__________________________________________
View my fuel log 2013 Space Star Cleartec Intense 1.0 manual: 55.7 mpg (US) ... 23.7 km/L ... 4.2 L/100 km ... 66.9 mpg (Imp)
Something im interested in...is the 3a92 a solid lifter, or hydraulic lifter? I wonder how much, if any impact to MPG would happen if we were to throw in some 80lb springs on the valves? Maybe get another grand of redline?
2018 mirage ES manual
__________________________________________
View my fuel log 2018 Mirage Es 1.2 manual: 41.6 mpg (US) ... 17.7 km/L ... 5.7 L/100 km ... 50.0 mpg (Imp)
The 3A90 valvetrain uses solid tappets, not hydraulic lifters.
__________________________________________
View my fuel log 2015 Mirage ES 1.2 manual: 49.6 mpg (US) ... 21.1 km/L ... 4.7 L/100 km ... 59.5 mpg (Imp)
It would surely impact the MPG a little bit to put stronger valve springs in. That's why they didn't. The valves themselves are very spindly and small. They've gone out of their way to make that valvetrain take as little energy to turn as possible.
But, yeah... stiffer valve springs would surely have kept the valves from crashing like they did. For now, we're just going to make efforts to ensure that we don't miss shifts like that any more! It cost $600 for the engine, plus consumables, and down time.
Interestingly, I think my current configuration is going to be capable of better gas mileage. The friction improvements on the 2017 engine (same thing that gives it 4 more hp) and my lighter flywheel. Last night, after playing with acceleration runs, I took the long way home and played with hypermiling. Sunday night, no traffic, good time for that. It wasn't a long trip, but usually that kind of trip would net me a max of about 54 mpg. This time, even with two traffic light stops and some traffic that made me drive 45 mph, I was flirting with 59 for a while. Ended up at 57.6 by the time I got home. That is an absolute record for me in this car by almost 4 mpg!
Simplify and add lightness.
Whoa, last night was not a fluke. Traffic wasn't particularly heavy today, being Veteran's Day. But, there was traffic. And I just drove 40 minutes, 25 miles of mixed driving... 56.9 mpg! It was a bunch of stop and go 35-45 mph, some 55 mph highway, and some casual suburban cruising at 30-35.
It's definitely easier to get more MPG with a little more torque available. (likewise, would be easy to NOT get more MPG... takes restraint)
Simplify and add lightness.
My 18 with no ac on hauling 50mph going to work, I can hang out around 54mpg until I get in the city, and it drops off to abiut 51, south west florida weather is too hot for real good MPGs can't wait for winter to hit! I love your threads, make me confidant I can tackle anything on this little car
2018 mirage ES manual
__________________________________________
View my fuel log 2018 Mirage Es 1.2 manual: 41.6 mpg (US) ... 17.7 km/L ... 5.7 L/100 km ... 50.0 mpg (Imp)
Without a cam that is ground to produce power in that rpm range all you’d do make more noise. Even if you could take advantage of more rpm there is no guarantee that the alternator, ac compressor, oil and water pump could take the rpm for any length of time. Another concern would be that with only a 3 qt or L oil capacity at higher rpm you could run the risk of having all the oil in the upper portion of the engine and the oil level is so low in the pan that the oil pump either sucks air or aerates. Both are bad. Which is why engines that are designed for higher rpm’s have high volume oil pumps and extra capacity pans.
__________________________________________
View my fuel log 2015 Mirage ES 1.2 automatic: 40.5 mpg (US) ... 17.2 km/L ... 5.8 L/100 km ... 48.6 mpg (Imp)
Fummins (11-12-2018)
Odd question, but is the standard oil pan metal or plastic?
Steel
__________________________________________
View my fuel log 2014 Mirage SE wussie cvt edition. 1.2 automatic: 37.7 mpg (US) ... 16.0 km/L ... 6.2 L/100 km ... 45.3 mpg (Imp)