A crackpot idea - Page 2 - Fuelly Forums

Android Users - Coming Soon! - Migrating from aCar 4.8 to 5.0

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 10-24-2006, 05:55 PM   #11
Registered Member
 
Rstb88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 73
Country: United States
Its such a good idea it makes my head hurt... when i first read sludgys post before any of the other I just thought to myself, just buy a diesel then read his closer and he wants a gasoline one.
__________________

__________________
It just came to me about blogging lol. Its like an orgasm a few good shots and the rest is dribbles lol!
Rstb88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2006, 07:00 AM   #12
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 682
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rstb88
Its such a good idea it makes my head hurt... when i first read sludgys post before any of the other I just thought to myself, just buy a diesel then read his closer and he wants a gasoline one.
Diesels could effectively use "Atkinson" VVT too. Diesels are frequently designed with high compression ratios (20-22:1) in order to help cold starting. High compression ratios increase bearing loads and frictional losses more than any energy derived from more expansion. Optimum diesel efficiency occurs at about 15-16:1.

Diesel VVT would allow high compression ratios at startup, after which the intake valves would be retarded to lower the compression ratio. The expansion ratio would stay the same, so this would lower both the frictional loads, and still keep the high expansion ratio, for a double benefit.

I already have a diesel F350, and I hate it. It gets worse mileage than either of my GM half tons, and it rides, well, like a truck. I can't wait to trade it for a new GMC or Chevy. Two more years of payments..... argghhh

Ford ought to rename it the "Powerjoke".
__________________

__________________
Capitalism: The cream rises. Socialism: The scum rises.
Sludgy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2006, 07:49 PM   #13
DRW
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 615
Country: United States
As long as we're daydreaming in this thread, how about this for a wacky idea? First add lean burn to the car, then change the A/F ratio as a function of engine air consumption. In other words, as air consumption decreases (light throttle) set the A/F ratio really lean, like 20:1, so power is reduced not only by the ammount of air going into the engine, but also by the weak A/F ratio. Then as airflow increases bump up the A/F ratio for more power. Power would be reduced at light throttle without closing the throttle too much, reducing pumping losses. It's similar to coasting in gear with the fuel off and throttle wide open, but not quite. As more power is needed, it's supplied by a larger percentage of fuel, so airflow through the engine stays more even. It's not quite like a diesel, but closer than the way gas engines are currently run.


Then meter some EGR gasses to act as a type of WAI to help promote atomization of the fuel, as well as the usuall EGR benefits.
I think it could work.
__________________
Dave W.
DRW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2006, 11:33 PM   #14
Registered Member
 
omgwtfbyobbq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,516
Country: United States
The problem with any lean burn system is NOx, just like diesels.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormulaTwo
I think if i could get that type of FE i would have no problem driving a dildo shaped car.
omgwtfbyobbq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2006, 12:34 AM   #15
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 541
Country: United States
Yeah , I agree.
While it is possible to reduce to mixture to gain FE in extremely light load conditions I belive that the engine is dirty.

An excessively lean mix doesnt burn well causing rises in bad gasses.
onegammyleg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 06:39 AM   #16
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 682
Country: United States
http://www.ae-plus.com/Technology%20...une%202006.htm

Fiat apparently though of the idea too, but BMW beat them to production.
__________________
Capitalism: The cream rises. Socialism: The scum rises.
Sludgy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 06:58 AM   #17
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 541
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sludgy
but BMW beat them to production.
Fiat tends to focus on the cheap compact car market whereas BMW doesn't.
They probably could justify the complexity and cost for most of their range.
Perhaps they will use it on the sports cars , and the extra costs involved would be charged for accordingly on those models.
onegammyleg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 08:59 AM   #18
Registered Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 238
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRW
First add lean burn to the car, then change the A/F ratio as a function of engine air consumption. In other words, as air consumption decreases (light throttle) set the A/F ratio really lean, like 20:1, so power is reduced not only by the ammount of air going into the engine, but also by the weak A/F ratio.
Lean-burn? Another way to spell "burned exhaust valves"! The temp. rise will be high(er?)! Just a thought....
Then, there are emissions to consider ...with higher combustion temps, all this lean burn stuff screams higher NOx formation! If it won't pass emission specs...it ain't legal!
Ted Hart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 09:46 AM   #19
DRW
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 615
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Hart
Lean-burn? Another way to spell "burned exhaust valves"! The temp. rise will be high(er?)! Just a thought....
Then, there are emissions to consider ...with higher combustion temps, all this lean burn stuff screams higher NOx formation! If it won't pass emission specs...it ain't legal!
Ah, you're being realistic. I thought this thread was about 'Crackpot Ideas'?
__________________
Dave W.
DRW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 03:21 PM   #20
Supporting Member
 
cfg83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,779
Country: United States
DRW and Ted -

Quote:
Originally Posted by DRW
Ah, you're being realistic. I thought this thread was about 'Crackpot Ideas'?
Is the 1992-1995 Honda Hatchback VX highway speed "lean burn" mode running dirty? Granted, if emissions standards were less stringent, it might just be "conforming to it's time", but I keep thinking that there are lots of "lean burn lurkers" out there that are emissions compliant and running fine.



CarloSW2
__________________

__________________
Old School SW2 EPA ... New School Civic EPA :

What's your EPA MPG? http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectYear.jsp
cfg83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help Needed! thewolfwagon Fuelly Web Support and Community News 2 05-17-2012 05:44 PM
Car not showing in browse vehicles Armegatron Fuelly Web Support and Community News 1 01-17-2012 04:15 AM
electricity / kWh fuel type kal Fuelly Web Support and Community News 4 03-24-2011 03:08 AM
When will my car show up in "Browse Vehicles"? dullgeek Fuelly Web Support and Community News 11 06-02-2010 02:08 AM
Fuelly for international? pixelthing Fuelly Web Support and Community News 8 08-11-2008 08:32 AM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.