DIY EFIE for less than $5. - Page 7 - Fuelly Forums

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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 10-19-2007, 11:45 AM   #61
Registered Member
 
trebuchet03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 812
Country: United States
Send a message via AIM to trebuchet03
Quote:
To the skeptic, if Honda did everything right in building their cars, and built the Civic vx/insight with lean burn then would this not be a good thing to imitate carefully? You can't say lean burn is always bad and then say that Honda is knowing what they are doing without contradicting yourself.
Didn't the CA VX not have lean burn? I'm curious to know what the NOx standards in CA were in 1995 compared to the rest of the states -- and then compared to NOx emissions today (or when NOx emissions for the rest of the states matched CA NOx levels in 1995).

The Insight used a special catalyst to deal with NOx (which is likely where the auto industry will be heading - hopefully).

It's not that it can't be done... It was done with higher NOx in the first half of the 90's -- plus non "conventional" equipment (for both the civic and insight). In both cases, physical attributes help with NOx (I've been reading about swirl burners/swirl numbers for turbines and the VX has come up as an example).


CA Emissions for NOx (early 90's):
.4 grams/ mile
__________________

__________________
Time is the best teacher. Unfortunately it kills all its students.


Bike Miles (Begin Aug. 20 - '07): ~433.2 miles

11/12
trebuchet03 is offline  
Old 10-19-2007, 11:51 AM   #62
Registered Member
 
omgwtfbyobbq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,516
Country: United States
Yup, CA VX=no lean burn AFAIK. The interesting thing is that it only dropped EPA mileage by ~10% IIRC. So lean burn in gassers comes no where near improving efficiency as much as appropriate gearing compared to load does.

Urea injection seems to be the way to go for newer large diesels (smaller versions are T2B5 w/o it IIRC), w/ the OBD system preventing the car from starting if there's no urea for a long enough period of time.
__________________

__________________
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  
Old 10-19-2007, 12:02 PM   #63
*shrug*
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 6,195
Country: United States
Also, the auto insight didn't have lean burn, something that lead to its better environmental scores than the stick version...
SVOboy is offline  
Old 10-19-2007, 08:16 PM   #64
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,978
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVOboy View Post
Also, the auto insight didn't have lean burn, something that lead to its better environmental scores than the stick version...
IMHO, NOx stinks and bad FE stinks (in response to hydrocarbons). Compromise is there somewhere.

That is, if you have to drive...

I understand the goal is reduce fuel consumption as much as possible -- for those who have nearly eliminated driving, I definitely applaud you.

But, there are those of us that have to get around -- be it plane, train, or automobile.

I looked at the shop manual again for my car today. The question remains -- can I fiddle with sensors, reduce fuel consumption, and still reduce emissions? That is the question -- That is my goal. I'm not in it for the cash savings, not entirely for the oil import factor. I am an environmentalist -- pure and simple. That's my platform. Getting there, is to challenge the current rhetoric -- but also to appeal the solution to the masses. If us, as a small number of individuals, save fuel -- so be it. We're doing our part. Getting others involved is the key -- but to keep emissions as part of the goal is very important. Instead of that total FE number.

RH77
__________________
rh77 is offline  
Old 10-19-2007, 08:36 PM   #65
*shrug*
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 6,195
Country: United States
LPGee whiz!
SVOboy is offline  
Old 10-19-2007, 08:38 PM   #66
Registered Member
 
skewbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 771
Country: United States
Well Rick, it is real hard to know for sure without fancy equipment. You might have to dig into the effects of NOx in lean mode, and the effects of continuing to burn the extra gas to make an informed decision.

IIRC you are on the hiway a fair bit, there may be some simple things like lowering the car, moon caps (your mags look a little draggy), grill blocks, possibly skirts that can be done for very little money and effort that provide good results.

If you have some taller steelies laying around that might help the gear ratio and they would accept those cheapie moon caps.

__________________
Standard Disclaimer
skewbe is offline  
Old 10-19-2007, 09:28 PM   #67
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,978
Country: United States
OK, well...

Ben - you should be in sales! If I could manage LPG I'd do it, but fueling-up is across the city

Scewb -- Nice pic

I do a lot high-speed driving -- probably 75% over 50 mph. The mags have low LRR tires, which are fairly new and costly. When they wear out, I'll have to look into steelies -- but IIRC, steel weighs more than magnesium/alloy.

But...if wind resistance is the goal (and not unsprung weight), then by all means, I'll look into it. On an aside, this Winter, a grille-block HAS to be installed (for engine operation). Cd should improve.

The long 3-door hatch design is pretty good for Cd -- not ideal, but better than a flattened trunk lid sedan, or flat-back/short-hatch design.

Gearing is the bottom line. It's an automatic, and without significant mods, I'm at its mercy after 4th gear hits. A smaller diameter steelie might be the solution: a good compromise to allow increased Cd and final gearing. The SG would have to be the calibrated source for displaying the proper speed.

I've looked at lowering it, but it's not feasible (too rough for daily driving, and too low for rural roads). Some driving is done for volunteer Emergency Management/Communication on gravel roads for severe weather reporting (heavy rain/flooding, high winds, hail, excessive snowfall, icing, etc.) and low-water-bridge crossings. 95%+ of others in this volunteer position, insist on SUVs or trucks for this task -- Teggy does just fine.

I've considered a 3rd vehicle for commuting, but 60-70% of driving is done in rented cars for work out of town (which generally have lower emissions -- and the reports are posted here for FE comparison).

That's where I'm at.

RH77
__________________
rh77 is offline  
Old 10-20-2007, 03:05 AM   #68
Supporting Member
 
cfg83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,779
Country: United States
trebuchet03 -

Quote:
Originally Posted by trebuchet03 View Post
Didn't the CA VX not have lean burn? I'm curious to know what the NOx standards in CA were in 1995 compared to the rest of the states -- and then compared to NOx emissions today (or when NOx emissions for the rest of the states matched CA NOx levels in 1995).

The Insight used a special catalyst to deal with NOx (which is likely where the auto industry will be heading - hopefully).

It's not that it can't be done... It was done with higher NOx in the first half of the 90's -- plus non "conventional" equipment (for both the civic and insight). In both cases, physical attributes help with NOx (I've been reading about swirl burners/swirl numbers for turbines and the VX has come up as an example).


CA Emissions for NOx (early 90's):
.4 grams/ mile
How does the ".4 grams/mile" translate to PPM?

Here's my latest Smog Test result for NOx :

Code:
                      NOx (PPM)        My Self Imposed
Test       RPM   Max   Ave    Meas     Personal Limit
15 mph    1660   477    57      70     238.5
25 mph    2076   764    50     101     382.0
From my POV, the compromise in the above numbers is 50% of the Max NOx allowed (my made-up personal limit). I know that with the HAI and the EFIE I am going more lean. The rub will be in figuring out my NOx without going to the smog tester all the time.

CarloSW2
__________________
Old School SW2 EPA ... New School Civic EPA :

What's your EPA MPG? http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectYear.jsp
cfg83 is offline  
Old 10-20-2007, 07:38 AM   #69
Registered Member
 
Mentalic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 121
Country: United States
I ran across the chart below in a Toyota manual that points out the fuel air requirements for the catalytic converter. It would have been nice if there was an actual scale to the chart but even so its interesting how fast NOx purification drops as you go lean.

__________________
Mentalic is offline  
Old 10-22-2007, 12:23 PM   #70
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 33
Country: United States
im going to leave one last reply as personal closure to this thread.


in my state of florida i dont have emissions testing. i dont even have a cat converter installed on my car right now. just a bypass pipe i made. the cat fetched $125 at a scrap yard. anyways, im not concerned with emissions as i already drive an efficent car. its not like i have a gas guzzling v8 with a choke stuck closed. i know some of you are very concerned with emissions, and will only do fuel economy mods which dont impact youre emissions. i can understand this, espically sence most states in the usa have yearly emissions testing. if i lived in another state which had yearly testing i would not remove my cat or mess with the o2 either. but i live in florida and we have no emissions testing. and besides that fact, i dont really care if my car emits more emissions. im just not converned with it. i would rather get better fuel economy and use less gas than have lower tailpipe emissions. perhaps that is wrong of me but its just how i am.

in any case, i developed my o2 sensor mod by myself and for my own car. i didnt make it for other people. i just thought that since it seems to work quite good for me then maybe i should share it with you guys and maybe some of you might even give it a try. if you guys dont want to try it thats cool i mean i dont do some of youre mods like the pcv catch can for example. (my crankcase vents are routed to open atmosphere)
its just that going off topic about things that have nothing to do with this got my goat. but thats ok as ill grow some thicker skin and stay on the website. i was actually supprised people send me pm's and emails asking me to stay. kind of hard to argue with that you know....
so anyways, the o2 sensor mod works good atleast for my car. maybe other makes and models of cars this wouldnt work so good on? who knows. i notice that it doesnt take effect right away. seems to take 50-100 miles before it starts working. i dont know whats up with that. perhaps the computer needs time to adjust the long term fuel trims? thats just a shot in the dark as to why. but ive since decreased the resistor value from 1750 to about 1100ohms. this gives the sensor ground a bump in the voltage, and i still dont have a check engine light so i think everything is within the computers parameters. i figure that every couple days or hundred miles im going to slightly decrease the resistor value. today im going to replace the resistor with a potentiometer thats inline with a 500ohm resistor. that was if i set the pot to zero ohms, ill still have 500ohms resistance to avoid sending a 12 signal right through the o2 to the computer. i guess ill keep going down in value untill i either get a check engine light or the engine starts to stumble and miss or ping. im not going to drive it so lean that it misses and pings. thats not worth it.
if anyone actually tries this, give me an email or pm after youve got a couple hundred miles on it and let me know how its working. i would be curious to see what resistor values other cars respond to (if they even respond at all that is). goodluck and look for my next thread dealing with a manual lockup switch for the chrysler a604 ultradrive torque converter.
__________________

csrmel is offline  
Closed Thread

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


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:13 PM.


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