Roman Posted March 10, 2022 Author Share Posted March 10, 2022 21 hours ago, Sunbeam said: This is harder than I thought, as my strong sense of shame is battling with my scientific curiosity. I have made the eco bar go into the red twice already. Buy an OBD2 reader then connect a phone or tablet up to it, and set it up so you can watch the fuel economy in real time on the dash. As well as the numbers from your trip so far. Then it becomes a game where you need to try get a better score, rather than demoralizing and dreary haha. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunbeam Posted March 10, 2022 Share Posted March 10, 2022 42 minutes ago, Roman said: Buy an OBD2 reader then connect a phone or tablet up to it, and set it up so you can watch the fuel economy in real time on the dash. As well as the numbers from your trip so far. Then it becomes a game where you need to try get a better score, rather than demoralizing and dreary haha. Already on it! Geeking out hard. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoeddynz Posted March 11, 2022 Share Posted March 11, 2022 Curses that Takaka hill and our Riwaka hill. Just re-filled Minky k11 and it returned a 6.7/100 - way worse than our low 5's due to driving over each way Takaka hill plus driving our local hill pretty much every time we use the car. It's not terrible but I want better. Still- its so fun on the hills 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roman Posted March 13, 2022 Author Share Posted March 13, 2022 Needs a speeduino, using some fuel cut decel and lean burn strategies and it'll pay for itself pretty quick 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Slideways~ Posted March 13, 2022 Share Posted March 13, 2022 20 hours ago, Roman said: Needs a speeduino, using some fuel cut decel and lean burn strategies and it'll pay for itself pretty quick I've been wondering about this recently, the cost of ecu + tune versus fuel saving based on the 30 year old tech/tune (no oxygen sensor and basic AFM, non-variable TPS etc). I'll hopefully be back to dailying my 1.6 MX5 within the next few months after I paint it. But the funny thing is its worse on fuel than my 2L 3sge Celica (St202 with acis, which seems to work pretty well) for the same drive. I thought maybe it was just because of the way I drove the MX5, but a work mate here has had a few and he reckons they are all surprisingly thirsty. I have a Speeduino to go in, whether I do that with the stock intake or with ITB's I'm not sure. It would be interesting to see what sort of fuel economy increase I could get. They have a lowish 9.4:1 compression ratio so it would be worth shaving the head too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrike Posted March 13, 2022 Share Posted March 13, 2022 29 minutes ago, ~Slideways~ said: I've been wondering about this recently, the cost of ecu + tune versus fuel saving based on the 30 year old tech/tune (no oxygen sensor and basic AFM, non-variable TPS etc). I'll hopefully be back to dailying my 1.6 MX5 within the next few months after I paint it. But the funny thing is its worse on fuel than my 2L 3sge Celica (St202 with acis, which seems to work pretty well) for the same drive. I thought maybe it was just because of the way I drove the MX5, but a work mate here has had a few and he reckons they are all surprisingly thirsty. I have a Speeduino to go in, whether I do that with the stock intake or with ITB's I'm not sure. It would be interesting to see what sort of fuel economy increase I could get. They have a lowish 9.4:1 compression ratio so it would be worth shaving the head too. Shame Speeduino doesn't have DBW options currently or you could get some Motorbike ITBs like Roman Wasn't there a guy on here who built a mx5 with a later model head and high compression? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Slideways~ Posted March 13, 2022 Share Posted March 13, 2022 12 minutes ago, shrike said: Shame Speeduino doesn't have DBW options currently or you could get some Motorbike ITBs like Roman Wasn't there a guy on here who built a mx5 with a later model head and high compression? My bike ITB's actually did have a DBW set up but it was on the 2nd set of throttles which simple don't seal like the 'real' set do. Yep there is, he's got a build thread too. Really cool swap, I reckon it'd need a cert simply because it looks like a different engine though. Probably the same with ITB's too unless you have a real lenient wof place. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrike Posted March 13, 2022 Share Posted March 13, 2022 9 minutes ago, ~Slideways~ said: My bike ITB's actually did have a DBW set up but it was on the 2nd set of throttles which simple don't seal like the 'real' set do. Yep there is, he's got a build thread too. Really cool swap, I reckon it'd need a cert simply because it looks like a different engine though. Probably the same with ITB's too unless you have a real lenient wof place. Sorry for thread spam but depending on how you do it could always swap back to factory intake for wofs lol. Used to have a mate that took the turbo off his skyline for every wof haha Actually if they are in a box not sure if some places would even notice 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cletus Posted March 20, 2022 Share Posted March 20, 2022 Has anyone done any accurate testing on mileage vs cost on 91 vs 95 vs 98 on an engine that could run happily on any of them? I wonder could the extra cost of 98 or 95 be outweighed by mileage gained by the ability to have more timing, or is the price difference too much to be worthwhile Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxPower Posted March 20, 2022 Share Posted March 20, 2022 Tried this on a Mitsubishi Outlander , buying 98 vs 91 did 3 tanks of each and got the same results. 450km to 50L fuel 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roman Posted March 20, 2022 Author Share Posted March 20, 2022 37 minutes ago, cletus said: Has anyone done any accurate testing on mileage vs cost on 91 vs 95 vs 98 on an engine that could run happily on any of them? Just looking at local prices right now 91 octane $2.49 95 octane $2.73 98 octane $2.83 So for either of the options to be cost neutral against 91, you'd need to gain: 9.6% fuel efficiency for 95 octane 13.6% efficiency for 98 octane There's no way you'll get those numbers. Avoiding E10 is probably the best thing to do, because stoich of E10 is actually around 14.2 instead of 14.7. so if your oxygen sensor is trying to find stoich you're going to be using 3.5% more gas. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpr Posted March 20, 2022 Share Posted March 20, 2022 irrelevant sharn; e10 also needs a few degrees less timing to make the same power as normal 95. but both make the same power if not knock limited and timing set right for the fuel used. so if your engine was under timed for 95 and just throw some e10 98 in the tank it would gain a little power 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roman Posted March 20, 2022 Author Share Posted March 20, 2022 Speaking of such things, I've been getting pretty so-so economy on this tank of gas so far, and I just realize I've filled up on E10 from Gull. Ahh well, next tank back to 98 anyway 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajg193 Posted March 20, 2022 Share Posted March 20, 2022 E10 would only set you back like 4% economy though? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpr Posted March 20, 2022 Share Posted March 20, 2022 I haven't noticed any significant change between 95 and 98 gull. Thats same tune, no o2 compensation. But.. i did spend some time on the dyno the other day and found a few places at low throttle where it liked a little more timing. so that could have been an advantage when filling with 98 gull, evening things out a little. A lot of the time up here 98 gull is actually a little cheaper than 95 Along with finding a few small things in the tune. put some slightly less tar in for oil, and the plastics back on under the front of car. and yeah 7.2L per 100k which worse than normal haha. but that was already 100k's in, then tuning on dyno on that tank. see how the next tank goes, but give up. Although i did forget to see what difference it made with vvt on/off at cruise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunbeam Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 On 10/03/2022 at 12:04, Sunbeam said: This is harder than I thought, as my strong sense of shame is battling with my scientific curiosity. I have made the eco bar go into the red twice already. So, I pulled the pin after 380km. It’s just too embarrassing. Anyway driving like an economy anorak netted 4.2l/100km. One does feel smug though, putting $39 of gas in the tank for 380km. Now I can get back to driving like normal. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locost_bryan Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 On 08/03/2022 at 18:56, yoeddynz said: has anyone on here got one of those 3 cylinder ecoboost fords? I've got a 3 cylinder boosted Kia Rio. Does about 5.5 l/100k on a trip to Hamilton, where our 1.3 Jazz did 5.8. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locost_bryan Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 On 20/03/2022 at 22:29, cletus said: Has anyone done any accurate testing on mileage vs cost on 91 vs 95 vs 98 on an engine that could run happily on any of them? I wonder could the extra cost of 98 or 95 be outweighed by mileage gained by the ability to have more timing, or is the price difference too much to be worthwhile AA did a test with a Maxima years ago. Got better economy on higher octane, but not enough to offset the extra cost. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubastreet Posted March 31, 2022 Share Posted March 31, 2022 I had a lancer vxr a few years ago. It got better mileage in 95 vs 91 to the point that there was very little financial difference, but the engine felt so much better with the 95 which made it definitely worth it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muncie Posted April 14, 2022 Share Posted April 14, 2022 Stumbled across this thinking it would be a Hick brazing scrap metal together. Involves 3d printed parts sound science and he even builds an app to monitor air fuel ratio. Good watch. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.