Fuel Saving Engine Map - Page 4 - Fuelly Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 08-18-2009, 06:54 AM   #31
Registered Member
 
GasSavers_bobski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 463
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by OUScooby View Post
CL AFR is set 14.7 rich 15.5 lean
Does the ECU have a wide band to judge that? If it's relying on a standard 4-wire narrow band sensor, it won't be able to tell the difference between 14.8 and 15.5.
__________________

GasSavers_bobski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2009, 10:28 AM   #32
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 20
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobski View Post
Does the ECU have a wide band to judge that? If it's relying on a standard 4-wire narrow band sensor, it won't be able to tell the difference between 14.8 and 15.5.
I do not have a wideband 02 sensor, the stock narrowband 02 is fairly accurate but only when around 14-16:1 beyond that it can really only tell if it's rich or lean.
14.7and 15.5 are the AFR targets for CL fueling that I've programed in the ECU, while I don't have a way to accurately monitor AFR without a wideband the ECU will do everything it can to help the engine maintain this range when in closed loop fueling.
__________________

OUScooby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2009, 07:13 PM   #33
Registered Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 447
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobski View Post
Possibly. More likely it's the reduced drivetrain losses... Drag from all the extra hardware needed for an AWD system can put a noteworthy dent in fuel economy.
If you really want to compare the two, it's worth noting that the most expensive WRX starts at roughly 10 grand cheaper than the least expensive 'vette. 10 grand will buy a lot of gas, and a hatchback with all wheel drive will prove far more practical for day-to-day tasks and dealing with inclement weather than a rear wheel drive sports car.
No its not a Vette, but my G/F's 3.8l Monte Carlo gets high 20's all the time. she was getting better than my accord. The thing turns like 2000 rpm at 65 mph. My civic does 3200! Big slow moving pistons aren't all bad at FE. Im tellin ya if GM can tweak on their push-rod motor cars, I bet they could build a 30+ mpg full sized car with existing parts. Just maybe they could pull themselves out of this.
__________________
slurp812 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2009, 11:00 AM   #34
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 20
Country: United States
So the map seems to be a total fail. Last tank driven off under normal driving conditions was 19.5mpg basically what I'd normally see. Plus my IAM is at 15 and won't get up to 16. Time to rethink this, until then I'm going back to my regular stage 2 tune.
__________________

OUScooby 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
Fuelly & Twitter i64w2gohome Fuelly Web Support and Community News 2 09-23-2012 11:03 AM
How do I change the EPA Estimates Thrasymachus Fuelly Web Support and Community News 2 08-19-2008 07:58 AM
Affordable scanguage? lawnguybri General Fuel Topics 6 01-30-2008 07:22 PM
Amazed by the SGII GeekGuyAndy General Discussion (Off-Topic) 7 08-19-2007 12:25 AM
straight wheel and engine deflector theory lunarhighway Aerodynamics 6 06-12-2007 03:49 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:40 PM.


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