Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

302 Economy Build

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Yeah... getting the right engine for your purpose also makes a big difference. I drive about 5K miles a year so any engine swap is pretty much a no-go.

    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. -- Albert Einstein
    rides: 93 Crown Vic LX (The Red Velvet Cake), 2000 Crown Vic base model (Sandy), 2003 Expedition (the vacation beast)
    Originally posted by gadget73
    ... and it should all work like magic and unicorns and stuff.
    Originally posted by dmccaig
    Overhead, some poor bastards are flying in airplanes.

    Comment


      #17
      It wasn't specifically the emissions controls, it was the implementation. No computer controls for anything so timing and activation of the systems were pretty imprecise, usually involving mechanical thermal switches and vacuum delay valves and other nonsense. No way of monitoring or adjusting fuel mixtures or ignition timing to ensure efficient fuel burn. Also consider these things were added to engines designed long before any of that was a concern, so it was very much a compromise to make it all try and function. Electronic controls really did wonders for both performance and emissions, even when it was still attached to old design motors. It also just ran better, those early smog controls were pretty unreliable and got downright shitty to drive when they acted up.

      Modern engines are designed around efficiency and emissions. Different combustion chamber shapes, cam profiles, etc to promote more complete burning. Cats flow better than they used to. Production cylinder heads now are just miles better than anything from the "old days".

      The trick with small displacement, forced induction is that its kind of a variable displacement system. Pump air into an engine and it acts like its got more displacement than it really has. Cut the air down and you're back to what it really is. With variable vane turbos you get a big motor for acceleration and a little one for cruising. Power and economy in one box, though not really at the same time. Cylinder de-activation aims to get to the same place but you get a lot more parasitic loss with that. Even if its not being fired, just moving that piston up and down consumes an amount of power.
      86 Lincoln Town Car (Galactica).
      5.0 HO, CompCams XE258,Scorpion 1.72 roller rockers, 3.55 K code rear, tow package, BHPerformance ported E7 heads, Tmoss Explorer intake, 65mm throttle body, Hedman 1 5/8" headers, 2.5" dual exhaust, ASP underdrive pulley

      91 Lincoln Mark VII LSC grandpa spec white and cranberry

      1984 Lincoln Continental TurboDiesel - rolls coal

      Originally posted by phayzer5
      I drive a Lincoln. I can't be bothered to shift like the peasants and rabble rousers

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by gadget73 View Post
        It wasn't specifically the emissions controls, it was the implementation. No computer controls for anything so timing and activation of the systems were pretty imprecise, usually involving mechanical thermal switches and vacuum delay valves and other nonsense. No way of monitoring or adjusting fuel mixtures or ignition timing to ensure efficient fuel burn. Also consider these things were added to engines designed long before any of that was a concern, so it was very much a compromise to make it all try and function. Electronic controls really did wonders for both performance and emissions, even when it was still attached to old design motors. It also just ran better, those early smog controls were pretty unreliable and got downright shitty to drive when they acted up...
        Supports what I said about carb tuning, or lack there-of. My '69 Plymouth was powered by a 318- no emission controls what so ever other than PCV, if that even counts. Best I could do with that thing even when running stupid lean was 11 mpg.

        My '89 K1500 sports one of those engines designed before those things were a concern. But like you said, it runs remarkably well with electronically controlled stuffs. The '79 G10 Sport Van I got going again? Whoo boy, the first thing I did was disable the EGR. Would have disabled the smog pump if it had one too, or any other non necessary device controlled by Rube Goldberg like devices. With the timing bumped up, it ran quite well for a smog era six.

        For getting the job done or MPG, my concern is torque. Don't really care about horsepower, it's only a function of torque anyway. Years ago I had a 2.3 Quad powered '94 Grand AM. I loved that little POS, got 32+ MPG on the highway all week long. Don't know what the torque to displacement to weight ratio was on it, but it seemed optimal.
        1985 LTD Crown Victoria - SOLD
        1988 Town Car Signature - Current Party Barge

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by DerekTheGreat View Post
          Years ago I had a 2.3 Quad powered '94 Grand AM. I loved that little POS, got 32+ MPG on the highway all week long.
          Long live the IRON DUKE. LOL
          1987 CV LX 5.0

          Comment


            #20
            What I have read about the EGR system is that it actually provides a small increase in fuel efficiency along with a decrease in emissions. Basically it returns a portion of exhaust containing unburned fuel to the intake to ring out a bit more energy simultaneously making a cleaner exhaust.

            The air pump I don't know if that is a net drain efficiency wise or how much drain it is vs. how much pollution it eliminates (ROI)
            03 Marauder DPB, HS, 6disk, Organizer Mods> LED's in & Out, M&Z rear control arms, Oil deflector, U-Haul Trans Pan, Blue Fuzzy Dice
            02 SL500 Silver Arrow
            08 TC Signature Limited, HID's Mods>235/55-17 Z rated BFG G-Force Comp-2 A/S Plus, Addco 1" rear Sway, Posi Carrier, Compustar Remote Start, floor liners, trunk organizer, Two part Sun Visors, B&M Trans drain Plug, Winter=05 Mustang GT rims, Nokian Hakkapeliitta R-2 235/55-17
            12 Escape Limited V6 AWD, 225/65R17 Vredestein Quatrac Pro, Winter 235/70-16 Conti Viking Contact7 Mods>Beamtech LED headlight bulbs, Husky floor liners

            Comment


              #21
              Air pump is only for heating up the cats. So it's only really active for about 5-10 minutes. The rest of the time it's only drawing vacuum to assist with the cruise servo. I found that removing it gained about 0.5 to 1 mpg when I had the 88 MGM (Mad Marquis).

              Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. -- Albert Einstein
              rides: 93 Crown Vic LX (The Red Velvet Cake), 2000 Crown Vic base model (Sandy), 2003 Expedition (the vacation beast)
              Originally posted by gadget73
              ... and it should all work like magic and unicorns and stuff.
              Originally posted by dmccaig
              Overhead, some poor bastards are flying in airplanes.

              Comment


                #22
                Most modern EGR systems are good for MPG, older systems not really.
                New stuff changes ign timing depending on egr position, with the egr open, timing can be advanced more, and kinda has to be, as the exhaust gases ignite slower. Inert gases cool the ignition temps. Almost all newer systems also cool the recirculated gases, to lower cylinder temperatures even more.
                EGR also reduces manifold vacuum slightly, which helps with cylinder fill a little bit. Of course diesels dont have vacuum, so it doesnt work. Diesels also produce soot and particle matter, which causes the intake & egr systems to clog up and fail. And thats why diesels are so often "deleted".

                I'd wager that the EEC-IV doesn't change timing in egr open situations. Also I'd seriously question the overall effectivess of the CFI egr cooler.
                Personally I can't say anything on the effects on EGR on my box, I have gone back and forth, but the overall running condition might ruin all of that.
                1985 Mercury Grand Marquis LS, "Maisa"
                1995 Chevrolet Caprice Classic STW, "Sally"

                Comment


                  #23
                  EEC-IV does lean out the fuel mix and bump the timing on the SEFI cars at least.

                  One big down side for how early EEC-IV does EGR monitoring is that it just uses a position sensor. It has no idea how much is actually flowing, so its just a guess based on whether it sees the valve open or not. Entirely possible for the passages to be clogged solid and allow no flow. Things get prone to detonation when that happens because the fuel and timing are set to expect exhaust gas.

                  EGR works on everything I own except the diesel. Can't say I've ever noticed an obvious difference in performance so long as the system worked right. When the control solenoid was flaky on the Towncar it went full open just off idle and caused an annoying hesitation but that went away when I replaced the bad part.
                  86 Lincoln Town Car (Galactica).
                  5.0 HO, CompCams XE258,Scorpion 1.72 roller rockers, 3.55 K code rear, tow package, BHPerformance ported E7 heads, Tmoss Explorer intake, 65mm throttle body, Hedman 1 5/8" headers, 2.5" dual exhaust, ASP underdrive pulley

                  91 Lincoln Mark VII LSC grandpa spec white and cranberry

                  1984 Lincoln Continental TurboDiesel - rolls coal

                  Originally posted by phayzer5
                  I drive a Lincoln. I can't be bothered to shift like the peasants and rabble rousers

                  Comment


                    #24
                    I drove dad's T-Bird on a long highway run and nailed 30 mpg average over 200 miles on the trip computer. 24-26 is pretty standard for it. The aerodynamics and lighter weight certainly helped.

                    IIRC the E6SE heads were designed for high turbulence/swirl to aid in part throttle cruise efficiency?
                    1990 Country Squire - weekend cruiser, next project
                    1988 Crown Vic LTD Wagon - waiting in the wings

                    GMN Box Panther History
                    Box Panther Horsepower and Torque Ratings
                    Box Panther Production Numbers

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by Tiggie View Post
                      I drove dad's T-Bird on a long highway run and nailed 30 mpg average over 200 miles on the trip computer. 24-26 is pretty standard for it. The aerodynamics and lighter weight certainly helped.

                      IIRC the E6SE heads were designed for high turbulence/swirl to aid in part throttle cruise efficiency?
                      Another +1 for the Fox.
                      1985 LTD Crown Victoria - SOLD
                      1988 Town Car Signature - Current Party Barge

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X