by "Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo" (thetomselleck)
Published 08/27/2017 at 13:02
by "Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo" (thetomselleck)
Published 08/27/2017 at 13:02
Tags: Sportcross
STARS: 3
Oh yeah! Even with 90% freeway driving, this was all I could squeeze. Okay, so there some instances of enhanced speed here and there. But you have to live a little.
I’m gonna splurge on this thing that EL_ULY linked me and see if we can crack 23!
http://m.ebay.com/itm/400934044395?_mwBanner=1
Also had a nightmare last night about someone smashing into the back of me and my newly-painted bumper falling off in pieces. Ah, the anxieties of finally owning a decent car...
"FTTOHG Has Moved to https://opposite-lock.com" (alphaass)
08/27/2017 at 13:16, STARS: 1
I still vote that you accept that you’re not going to ever get “good” mileage with this car and slap a big turbo on it. 2Jz’s were made to be boosted. (Only half serious I’m super jealous of this car..)
"bhtooefr" (bhtooefr)
08/27/2017 at 13:19, STARS: 1
So, fun fact: making a stoichiometric gasoline engine breathe better actually hurts fuel economy, if the ECU accurately measures intake charge.
Basically, if it detects more air (either through more flow or lower IATs), it will compensate by adding more fuel to maintain stoichiometric mixture. So, you have to close the throttle plate more to maintain the desired power level, increasing pumping losses.
However, that Injen kit looks like it pulls more from the engine bay than from actually cold air, so it might actually run hotter IATs, reducing intake charge density, improving fuel economy. (Basically, it’s utter shit for what it claims to do, and I sure wouldn’t run it because cone filters are often bad, but it might actually do what you want it to do.)
"Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo" (thetomselleck)
08/27/2017 at 13:25, STARS: 1
I do accept! I accepted it long before purchase. I got 16 on my last tank. It was more a tongue-in-cheek comment that 23 MPGs would be a cause for celebration
"gin-san - shitpost specialist" (gin-san-)
08/27/2017 at 13:33, STARS: 1
For pure highway driving it’s on the low side, but if you’re enjoying the drive I think it’s a worthwhile tradeoff.
My last fuel tank read 12.7L/100km; that’s 18.5 MPG for you imperialists. This is from a 200hp 1.6L turbo engine with 100% city driving. The best I’ve managed on a pure highway trip was about 8L/100km which works out to around 29 MPG.
Then again, I drive like my foot is made of lead - I don’t break speed limits by insane amounts or anything, but I enjoy the acceleration that my old car never had.
"bhtooefr" (bhtooefr)
08/27/2017 at 13:46, STARS: 1
I think there’s ways to do it, but by the time you did it, you could’ve bought an actually efficient car.
Retarded intake cam timing by, oh, 30-50° or so, and a tune that’s aware of this (as it may massively fuck with mixture control due to intake reversion - bonus, you’ll now be able to run on regular perfectly fine)
Taller rear end ratio - 3.583 exists in European and Australian cars. I believe you could keep the automatic with this, or swap to a manual
Speaking of which, swap to a manual - especially because this has a cable throttle apparently, that will help a lot - you need to be able to have the throttle fairly wide open while holding a high gear for maximum efficiency, and a cable throttle on an automatic can’t do that
Low rolling resistance tires on the smallest, lightest, most aero wheels that clear the brakes (16s, apparently)
Hot air intake (that’s starting to get into questionable territory, but it does work)
Note that performance will be seriously negatively affected - low-end torque especially will be hurt badly, combined with gearing that needs that low-end torque even more.
"E90M3" (e90m3)
08/27/2017 at 13:50, STARS: 0
So when are you getting an E91?
"Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo" (thetomselleck)
08/27/2017 at 14:06, STARS: 0
Right after you collect this knuckle sammich
"E90M3" (e90m3)
08/27/2017 at 14:14, STARS: 0
So tomorrow?