So, who knows how much is due to friction. Also, I'm sure significant design changes were made to reduce friction rather than just a surface finish.

So, can it help? Yes. Is this particular process worth doing for improving fuel economy and an existing engine? Very unlikely, unless it is cheap and you are rebuilding the engine anyways. And the prices you posted don't look cheap to me...

The intent is at some point to rebuild; but for now, I'm exploring potential options.

gone-ot

07-23-2015 10:33 PM

GM is claiming "diamond'ized" cylinder wall coating increases FE in current engines, but you couldn't tell it by our Cruze numbers.

curiosity

08-19-2024 09:54 PM

Reduced friction, improved fuel efficiency, cheap and simple to do?

Quote:

Originally Posted by darcane (Post 487802)

This is a focus on modern engine design in order to improve efficiency. Mazda's claim for the Skyactiv-D engine is that they reduced friction by 30%

The Skyactiv 2.0L uses 15% less fuel than the old 2.0L Mazda engine.

...unless it is cheap and you are rebuilding the engine anyways.

XcelPlus showed a similar reduction in friction (~30%):
Refer FAA testing

Fuel efficiency improvements will vary from car to car e.g.
Le Tourneau Uni testing +36%

If you want to experiment XcelPlus is a simple and cheap way of coating the moving parts in an engine.

:-)

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:41 AM.

Page 1 of 2

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page