Rising Sun Member Forums  

Go Back   Rising Sun Member Forums > Toyota 4x4 > General Tech Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #11  
Old 03-19-2008, 07:48 AM
DaveInDenver's Avatar
DaveInDenver DaveInDenver is offline
Hard Core 4+
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Larimer County
Posts: 6,552
Default

Letting it rattle around some more, I think what doesn't seem right is the claims of fuel economy increase. Going from 22MPG to 60MPG? Uh, yeah, if that was possible why wouldn't the manufacturers be all over it? Probably the vast conspiracy to keep us all suckling at the teet of crude oil. OK, there might be some of that, but at least one manufacturer would buck the system and try to corner the market. Color me very skeptical. There just isn't that much energy left in the exhaust, certainly not enough to see 300% increases in economy. Even an old 22R-E or 3FE uses an O2 sensor and is trying to stay close to stoichiometric balance and our engines already do some of this with EGR, which helps with burned HC.
__________________
'91 Toyota Pickup
'09 Kawasaki KLR650
'12 Gunnar Rockhound 29

"They say the test of literary power is whether a man can write an inscription. I say, 'Can he name a kitten?'" -- Samuel Butler
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-19-2008, 08:40 AM
Chris's Avatar
Chris Chris is offline
Hard Core 4+
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Front Range
Posts: 969
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveInDenver View Post
Letting it rattle around some more, I think what doesn't seem right is the claims of fuel economy increase. Going from 22MPG to 60MPG? Uh, yeah, if that was possible why wouldn't the manufacturers be all over it? Probably the vast conspiracy to keep us all suckling at the teet of crude oil.
You're right on there, if it worked to the degree mentioned manufacturers would be all over it. This whole conspiracy to keep fuel economy under wraps by the powers that be has been around since forever. It's fun to think about but so is thinking Jimmy Hoffa is alive and well.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-19-2008, 10:43 AM
corsair23's Avatar
corsair23 corsair23 is offline
Rising Sun Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Littleton
Posts: 8,697
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveInDenver View Post
Letting it rattle around some more, I think what doesn't seem right is the claims of fuel economy increase. Going from 22MPG to 60MPG?....Color me very skeptical. There just isn't that much energy left in the exhaust, certainly not enough to see 300% increases in economy.
Agreed, which is why I want to watch from the sidelines to see what happens and get some hard data and hopefully real life unbiased testing on an 80. I certainly wouldn't mind being a test subject (assuming someone can tell me this won't cause my engine to melt down) but I don't plan to send them $1K for some snake oil technology...

That would be if Robbie got "certified" and proved this stuff really worked
__________________
Jeff Z. (the "not quite as skinny" one)
TLCA #17037
'97 LX450 - aka "The Whale"
'97 FZJ80 Antique Sage AE #267, stock
12/74 FJ40, 2F, SM420, 4" Lift, ARBs, 33" MTRs

:

"...anything else i can do for you guys, how about i wash your car or mow your lawn while you figure out your firewall system? I am now boarderline insane/unibomber." Kipper

"That assumes I'm even capable of pulling and stabbing..." Jacket

"I really like having a detachable unit." Beater

Last edited by corsair23; 03-19-2008 at 11:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-19-2008, 11:01 AM
DaveInDenver's Avatar
DaveInDenver DaveInDenver is offline
Hard Core 4+
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Larimer County
Posts: 6,552
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by corsair23 View Post
assuming someone can tell me this won't cause my engine to melt down
If you assume that the amount of H2 produced is not really significant, then I don't think you'll do anything that the ECU and ignition advance won't be able to deal with. My guess is the main immediate concern would be not passing the tailpipe emissions tests anymore. While the catalytic converter prefers a slightly lean condition for the oxidation reactions, if you lean out too much the reductions won't be balanced. At a slightly rich condition, the NOx reduction is favored and if you are abnormally lean then you might not reduce enough NOx and that could fail your test. I'd have guessed on an 80 series with an O2 sensor after the cat that the ECU would run rich to keep the reactions balanced and so that would compensate out any MPG gains you might get from introducing hydrogen into the intake. A single O2 sensor system would just be shooting for 14.7~14.8 stoichiometry and so adding fuel into the intake might make the ECU dial back the fuel injectors, that seems logical I guess.

The unburned HC oxidation
Attachment 8325

Carbon Monoxide oxidation
Attachment 8326

Nitrogen reduction (this is the NOx)
Attachment 8327
__________________
'91 Toyota Pickup
'09 Kawasaki KLR650
'12 Gunnar Rockhound 29

"They say the test of literary power is whether a man can write an inscription. I say, 'Can he name a kitten?'" -- Samuel Butler

Last edited by DaveInDenver; 08-26-2010 at 09:16 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-19-2008, 11:19 AM
corsair23's Avatar
corsair23 corsair23 is offline
Rising Sun Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Littleton
Posts: 8,697
Default



Dave, I don't understand half of what you post but it makes fascinating reading non the less

On the ECU issue, if I read correctly (in the thread on MUD or at the website), their is a piggy backed ECU somewhere in the mix that may handle some of the issues I think you are talking about.
__________________
Jeff Z. (the "not quite as skinny" one)
TLCA #17037
'97 LX450 - aka "The Whale"
'97 FZJ80 Antique Sage AE #267, stock
12/74 FJ40, 2F, SM420, 4" Lift, ARBs, 33" MTRs

:

"...anything else i can do for you guys, how about i wash your car or mow your lawn while you figure out your firewall system? I am now boarderline insane/unibomber." Kipper

"That assumes I'm even capable of pulling and stabbing..." Jacket

"I really like having a detachable unit." Beater
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-19-2008, 11:55 AM
DaveInDenver's Avatar
DaveInDenver DaveInDenver is offline
Hard Core 4+
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Larimer County
Posts: 6,552
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by corsair23 View Post


Dave, I don't understand half of what you post but it makes fascinating reading non the less

On the ECU issue, if I read correctly (in the thread on MUD or at the website), their is a piggy backed ECU somewhere in the mix that may handle some of the issues I think you are talking about.
They aren't gonna undo thermodynamics with a piggy backed box, so all they can do is remap the fuel profile to compensate for anything their gizmo might do. Now that I think about that, I wonder if that's the key, their chip. Putting a hyper-economy aggressive fuel map into the ECU would make your MPG skyrocket, although it would be like driving a 6,000 lbs Hilux with a 22R-E... S L O W. That could be the trick, you bolt on this $1,000 box that doesn't really do all that much, but with it you have to put this chip in to make it work. All the tricks are in the chip. It's like a distraction, watch this hand, watch this hand, as the other hand is liberating your of your wallet.
__________________
'91 Toyota Pickup
'09 Kawasaki KLR650
'12 Gunnar Rockhound 29

"They say the test of literary power is whether a man can write an inscription. I say, 'Can he name a kitten?'" -- Samuel Butler
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-19-2008, 06:36 PM
Rzeppa's Avatar
Rzeppa Rzeppa is offline
Cruise Moab Committee
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Kittredge CO, USA
Posts: 5,222
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by powderpig View Post
I know If I got better Fuel milage from the cruiser, I would drive it more than I do now. For now, it is the Saab.
Interesting - Both Robbie Antonsen (master mechanic and master wheeler) and Mark Whatley (master mechanic and master wheeler) wheel Land Cruisers and drive Saabs.

FWIW, I get a moving weighted average of 16 MPG in my 1971 FJ40 and 15 MPG in my 1978 FJ45. My wife says I'm a freak because I keep track of this stuuf. She has no idea what she gets in her 2001 VW bug with 1.8 turbo gasser. My best guess is around 21 MPG (she has a lead foot with the turbo).
__________________
Jeff Zepp
Kittredge CO USA
1971 & 1976 FJ40s, 1978 FJ45, 1987 FJ60
Rising Sun 4WD Club, TLCA #4063
http://american3dprinting.net/
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-19-2008, 06:41 PM
Rzeppa's Avatar
Rzeppa Rzeppa is offline
Cruise Moab Committee
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Kittredge CO, USA
Posts: 5,222
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveInDenver View Post
and our engines already do some of this with EGR, which helps with burned HC.
Actually, that is not what the EGR is for. The purpose of the EGR is to reduce combustion temps, thus reducing NxOx. At our elevation, this is not an issue and all the EGR does is rob us of performance and fuel economy.
__________________
Jeff Zepp
Kittredge CO USA
1971 & 1976 FJ40s, 1978 FJ45, 1987 FJ60
Rising Sun 4WD Club, TLCA #4063
http://american3dprinting.net/
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-19-2008, 07:26 PM
calphi27's Avatar
calphi27 calphi27 is offline
Trail Ready
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 315
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rzeppa View Post
Interesting - Both Robbie Antonsen (master mechanic and master wheeler) and Mark Whatley (master mechanic and master wheeler) wheel Land Cruisers and drive Saabs.
Same here I wish I was a master mechanic though.
__________________
1990 FJ62 aka -HOGMAULER- (OME Med-SR-ARB Bull Bar-SROR Sliders)

Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-18-2008, 09:57 PM
nakman's Avatar
nakman nakman is offline
Rising Sun Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: north side
Posts: 9,955
Default

Jeff, looks like he got it installed. Good thing he wore his extra thick flame suit http://forum.ih8mud.com/80-series-te...-increase.html

:popcorn:
__________________
99 uzj100, 05 525EXC

www.gamiviti.com

Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

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


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.