100mpg from diesel hatchback??

[theholycow]

Every chip seller insists that theirs increases fuel economy. The expert engineers who designed the cars are no fools, but they are constrained by having to make the car be everything to everyone -- emissions, fuel economy, power, price, dependability, drivability, and some other things I can't think of at the moment. To adjust one of those items up, someone writing a new program has to adjust most of the others down.

Try to find actual customers who have real world results to report. Maybe it can increase your economy but I wouldn't depend on it.

[Jay2TheRescue]

Originally Posted by theholycow

Every chip seller insists that theirs increases fuel economy. The expert engineers who designed the cars are no fools, but they are constrained by having to make the car be everything to everyone -- emissions, fuel economy, power, price, dependability, drivability, and some other things I can't think of at the moment. To adjust one of those items up, someone writing a new program has to adjust most of the others down.

Try to find actual customers who have real world results to report. Maybe it can increase your economy but I wouldn't depend on it.

If increasing power and MPG came with a simple rewrite of the computer program, that didn't sacrifice driveability and emissions then the MFR would have already done it.

-Jay

[Dave252252]

Its interesting that they only state a FE improvement for turbo diesels, and not for petrol/ petrol turbos.

I have read in the past, that in some models with the same engine, but different power/ torque outputs, the one with more power and torque gives better FE.

Maybe it depends upon your specific engine/ programme that is designed?

[GasSavers_BEEF]

I know that superchips for dodge trucks is crap!!!. I can't say for the cars but I know that over time on my truck, the ECU will relearn the way the superchips is fooling it with the sensors and counter act them. you will see a descent increase at the beginning but over time it will go back to the way it was. several people confirmed that which saved me $245. can't say about fuel economy, at the time gas was about $2 a gallon and nobody cared.

there are places that would completely rewrite your program for the ECU but they were $500 for the mild and $1k and up for the wild and they rewrote fuel maps and timing which made your mileage go to crap. you would get stupid gains from it. most of the extreme programs required major work to the engine because it would damage a stock (non-built) engine.

it all goes back to that old saying "you never get something for nothing"

I saw that little car on the internet. I looked it up after I posted. cool little thing. no where near legal in the states but I would drive the crap out of it. My first car was a '93 geo metro, got 50 mpg which was awesome to me (still awesome actually). they remind me a lot of each other.

start a gas log. I think it would be interesting to see a car get that kind of mileage from the factory.

[Dave252252]

Why would it not be legal over there Beef?

I shall maybe start a log. Certianly 90mpg will be acheivable without too much fuss I would think.

I had the next tdi engine up from this one, in a much larger car. A 1.9 turbo diesel, 25% heavier,even more of a wind barge, and still got 65mpg. That was before I began 'hypermiling' too.

[GasSavers_JoeBob]

Doesn't look that boxy to me....certainly no more boxy than my '91 Geo Metro...I wouldn't mind one of those...75 mpg would still be a nice improvement over 40 mpg...

[GasSavers_RoadWarrior]

75 over thyar is 63 over hyar don't forget.

[Wyldesoul]

If I'm not mistaken, due to the fact that diesels don't have a throttle (usually), the method they use to regulate RPM isn't by regulating incoming air, but by regulating fuel injected.

Due to the fact that a diesel runs on detonation, having it too lean isn't as much a worry. As you push down on the throttle more fuel is injected which gives more power which supports a higher rev. That's why you see puffs of black smoke when you floor it, because you pump too much fuel than can be burned, and it takes a moment or two for the revs to get high enough to burn it all.

So with that being the case with diesels, I'd say that the best driving method you could use is just use as light a foot as you can, so that as little fuel is injected as possible.


Of course, this whole post is based on the fact that I'm right about that first bit.

[ZugyNA]

Originally Posted by theholycow

Most improvements that people achieve are from driving strategies, not modifications.

Wrong. Though driving changes can help a lot. But so can technical mods. Put both together and what do you have?


Example of a technical mod:

http://www.fuel-saver.org/Forum/showthread.php?tid=680

I'm sure some on this forum will throw a fit.....

[Lug_Nut]

Keep in mind the volume differences between the Imperial gallon Dave's using and the US gallon most of the rest of us are using. Dave's Euro-cycle economy number of 78.5 per Imperial gallon is equal to 65.4 on our gallons. His desired goal of 100 is equal to our 83.3. Those make the achievement much more likely.
As far as technique versus technology, technique will always win.