Page 10 of 13 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 126

Thread: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

  1. #91
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    Like I need to prove that inhaling poisons into your lungs is harmful? NM you are a Conservative. Breath deep.
    Were not talking about that only. It's about how they determine how much pollution your car is putting out. They apparently don't know crap about cars and they are full of ****. Primarily because one of the stated goals of the environmentalist movement is to eliminate internal combustion engines.

    As far as I'm concerned, they can suck the barrel of my AR.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  2. #92
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    The only reason to "detune" an engine is EPA requirements. You never get better MPG by "detuning" an engine.

    OBD II made "chipping" a car more problematic. Best bet is to eliminate the entire factory computer controls and put in an after-market engine management system. There is hidden code in the OBD II factory systems. If they notice a vehicle is out of "range" of "normal", the system tries to bring it back into "normal" range. The other problem with programmers is that they attempt to get CARB approval, thus killing anything useful in them.
    I understand that, detuning means less combustion which kills mileage, I forgot the formula but there actually is a range where more horsepower than factory can buy you a couple of miles to the gallon, but engineers are hamstrung from doing it because of other politician created issues.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  3. #93
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,420

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    The fuel mileage difference you see is because the fuel/air ratio is set to around 14-14.5/1, optimum is between 12-12.5/1. When you go up in altitude, the air is thiner, so the computer tries to adjust, but in doing so, you actually get a more optimum ratio.
    Actually, thinner air is much less wind resistance. The vast majority of your fuel usage at cruising speed is in fighting wind resistance. At level ground at 7000 feet most vehicles will get better mpg cruising at 70 mph than they would at the same speed at sea level because of the lower wind resistance. Start going uphill and the mpg at altitude will decline precipitously because it takes more fuel to generate the same power.

    The same is true on a road bike. Riding in Colorado I burn slightly less calories on level ground due to less wind resistance, but considerably more calories when climbing due to lower oxygen levels. Internal combustion engines are no different, especially normally aspirated ones.

    No, I don't have to deal with the smog of a city. I live in the country. Lots of trees around to soak up all that bad **** your car puts out. Want cleaner air, plant more plants.
    Its not the trees soaking up the smog, its just you have far lower vehicle densities in rural areas. If trees cleaned up smog then Houston and Atlanta would have some of the cleanest air in the USA, they don't of course. Houston has the air quality of a third world country despite all those east Texas pines.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  4. #94
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    I understand that, detuning means less combustion which kills mileage, I forgot the formula but there actually is a range where more horsepower than factory can buy you a couple of miles to the gallon, but engineers are hamstrung from doing it because of other politician created issues.
    The real problem is their stance on CO2. As I've said, you simply cannot improve the efficiency of the burn without increasing CO2. Sulfur and other things add to complexity of engineering, true. However, if we didn't have laws protecting certain labor markets, we could use different materials. Both Lamborghini and Porsche have all ceramic engines in Europe, illegal in the States. Guess the steel lobby is too strong.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  5. #95
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat View Post
    Actually, thinner air is much less wind resistance. The vast majority of your fuel usage at cruising speed is in fighting wind resistance. At level ground at 7000 feet most vehicles will get better mpg cruising at 70 mph than they would at the same speed at sea level because of the lower wind resistance. Start going uphill and the mpg at altitude will decline precipitously because it takes more fuel to generate the same power.

    The same is true on a road bike. Riding in Colorado I burn slightly less calories on level ground due to less wind resistance, but considerably more calories when climbing due to lower oxygen levels. Internal combustion engines are no different, especially normally aspirated ones.



    Its not the trees soaking up the smog, its just you have far lower vehicle densities in rural areas. If trees cleaned up smog then Houston and Atlanta would have some of the cleanest air in the USA, they don't of course. Houston has the air quality of a third world country despite all those east Texas pines.
    Drag is the greater force, not wind resistance. Two vehicles with the same front end design (wind resistance) but different rear end designs (drag), the lower drag coefficient will always be the better.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  6. #96
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat View Post
    Yes, oh the horrors of an energy policy that does not require that we blow up entire mountains and destroy thousands of miles of rivers and streams.

    This is how we get coal. We turn places like this:



    Into this:

    Attachment 67163037

    Is that what you want?
    Better than stone_ages.jpg

    Which is what the environazi's want.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  7. #97
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    I understand that, detuning means less combustion which kills mileage, I forgot the formula but there actually is a range where more horsepower than factory can buy you a couple of miles to the gallon, but engineers are hamstrung from doing it because of other politician created issues.
    The other thing that manufactures do is market HP. Horsepower doesn't mean crap until top end, if then. But saying an engine has XXX HP is a marketing ploy. If they set the cam profile and valves to get the best low-mid torque and gear them right, they would get much better gas mileage.

    I have a 2010 HHR (for sale if anyone wants one), the power band is ridiculously high on it. Even though it is rated at 155 HP, it's not until 6100 rpms, hardly daily driving range. That is one of the reasons why my 1985 fiero actually got better gas mileage and could beat it 0-60, even though it was rated at 95 HP.

    The virtual dyno on the 454 I'm building for my Chevelle rates the hp with my selected cam at between 500-600, but torque is almost 700 and down in the range I will need it except racing. Of course, until completed and dynoed for real, I won't know for sure. Especially since I am putting in multi-point sequential fuel injection with a plenum design similar to the TPI system. Which was the best system GM ever built for low-mid range torque on a small block.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  8. #98
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    The other thing that manufactures do is market HP. Horsepower doesn't mean crap until top end, if then. But saying an engine has XXX HP is a marketing ploy. If they set the cam profile and valves to get the best low-mid torque and gear them right, they would get much better gas mileage.

    I have a 2010 HHR (for sale if anyone wants one), the power band is ridiculously high on it. Even though it is rated at 155 HP, it's not until 6100 rpms, hardly daily driving range. That is one of the reasons why my 1985 fiero actually got better gas mileage and could beat it 0-60, even though it was rated at 95 HP.

    The virtual dyno on the 454 I'm building for my Chevelle rates the hp with my selected cam at between 500-600, but torque is almost 700 and down in the range I will need it except racing. Of course, until completed and dynoed for real, I won't know for sure. Especially since I am putting in multi-point sequential fuel injection with a plenum design similar to the TPI system. Which was the best system GM ever built for low-mid range torque on a small block.
    Torque is the most important aspect, I mainly focus on HP because if the drivetrain is done right the torque numbers tend to be close, and even then the HP is a reflection of the kind of build of the engine, it's going to put better numbers out with proper compression and fire. I like big displacement because it can facilitate lower compressions for torque and power which saves on wear during it's life, I always get a laugh at the kids who go with double digit ratios and put a ton of pressure and strain on their smaller four and six banger engines, the durability is gone at that point.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  9. #99
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,387

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    The real problem is their stance on CO2. As I've said, you simply cannot improve the efficiency of the burn without increasing CO2. Sulfur and other things add to complexity of engineering, true. However, if we didn't have laws protecting certain labor markets, we could use different materials. Both Lamborghini and Porsche have all ceramic engines in Europe, illegal in the States. Guess the steel lobby is too strong.
    LOL There is no limit on CO2 in auto exhaust. And increased efficiency reduce CO2/mile which is what we want. CO is another story and is a product of incomplete combustion. The Ceramic engines you mentioned are experimental "adipic" engines that run at ultra high temps and have no engine cooling. The radiator is the #1 waster of energy in a conventional car. But engine temps > 500 degrees present other problems.
    Last edited by iguanaman; 03-07-14 at 01:44 AM.

  10. #100
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    Torque is the most important aspect, I mainly focus on HP because if the drivetrain is done right the torque numbers tend to be close, and even then the HP is a reflection of the kind of build of the engine, it's going to put better numbers out with proper compression and fire. I like big displacement because it can facilitate lower compressions for torque and power which saves on wear during it's life, I always get a laugh at the kids who go with double digit ratios and put a ton of pressure and strain on their smaller four and six banger engines, the durability is gone at that point.
    The biggest problem is going to be tuning it. I need to write some custom software and build a load generator before I do it. Otherwise, doing the tune manually on the load generator will take up to 2 months to get the fuel and spark tables set to optimum. Lot of work without the right software and I don't think anyone has ever approached tunning in the manor I plan to.

    I'm going to use a digital flow meter from marine use to measure actual fuel flow/usage instead of using injector timing. So, setting the tables manually would take a very longtime. At each rpm (100 rpm increments), optimize the fuel/air and timing for minimal fuel consumption for each increment at each load range. So, lets see, about 5000 rpm operating range, which gives me 50 different increments spread out over say 20+ load ranges plus partial and wide-open-throttle curves. Yep, better get back to my C++ books tomorrow.

    And then do it all over again after I add supplemental hydrogen to it.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

Page 10 of 13 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •