Strange Gas mileage results with deckplate
02-11-2007, 09:27 PM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everyone forgets about the simple fact that the gain in performance can't happen without a loss in mileage. By increasing the air flow, the engine must compensate by adding more fuel. It's very hard to stay off the throttle, but if you really want to increase your mileage, you'll need to do just the opposite and install a restrictor plate, reducing the air flow.....
Ignition,combustion,transmission drivetrain, must be in very good working condition.
02-12-2007, 02:43 PM
#22
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Warrenton, Oregon
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm... The 3.4L in this installation is known to be starved for air, that's been proven. If I create a way to get more air into the engine, then that doesn't mean it will _take in_ more air.
Correct, but 800CFM is still 800CFM, you have to "ask" for more airflow.
More air flow will create more fuel flow, which will create more power. With the deckplate mod the engine will get what it needs, when required, which is when asked.
Here's an extreme example...
Expand the airbox hole to 2 feet in size (theoretical)... Just because the hole is larger, doesn't mean that the engine will take in more air. But, the converse of reducing the hole to, say, nil (i.e., put the deckplate in) _does_ mean that the engine will be starved for air.
Regardless, we're talking about a mod that finds 6hp and you've seen a drop of 3.5mpg. 6hp won't cost you 3.5mpg (20% of your previsou mileage). Something else is going on.
Correct, but 800CFM is still 800CFM, you have to "ask" for more airflow.
More air flow will create more fuel flow, which will create more power. With the deckplate mod the engine will get what it needs, when required, which is when asked.
Here's an extreme example...
Expand the airbox hole to 2 feet in size (theoretical)... Just because the hole is larger, doesn't mean that the engine will take in more air. But, the converse of reducing the hole to, say, nil (i.e., put the deckplate in) _does_ mean that the engine will be starved for air.
Regardless, we're talking about a mod that finds 6hp and you've seen a drop of 3.5mpg. 6hp won't cost you 3.5mpg (20% of your previsou mileage). Something else is going on.
The engine sucks air in, and as you said it is starved for air. Any time you decrease resistance, and this is true for anything, you will increase the flow/movement, for whatever the case is.
If you take sky diver and drop him from an airplane, he will fall fast, but the air will limit his speed. Take the same sky diver in a vacuum, and he is going to never stop increasing speed. This is simply because there is less resistance, even though there is no increase force pulling him down.
Same goes for this, You take an engine that is pulling air in, and it has resistance on it. Cut a bigger hole, there is less resistance, therefore it is easier for the engine to pull more air in. So with the same throttle, it has more ease pulling air in, and it naturally will, unless the engine has something else to compensate for it.
It might, i don't know enough about how these work, but the simple physics of something like this is always true. That is kinda my point, i just want to know what could be causing such strange results. I don't hammer on the engine much at all, too worried about constant wear.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
he's gone
95.5-2004 Tacomas & 96-2002 4Runners
7
12-03-2019 07:08 AM
Tacoma1313
95.5-2004 Tacomas & 96-2002 4Runners
2
08-17-2015 05:44 PM
nonstop
General Vehicle Related Topics (Non Year Related)
7
08-11-2015 09:26 AM
