Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Shop\-talk\]\s+6\s+to\s+3\s+fuel\s+saving\s*$/: 21 ]

Total 21 documents matching your query.

1. [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: "Elton E. (Tony) Clark" <eltonclark@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 20:08:15 -0500
*Okay, open your minds . . . the guy on the next bar stool opines that on his straight six '95 Jeep Cherokee work car, he is considering removing the rocker arms and pushrods on every other cylinder
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00166.html (7,701 bytes)

2. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: "Gerald Brazil" <gerrybraz@cablespeed.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 21:55:31 -0400
If God wanted it to run on three cylinders She would have made it that way! Seriously, if it does run, I think he will use almost as much gas because he is basically pushing a brick through the air a
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00168.html (8,664 bytes)

3. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: "Randall" <tr3driver@ca.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 19:11:55 -0700
Yup. The only savings (if any) would be lower "pumping losses" due to running with the throttle wider open. That's the main reason small engines get slightly better fuel mileage in the same car as l
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00169.html (7,683 bytes)

4. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: "Paul Mele" <paul.mele@usermail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 23:12:46 -0400
Always a great topic consider that BMW did an experiment in late 70's...production in mid 80's... took a 3200 lb 5 series, 4 door.... wanted the smoothness of in line 6, with economy of 4... develope
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00170.html (8,883 bytes)

5. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: Eric Murray <ericm@lne.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 20:20:02 -0700
Yes. If it's driven at the same speed, the only savings will be the lack of valve train friction in 3 cylinders. That's not zero, but it's not very much. Switching to highway tread tires would do mor
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00171.html (8,657 bytes)

6. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: "FRED E THOMAS" <frede.thomas2@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 23:35:24 -0400
Anybody remember the "Cadillac" 8-6-4 from a few years back, seemed to work _______________________________________________ Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html Shop-talk mailing list htt
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00173.html (9,956 bytes)

7. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: "Randall" <tr3driver@ca.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 21:12:36 -0700
Yeah, but what I remember is that they almost got sued over them being "unsafe". Had a tendency to turn off all cylinders while rolling down the road; or drop into 4 cylinder mode just after you'd p
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00174.html (7,790 bytes)

8. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: "David Scheidt" <dmscheidt@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 09:15:20 -0400
Dodge is now selling something along those lines in some of its big V8 beasts. They're better at it then GM was, but the economy gains aren't very big. -- David Scheidt dmscheidt@gmail.com __________
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00177.html (8,381 bytes)

9. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: Steven Trovato <strovato@optonline.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:21:03 -0400
GM is too. They call theirs "Active Fuel Management". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Fuel_Management _______________________________________________ Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.h
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00178.html (7,866 bytes)

10. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: "Elton E. (Tony) Clark" <eltonclark@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 11:25:46 -0500
*I followed Steven's link and read about all four of the systems in use to reduce the effective displacement of engines for economy. The electronic/hydraulic complexity of the systems combined with t
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00179.html (8,736 bytes)

11. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: Steven Trovato <strovato@optonline.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:20:28 -0400
I'm not accusing anyone here of doing this, but it seems that sometimes people misinterpret fuel mileage improvements. If you're getting 10 miles per gallon, and you do something that gives you 11 mi
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00181.html (8,995 bytes)

12. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: Bill Rabel <brabel@dlux.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:07:25 -0700
This is why the Europeans use liters/100 km, or volume/distance, rather than distance/volume. - Bill Rabel Anacortes, WA _______________________________________________ Support Team.Net http://www.te
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00184.html (7,917 bytes)

13. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: Jim Juhas <james.f.juhas@snet.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 21:00:46 -0400
That's the great thing about bar stools. _______________________________________________ Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html Shop-talk mailing list http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00187.html (9,040 bytes)

14. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: "Paul Mele" <paul.mele@usermail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 22:59:13 -0400
a little more food for thought BMW 528e M20 "eta" engine, 2.7 liters, low RPM/ high torque; designed for fuel economy. the write-up discussed how the engineers at BMW targeted the valve train parasit
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00189.html (9,548 bytes)

15. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: eric@megageek.com
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 23:07:24 -0400
Agreeing with Steve's post about fuel economy improvements, I wanted to add I got tried of people whining about high gas prices. So I made an app for my web site so you can SEE how much it is really
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00190.html (9,218 bytes)

16. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: eric@megageek.com
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 23:22:10 -0400
I just wrote... After re-reading this post, I didn't make it clear that the people that were complaining were people at work, NOT here. I am really enjoying the discussion here on this topic and I do
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00191.html (8,889 bytes)

17. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: Jim Franklin <jamesf@groupwbench.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 07:04:26 -0400
I have an '04 WRX. A friend had an '02. She said no matter how gently she drove, she never got better than 22mpg. So I never tried. WHen gas hit $4 I tried. Shift at 2000 rpm, predictive coasting, no
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00193.html (8,601 bytes)

18. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: Mark Noakes <mark@noakes.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 11:13:14 +0000 (GMT)
I haven't been paying attention to this thread till now so I don't know what else was said, but I've done what I would call casual hypermiling (keeping it legal) on my 86 Corvette, mildly modified fo
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00194.html (9,320 bytes)

19. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: Steven Trovato <strovato@optonline.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 11:17:28 -0400
I would rather thrash a 4 banger econobox than drive a Corvette like that. It's kind of like saving on heating oil by setting your thermostat to 55. That really works too! ___________________________
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00195.html (10,884 bytes)

20. Re: [Shop-talk] 6 to 3 fuel saving (score: 1)
Author: Mark Noakes <mark@noakes.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:17:30 +0000 (GMT)
I was mostly just trying to see what I could do with it as an engineering experiment. A C4 vette will typically get good gas mileagte anyway on the interstate...27mpg with the cruise control set on 7
/html/shop-talk/2008-07/msg00196.html (11,058 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]
This search system is powered by Namazu