MPGs run, Aspire SE

[TominMO]

BTW, I probably read it and it didn't register with me but what did you do for a downstream o2 when you put the wideband in its' place?

It's a 95 Aspire, so OBD1--no downstream O2 sensor. But I did have the bung for it, which had a plug in it. With Matt's header of course you get two bungs, one for the upstream and one for the wideband, if used. If you had an OBD2 Aspire and therefore needed a cat, you would have to have another bung welded onto the pipe behind the cat, or find a way to re-use what you had. Which is why I buy only 1995 cars or earlier--no inspection here for pre-OBD2, and I don't have OBD2 issues like needing a rear O2 sensor.

As far as the parts working as advertised--even though I am sure the principles of how to proceed in designing engine parts to give specific results are well-known by guys like Matt, that doesn't mean that results are perfectly predictable! Engine-building is a science, and perhaps to some extent intuitive (but based on experience), and science requires experimentation. Matt is an expert, but he is not omniscient, and he does not have testing facilities like GM and Toyota, so we are the testers of what comes out of his shop. My AFR meter has proven that his cam does make the car run lean--but I think the computerized fuel system is self-correcting, so it's hard to defeat it; although at least I'm not throwing a code anymore.

[zoom zoom]

Thanks for the part number, my b6 Festy is throwing a code 15 now too. (It had a code 17 after I adjusted the idle set screw but turning that back has kept that code from reappearing) Sorry your having such a hard time with these nice new parts man, for the price they should work as advertised. I mean obviously if your buying a cam for max mpg you want max mpg and getting max mpg is more important than a couple HP lol, otherwise you'd opt for a cam that'll rock the car like a 57 Chevy with a big block. These runs your doing are good for the community, I don't mean to offend in my previous posts, I actually have and still do track milage and try figure out how new parts or upgrades affects operation and economy. All I meant was that there needs to be some type of control groupage to compare individual new parts vs stock. Your doing a fine job of getting results, good or bad, and that's what it's all about. I just hope your happy with the end result, don't sweat us haters.


BTW, I probably read it and it didn't register with me but what did you do for a downstream o2 when you put the wideband in its' place?

[TominMO]

It's odb1, so no feedback check. Without testing I wouldn't know if it's within reason. For 10x over the recommended milage, I'll can assume to buy new, since it's history, and my 100k of mistreat before rebuild , and now especially the last 10k on leaded fuel....

I'll check those part#s Monday. Thanks.

Sent from my rooted HTC Supersonic using Tapatalk 2 Pro

OBD-I and II both use the 234-1000 (234-1010 with the Festy plug, -1020 with the Aspire plug) as the upstream O2 sensor. No downstream for OBD-I obviously.

[jason_]

Advance Auto lists the Denso 234-1000 as an alternative to the much more expensive plug-and-play one, the only difference being the correct plug. You can buy the 234-1000 for about $14, and splicing works fine. And yes a functioning O2 sensor makes a big difference, and they typically last from 30-60K miles, depending on fuel, your astrological sign, etc. I consider them a part of the tune-up procedure.

It's odb1, so no feedback check. Without testing I wouldn't know if it's within reason. For 10x over the recommended milage, I'll can assume to buy new, since it's history, and my 100k of mistreat before rebuild , and now especially the last 10k on leaded fuel....

I'll check those part#s Monday. Thanks.

Sent from my rooted HTC Supersonic using Tapatalk 2 Pro

[TominMO]

Might not be able to make a run on Sunday; 50% chance of rain that morning. In which case I will just drive around normally, city/hwy, and see what I come up with.

[TominMO]

I'm curious if a new o2 sensor will yield me some decent gains. This one has well over 300k miles. I read somewhere 30/40k is tops for accurate sensing, and lower if additives or lead is ran (been mixing 50/50 110/93 race fuel for my own experiments, as my 11:1 and unable to run hotter then 170* was a battle in stop and go traffic this summer, yes, I also blasted heater core to help... Miserable.... ) and burned, leaves a film that upsets sensors sensing capabilities.

Parts store claims can't get a single wire, but I don't know if all single wires are the same or not, regardless of year, or make, or just cut off ends and make it work and seal splice good.

Advance Auto lists the Denso 234-1000 as an alternative to the much more expensive plug-and-play one, the only difference being the correct plug. You can buy the 234-1000 for about $14, and splicing works fine. And yes a functioning O2 sensor makes a big difference, and they typically last from 30-60K miles, depending on fuel, your astrological sign, etc. I consider them a part of the tune-up procedure.

[drddan]

You go , Tom!

Incredible thread and work!

[jason_]

I'm actually following this. I'm curious if a new o2 sensor will yield me some decent gains. This one has well over 300k miles. I read somewhere 30/40k is tops for accurate sensing, and lower if additives or lead is ran (been mixing 50/50 110/93 race fuel for my own experiments, as my 11:1 and unable to run hotter then 170* was a battle in stop and go traffic this summer, yes, I also blasted heater core to help... Miserable.... ) and burned, leaves a film that upsets sensors sensing capabilities.

Oarts store claims can't get a single wire, but I don't know if all single wires are the same or not, regardless of year, or make, or just cut off ends and make it work and seal splice good.



Sent from my rooted HTC Supersonic using Tapatalk 2 Pro

[TominMO]

Ive always let a pump shutoff to let me know its full. Better than it splashing on your nikes. Now that i know you are topping off your car like a ride on lawnmower it makes sense. I was not saying passenger weight affects fuel ecomomy im saying weight uneven in the car,a slant lets the pump shutoff differently which obviously you are not doing anyway

OK, understood. Anyone doing MPG runs with just the first pump shutoff would get very inconsistent results; I can always add another 1/2 gallon or more after the first shutoff.

I just get annoyed that people are still criticizing my methodology, without reading my earlier threads to see what I am doing, and criticizing from the comfort of their computer chair, without doing any testing themselves. Every run is a couple or three hours of time, or more in some cases, when I could be doing other things, and I've made a lot of runs. Not to mention the expenses of gas, cam, cam gear, FPR, header, etc. At this point I easily have over $1K in testing, including gas and parts. Luckily I have the time and inclination.

[getnpsi]

Ive always let a pump shutoff to let me know its full. Better than it splashing on your nikes. Now that i know you are topping off your car like a ride on lawnmower it makes sense. I was not saying passenger weight affects fuel ecomomy im saying weight uneven in the car,a slant lets the pump shutoff differently which obviously you are not doing anyway

[TominMO]

I want the pump more uphill so that the filler neck is at the highest point of the tank. Same principle as getting air bubbles out of a radiator, try to have the filler neck uphill from the top hose so the bubbles get to the neck, and pop there before they can get to the hose.

So I should try to find a passenger at 6:30 on the mornings when I do my runs (to avoid the sun's heat, so I don't need A/C)? And then do what, leave him there while I go on my run? His suggestion makes no sense.

[drddan]

and only use pumps where the land is slanted downhill from the gas pump. Oh, and a typical passenger would add about twice the weight of a tank of fuel.

?? What is reasoning for filling with downward slanted land??

... and I think he meant getting more gas into the tank with the weight of a passenger in the seat? and maybe not having the passenger ride in it, but just for the fill?
Dont know if that would make a diff.

[TominMO]

I would think that the ecu catches that lean reading and starts dumping fuel to get it back in line, especially aspire with maf. Only time will tell. Remember the initial MPG CAM bragging numbers were done with a carbed festiva and outside of california no one has any of them to EPA specs anymore. Obviously getting the car to start up and scoot is the most important, id just hate to see the sensors fighting themselves.

1. This is why im happy with your AFR brand purchase so you can at least run a narrowband voltage offset back to ecu to get it to think its running at 14.7 when you can lean it out some and it not know a thing.
2. Again I'd like to see longer trips being made.
3. Simply filling up with a passenger in the car might get slightly more gas in there before the click and so on

1. I'm not runnning a signal from the Innovate; I installed a separate narrowband heated O2 sensor. This is because I want to be able to move the Innovate to other cars, and have the Aspire still run properly, and without codes.
2. Fine, you pay my fuel bills. My technique has proven (to me) to be very consistent, and over shorter trips than these.
3. There's no click on the gas pump to be concerned about; I fill it until I can see gas at the very top, above the little flap. And rock the car to burp it, and only use pumps where the land is slanted downhill from the gas pump. Oh, and a typical passenger would add about twice the weight of a tank of fuel.

[getnpsi]

I would think that the ecu catches that lean reading and starts dumping fuel to get it back in line, especially aspire with maf. Only time will tell. Remember the initial MPG CAM bragging numbers were done with a carbed festiva and outside of california no one has any of them to EPA specs anymore. Obviously getting the car to start up and scoot is the most important, id just hate to see the sensors fighting themselves. This is why im happy with your AFR brand purchase so you can at least run a narrowband voltage offset back to ecu to get it to think its running at 14.7 when you can lean it out some and it not know a thing. Just dont get greedy make everything white and burn something up and have to do your head over. Again I'd like to see longer trips being made. Simply filling up with a passenger in the car might get slightly more gas in there before the click and so on

[TominMO]

Went on a MPG run this morn. Cam timing straight up (I haven't installed the adjustable cam gear yet), ignition timing at 10 BTDC. AFR meter showing a hot idle of 16 - 17. While running, the meter's digital readout oscillated between low 14s and low 15s (14.7 is considered the "ideal" mix). I drove 145 miles and refilled with 2.86 gallons, for a MPG figure of 50.7.

When I started the car after filling up, it was idling rough. Ran fine on the way home, but rough idle at the next two stop lights. Got home and hooked up the timing light, and played around with the timing to see what the car liked. Turned out to be ~15 BTDC; idled better, at about 700. Checked the AFR meter and it was reading in the 18 - 19 range. So, as I expected, advancing the timing will lean it out more. (I tried going the other way, but it was really struggling to idle at all.)

Since I can get such lean readings with this cam and adjusting the ignition timing, I am thinking that an adjustable FPR might not be any help. What I would really like to do is get things nice and lean with just the cam (and the heated O2 sensor), and the optimal ignition timing. That would keep costs down for anyone else wanting to improve their car's mileage this way. After I see what 15* does for the situation, I will experiment with the cam timing. I talked to Matt a few minutes ago, and he recommends adjusting cam timing 2* at a time. He and I both felt that the right direction to initially try with the cam was in retarding it.

I should also add that Matt went rather conservative in designing this cam, because he was very concerned that while I might get great mileage with a more radical MPG cam, the car would have no power. So it's not like my results are set in stone for anyone else with a Festy or Aspire. With a more aggressive MPG cam, another tester might well get better mileage. But given that my AFR meter is lurking in the 16s to 19s in hot idle, I don't know how much better you could expect from a cam. My run Sunday morning will hopefully answer some more questions.

After that I will just drive around, city/hwy, and see what happens mileage-wise, until I leave for Madness Thurs morning.