Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 47

Thread: Testing: 3A92 engine intake performance

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Florida
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    107
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 26 Times in 16 Posts
    Its a instant change on a "new" ecu, one that isnt well known to a certian fuel/timing map. Ones that know a certian map will follow that and slowly learn they can add more timing and power.

    I do like resetting my ecu every 6-8 months just so the fuel map can relearn the new "type" of fuel. IE: summer vs winter fuel blends


    2018 mirage ES manual

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log 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)


  2. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Country
    Canada
    Posts
    193
    Thanks
    121
    Thanked 64 Times in 48 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Timinator View Post
    Its a instant change on a "new" ecu, one that isnt well known to a certian fuel/timing map. Ones that know a certian map will follow that and slowly learn they can add more timing and power.

    I do like resetting my ecu every 6-8 months just so the fuel map can relearn the new "type" of fuel. IE: summer vs winter fuel blends
    I'm not sure I'm buying any of this. Any hard science to back this up? Do you even have winter fuel in florida?

    Also, doesn't the cost-increase of 93 over 87 negate nearly any efficiency you gain?

    I would be hard-pressed to even find 93 up here...

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage ES 1.2 automatic: 36.9 mpg (US) ... 15.7 km/L ... 6.4 L/100 km ... 44.3 mpg (Imp)


  3. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Florida
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    107
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 26 Times in 16 Posts
    Might be 91 not 93, its 90 something! I dont do it for mpg advantage. I do it for a better running car. $2 a tank is nothing
    2018 mirage ES manual

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log 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)


  4. #34
    Moderator Eggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    10,156
    Thanks
    4,039
    Thanked 2,788 Times in 2,107 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Timinator View Post
    $2 a tank is nothing
    You got that right. That's pretty good for a full tank of gas.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log 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)


  5. #35
    Administrator Daox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Germantown, WI
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    4,999
    Thanks
    2,892
    Thanked 1,804 Times in 1,017 Posts
    Well, that is really why I started this thread to begin with. I am interested in actually doing testing to show what works, what doesn't, and if there is even any room for improvement over the OE design.
    Custom Mirage products: Cruise control kit, Glove box light, MAF sensor housing, Rear sway bar, Upper grill block

    Current project: DIY Nitrous oxide setup for ~$100

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2015 Mirage DE 1.2 manual: 47.2 mpg (US) ... 20.1 km/L ... 5.0 L/100 km ... 56.7 mpg (Imp)


  6. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Timinator View Post
    Not octane sensors, knock sensors. No knock=more timing most new cars have them and adjust timing to what the ecu "hears" from the motor
    That might be the case for cadillac,infinity etc...... that recommend higher octane fuel from factory cause they are actually tuned to run it. If you run lower octane in those they will pull timing to reduce pinging. I highly doubt your Mirage came with a little sticker on the gas door that says run 91 octane lol If it's pinging with 87 then get it fixed. That's what warranty is for.

    Knock sensors aren't a new thing. Every injected chev I've worked on had 1 or 2, I'm pretty sure even some late model carbed v8's came with one too.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log 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)


  7. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Country
    Canada
    Posts
    193
    Thanks
    121
    Thanked 64 Times in 48 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Timinator View Post
    Might be 91 not 93, its 90 something! I dont do it for mpg advantage. I do it for a better running car. $2 a tank is nothing
    We'd be about $7 more/tank here for 91, fwiw.

    As far as the Mirage is concerned... if you're not doing it for mpgs, why have this car?


    Quote Originally Posted by Fummins View Post
    If it's pinging with 87 then get it fixed. That's what warranty is for.
    What he said.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage ES 1.2 automatic: 36.9 mpg (US) ... 15.7 km/L ... 6.4 L/100 km ... 44.3 mpg (Imp)


  8. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Florida
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    107
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 26 Times in 16 Posts
    I run 91 or what ever the highest octane is, average 42mpg/tank. Great power band pulls hard from 3000-5000. I own a 5spd. I bought the mirage because it was the cheapest new vehicle on the market, the fuel mileage is just a bonus. High test fuel in naples is only $2.35/gallon. 87 is like $2.04
    2018 mirage ES manual

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log 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)


  9. #39
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Washington
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    19
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
    Would it matter if the Helmholtz resonator is moved to the rearside of the airbox? So that it would be after the air has been filtered instead of before? Just to be clear I am not thinking that the "filtered air" will somehow improve intake performance. Just wondering if it's worth getting a junkyard airbox and intake to modify. But if the positioning of the resonator is important than I won't bother

  10. #40
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Washington
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    19
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
    https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=1527735

    "Generally modifications to the intake system before the filter are for NVH issues at particular revs.

    Having worked on engine development on dynos I can say for a fact that you want the absolute lowest pressure drop possible from atmospheric to the throttle (or atmospheric to the super/turbo inlet). There is no way that you would design an intake system for performance that had anything in front of the filter that would impede the airflow - therefore it is for noise.

    From empirical data I have seen saving 1 or 2 kPa before the intake is worth between 5 & 10 kPa in exhaust back pressure with regards to getting more power from an engine." Taken from the above article. So regarding this, wouldn't our helmholtz resonator just be for noise reduction whereas if it where after the airfilter or even after the throttle body it would be for tuning purposes?



Posting Permissions

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