CAI mpg debate...my mind is blown
10-10-2012, 12:25 AM
#1
Slowest Progress Ever
Thread Starter
iTrader: (26)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The coal ridden hills of Pennsylvania
Posts: 6,022
Total Cats: 304
CAI mpg debate...my mind is blown
I own a 2007 Mazda CX-7. It's AWD, with a 2.3 liter 4 cylinder, intercooled turbo.
I want to do some mods to it to hopefully better the fuel mileage, but because of what I've been reading on the internetz...my mind is blown.
My theory is simple, "remove factory implemented restrictions, and volumetric efficiency should improve."
When I say: "I don't want it to be faster, I want it to have better fuel economy."
I mean: "The increased power due to less restrictions, should also provide better fuel economy."
Same reason that my stock '99 Miata got 26mpg, and now turbo'd and megasquirted it get 29mpg's.
I was thinking about getting a better flowing intake, thinking, "the less restrictive design of the CAI should provide better airflow making it easier for the turbo to move air, which should increase efficiency".
However, I read this, "CAI will end up increasing fuel consumption not decreasing it. Colder air will be metered by the MAF and fuel will be ADDED to keep the ratio right. You'll get more sound and maybe a little more power, but not less fuel."
How is that?? I'm thinking that response means, "since my CAI makes so much noise, I spend more time on the throttle". That's why the fuel economy decreases.
I also thought about tuning software for it, so I read this:
"An ECU reflash like MazdaEdit or piggyback controller like the Standback from CPE can adjust fuel pressure to decrease the flow of fuel and increase MPGs. However, with DISI motors they run rich on purpose because the added fuel is used to cool the combustion chambers. Make it too lean and you get dangerously hot."
The added fuel that the quote was referring to is like 9.7:1. To me, that is disgustingly rich. This turbo spools stupidly fast and supposedly makes the torque at low RPM's, like 2600 or something. Why should a daily driver be designed to run this rich? Does my thinking about less restrictions/ improving efficiencies make sense or am I losing it?
I want to do some mods to it to hopefully better the fuel mileage, but because of what I've been reading on the internetz...my mind is blown.
My theory is simple, "remove factory implemented restrictions, and volumetric efficiency should improve."
When I say: "I don't want it to be faster, I want it to have better fuel economy."
I mean: "The increased power due to less restrictions, should also provide better fuel economy."
Same reason that my stock '99 Miata got 26mpg, and now turbo'd and megasquirted it get 29mpg's.
I was thinking about getting a better flowing intake, thinking, "the less restrictive design of the CAI should provide better airflow making it easier for the turbo to move air, which should increase efficiency".
However, I read this, "CAI will end up increasing fuel consumption not decreasing it. Colder air will be metered by the MAF and fuel will be ADDED to keep the ratio right. You'll get more sound and maybe a little more power, but not less fuel."
How is that?? I'm thinking that response means, "since my CAI makes so much noise, I spend more time on the throttle". That's why the fuel economy decreases.
I also thought about tuning software for it, so I read this:
"An ECU reflash like MazdaEdit or piggyback controller like the Standback from CPE can adjust fuel pressure to decrease the flow of fuel and increase MPGs. However, with DISI motors they run rich on purpose because the added fuel is used to cool the combustion chambers. Make it too lean and you get dangerously hot."
The added fuel that the quote was referring to is like 9.7:1. To me, that is disgustingly rich. This turbo spools stupidly fast and supposedly makes the torque at low RPM's, like 2600 or something. Why should a daily driver be designed to run this rich? Does my thinking about less restrictions/ improving efficiencies make sense or am I losing it?
Reply
0
0
10-10-2012, 01:17 AM
#2
Too drunk to understand you r post right now, but IIRC *(disclaimer
runk) the hotter air causes better efficiency due to less pumping losses in the same way as EGR causes less pumping losses. Less oxygen=less power=more throttle=less pumping losses. Don't quote me on this.
runk) the hotter air causes better efficiency due to less pumping losses in the same way as EGR causes less pumping losses. Less oxygen=less power=more throttle=less pumping losses. Don't quote me on this.
Reply
0
0
10-10-2012, 01:21 AM
#4
yeah I read somewhere that hot air can actually have gains in fuel economy
here's a hot air intake, for example
Warm air intake on a Focus.... - Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum - EcoModder.com
here's a hot air intake, for example
Warm air intake on a Focus.... - Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum - EcoModder.com
Reply
0
0
10-10-2012, 01:21 AM
#5
Slowest Progress Ever
Thread Starter
iTrader: (26)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The coal ridden hills of Pennsylvania
Posts: 6,022
Total Cats: 304
Driving the same as current (light on the pedal), + cooler/ less turbulent airflow, minus restriction= more efficiency IMO.
Or is my opinion cracked like a taco taco manifold?
Or is my opinion cracked like a taco taco manifold?
Reply
0
0
10-10-2012, 02:10 AM
#12
Cpt. Slow
iTrader: (25)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon City, OR
Posts: 14,175
Total Cats: 1,129
I always thought it was pretty basic. Cooler air is more dense, aka, more oxygen. If your engine is trying to maintain a certain air fuel ratio, if you give it more air, it'll give you more fuel.
Reply
0
0
10-10-2012, 02:46 AM
#15
Elite Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Posts: 2,826
Total Cats: 67
...Which then gives more power, meaning to cruise at the same speed will then require less throttle, therefore using the same amount of fuel.... but the throttle is closed more so you get greater pumping loses.
Dann
Dann
Reply
-1
-1
10-10-2012, 08:48 AM
#17
Elite Member
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chesterfield, NJ
Posts: 6,892
Total Cats: 399
Or drill a large hole in the exhaust mani heatshield and plumb the airbox inlet to that large hole. Get super trick with a valve (cheap exhaust cutout style? old throttle body?) that you can flip so you can HAVE THE POWA when you need it.
Reply
0
0
10-10-2012, 10:13 AM
#20
Elite Member
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chesterfield, NJ
Posts: 6,892
Total Cats: 399
There was a thread here a while back on smokey yunick's hot vapor(?) hypermile setup that used really high IAT's as part of it. And a turbo to mix the air/fuel, not pressurize.
Reply
0
0
