Better atomization could be a factor. And you could definitely save a little fuel during the warm-up process.
I do respect the "sport" of hypermiling and the experimentation that goes with it!
Printable View
Better atomization could be a factor. And you could definitely save a little fuel during the warm-up process.
I do respect the "sport" of hypermiling and the experimentation that goes with it!
Update:
The ECU uses pulse duration, which translates to opening time of injectors, as the basis for calculating fuel consumption. The new injectors have a much higher flow rate than OEM, being around 140% of OEM, so they squirt more fuel at the same pulse duration. That made the display show less consumption than actual. Meanwhile the OEM injectors are back in.
I have observed the new injectors atomize fuel into a much finer spray than the OEM, which reduces consumption while the cold engine is warming up. I imagine the better atomization paired with the correct flow rate would be optimal for best economy. Improvement could realistically be around 5% depending on driving style and trip distance.
For comparison, the famous economical Daihatsu/Toyota/ 3cylinder 1KR engine, which is in current production and similar to ours, uses injectors with only four holes at almost identical fuel pressure. The atomization is clearly not as good as on our OEM 10 hole injectors.