Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 126

Thread: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

  1. #101
    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 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.
    I am an amateur, I want to do a few hobby cars so I'm not as meticulous. Sounds like you could go big with rebuilding and that setup.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  2. #102
    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.
    It's funny hearing them brag also. Had a guy back in the 90s that told me his Mitsubishi would out run my Camaro. He was right, but I told him to give me half the money he put into his, I would beat him and still pocket some change. Some of them simply never think that the same things they do to those rice burners can be done with a V-8. But 250+ hp/L on a 7.4, or even a 5.7, would be underivable except at a drag strip on special tires.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  3. #103
    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 am an amateur, I want to do a few hobby cars so I'm not as meticulous. Sounds like you could go big with rebuilding and that setup.
    Only on pre-OBD cars and those with supplemental hydrogen. Although, I might need to check it now that the EPA has gone to grams/mile. It might be doable then. Assuming of course they use actual fuel mileage instead of their imaginary numbers. Posting the .bin and other format files for engines I've already done wouldn't be that difficult.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  4. #104
    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
    It's funny hearing them brag also. Had a guy back in the 90s that told me his Mitsubishi would out run my Camaro. He was right, but I told him to give me half the money he put into his, I would beat him and still pocket some change. Some of them simply never think that the same things they do to those rice burners can be done with a V-8. But 250+ hp/L on a 7.4, or even a 5.7, would be underivable except at a drag strip on special tires.
    I think that's the thing a lot of those kids miss, they aren't driving sports cars or muscle cars but rather economy grocery getters. It takes twice the money or more to make them outrun stock and for what they have to put in to match they could easily upgrade to a genuine performance car.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  5. #105
    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 am an amateur, I want to do a few hobby cars so I'm not as meticulous. Sounds like you could go big with rebuilding and that setup.
    This is a special build really. I'm taking and putting as much modern tech into it as I can, but doing it with a early emissions/no catalytic converter car (in other words, removing EPA from the equation) and I want to see what comes out of it. Probably could do with a newer car, but then the whole legality thing comes into it. Only a few tech gadgets I won't be putting into it. Distributor-less Ignition (costly and I don't think it will make a big difference) and Direct Injection (no after-market source for heads and parts). Variable Valve Timing and Displacement on Demand would just be to frigging much trouble to learn and implement.

    But I'm adding some things that even the manufacturers don't do yet. Low friction and Heat blocking ceramic micro-coating. Just need to find a 400 degree oven that will hold an engine block to back it on. There is also a coating for radiators and engine blocks that increases heat transfer and limits the transfer to one way (don't ask me how, but thats the claim. I'll just be happy with more efficient heat transfer).
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  6. #106
    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 am an amateur, I want to do a few hobby cars so I'm not as meticulous. Sounds like you could go big with rebuilding and that setup.
    This is only one of the projects I have in mind. Contrary to what the liberals and others have posted here, I'm not anti-environment. I'm anti-environmentalist and anti-EPA because I think they are going about things backwards and stupidly. Not to mention wrecking the hell of the economy doing it.

    I all for closing coal power plants, but until we have the generation capacity to replace them, it is stupid to put such a strain on the public by all these regulations. Bio-fuels, hey, all for them, if they don't wreck havoc on the food supply. Natural Gas vehicles, great, make it doable and practical. Solar power, not particularly against it in some cases, but face it, it will be a longtime, if ever before it can meet all our power needs. Same with windmills. Damn shame both are hell on good cropland in agricultural areas. Don't like fertilizer run off, give us an alternative that works and is doable. Don't like pesticides, great, find us another way to stop bugs from eating our food so that we get that food. Don't like animal waste run off, ok, then we could use the waste for fertilizer, but then some of it runs off anyways. So many of them like their hamburgers, ribs and chicken sandwiches, well, we have to grow the animals to make those. Think the air is bad in LA now, imagine what it would be like with all those families having horses instead of cars.

    If the environmentalist and their supporters would invest 1/10th of what they spend on lobbying and hire some good engineers, they could of already built working viable alternatives to what we use today. There would be no need for all these laws and regulation. Hell, if they did that, in a decade, they would be the 1% that everyone complains about. Trying to force technology through regulation is just plain stupid.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  7. #107
    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
    This is only one of the projects I have in mind. Contrary to what the liberals and others have posted here, I'm not anti-environment. I'm anti-environmentalist and anti-EPA because I think they are going about things backwards and stupidly. Not to mention wrecking the hell of the economy doing it.

    I all for closing coal power plants, but until we have the generation capacity to replace them, it is stupid to put such a strain on the public by all these regulations. Bio-fuels, hey, all for them, if they don't wreck havoc on the food supply. Natural Gas vehicles, great, make it doable and practical. Solar power, not particularly against it in some cases, but face it, it will be a longtime, if ever before it can meet all our power needs. Same with windmills. Damn shame both are hell on good cropland in agricultural areas. Don't like fertilizer run off, give us an alternative that works and is doable. Don't like pesticides, great, find us another way to stop bugs from eating our food so that we get that food. Don't like animal waste run off, ok, then we could use the waste for fertilizer, but then some of it runs off anyways. So many of them like their hamburgers, ribs and chicken sandwiches, well, we have to grow the animals to make those. Think the air is bad in LA now, imagine what it would be like with all those families having horses instead of cars.

    If the environmentalist and their supporters would invest 1/10th of what they spend on lobbying and hire some good engineers, they could of already built working viable alternatives to what we use today. There would be no need for all these laws and regulation. Hell, if they did that, in a decade, they would be the 1% that everyone complains about. Trying to force technology through regulation is just plain stupid.
    Agree with 100% of this. There was a ridiculous regulation passed that all fuels had to contain a cellulose biochem, but the only problem with that is there is only like a gram or so of it in existence, so the law cannot be enforced. Then there are the issues with ethanol, and the compact fluorescent bulbs, but the politicians and environmental lobby keep asking people to live down, instead of building an acceptable alternative.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  8. #108
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,301

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    How much does respiratory disease cost? I need to know so that I can make an informed decision as a consumer as to whether I want cheaper gasoline or healthier lungs.
    Ride a bike, godammit! just kidding

    You know this will drive the cost of everything up, not just the fuel. Everything transported by truck. I'm not necessarily against such a rule, but it is an economic concern.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  9. #109
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,406

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    Better than Attachment 67163062

    Which is what the environazi's want.
    Natural gas is what is replacing coal. Given the choice between the 2, that is what I want. Anything is better than coal.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  10. #110
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,406

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    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.
    I think we stated the same thing, you just did a better job of it. When I stated wind resistance, I did not mean wind against the car, but rather air resistance created by the car moving through the air which is better stated as drag (as you wrote).

    Like I said earlier, its no different on a road bike. Drag is by far the biggest factor in terms of resistance when cruising on level ground at higher speeds.

    Plegs (watts) = (1-(Lossdt/100))-1 ( ( 9.8067 (m/s2) W (kg) ( sin(arctan(G/100)) + Crr cos(arctan(G/100)) ) ) + ( 0.5 Cd A (m2) Rho (kg/m3) (V (m/s))2 ) ) V (m/s)

    Here is a calculator. http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm Of course there it's measuring watts and calories, but the concept would be the same with a vehicle. The difference of course is that a vehicle is more aerodynamic than the human body.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 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
  •