| Author |
Message |
groove83
|
|
Post subject:
 Posted: Nov 06, 2009 - 04:40 PM
|
|
Blabbermouth
Joined: Nov 29, 2001
Posts: 1611
Location: Paw Paw, MI
Status: Offline
|
|
| PWE, I only skimmed though that article, but that was some pretty cool info... . |
_________________
AIM:groove8310
MSN:groove8310@msn.com
1994 Taurus SHO.....junked
1994 Topaz GS....daily
Project cars...
1964 Pontiac GTO
1992 Ford tempo GLS....SHO swap in progress
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Hermie
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 06, 2009 - 06:28 PM
|
|
Posting Freak
Joined: Jul 11, 2009
Posts: 723
Location: Lebanon, OR
Status: Offline
|
|
I've read some other articles from AutoSpeed. Even though they speak in terms of boot and bonnet, it's a wealth of information.
I found another article that made me trim my rear tire spats this morning. Apparently, the concept of "bigger is better" is detrimental here. Make it too big and it'll actually increase both drag and lift. I trimmed them down to only be one inch long, enough to create a pressure zone that curves the air downwards instead of perpendicular into the tire or spat. I'm trying to figure out how to add some to the front as well using what I trimmed. Unfortunately, the surface is much harder to work with than the rear, but it shouldn't be too hard to find a way.
Here's the article, also from Autospeed: http://autospeed.com/cms/title_Modifying-UnderCar-Airflow-Part-2/A_2456/article.html |
_________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Hermie
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 08, 2009 - 02:18 AM
|
|
Posting Freak
Joined: Jul 11, 2009
Posts: 723
Location: Lebanon, OR
Status: Offline
|
|
| Was going to get to the muffler today, then the pipe cutter failed, finacee demanded going out, then rained on. Things just didn't want me to get that done today. |
_________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
89TempoGLS
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 08, 2009 - 04:05 AM
|
|
Blabbermouth
Joined: Jul 26, 2005
Posts: 1502
Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
|
|
| its alright man, just take ur time with your project. if you dont take ur time, then things wont get done the way you want them or the right way. Good luck by the way! |
_________________
 
1988 GLS 2 door and 1995 Mystique 2.0 5 speed. former owner of Temper, 89 GLS 417 pkg
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
temptour
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 08, 2009 - 02:47 PM
|
|
Active Member
Joined: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 268
Location: Lebanon, PA
Status: Offline
|
|
| Thanks for the links to those autospeed articles. Read them both in their entirety. Pretty interesting stuff. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Hermie
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 08, 2009 - 06:42 PM
|
|
Posting Freak
Joined: Jul 11, 2009
Posts: 723
Location: Lebanon, OR
Status: Offline
|
|
Well, I got the muffler installed today. Wasn't that hard, but I needed to improvise a couple of things.
Some things to remember for others- The stretch of pipe attaching to the stock muffler doesn't have much of a straight section. You're going to either need to have the muffler at an angle, or get an extension. You're also going to need to remove the rubber thing that holds the tailpipe up and get a strap to hang the new tailpipe. Also, you can't get a pipe cutter all the way around, so you'll need to cut as much as you can and bend it the rest of the way or use a saw.
This muffler definitely has a deeper note, but hearing the high whine of the 4-banger and the low rumble of the muffler is kind of odd. I haven't taken it out yet to test the power gains, but I'm going food shopping later, so I'll get to try it out.
Oh, and I have the lip spoiler on too. Doesn't look too bad, but I probably should have moved it back half an inch farther, even though it would have started tilting from the rounded trunk edge.
I haven't calculated this week's mileage yet, but I'll be filling up the tank in a little bit. More to come later.  |
_________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
PerformanceWithEconomy
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 09, 2009 - 02:36 AM
|
|
Moderator
Joined: Dec 23, 2007
Posts: 1107
Location: South Suburbs of Chicago
Status: Offline
|
|
Were you able to make a good seal between the exhaust pipe and the muffler? You mentioned that this was not a straight or smooth area, so that's the first thing that came to mind.
As far as your power and mileage figures go, give the computer a bit to adjust to the changes in air flow. While the sound is obviously different, most of the differences in performance and / or mileage will be more long term than "HOLY COW" i.e. not instantly recognizable. Sean
< |
_________________
92 White / Red 2.3 MTX 130K miles, 93 Cayman Green / Grey 2.3 MTX 140K miles, 94 White / Grey 2.3 MTX 196K miles, 94 Red / Grey 2.3 ATX 70K miles, SouthSide Chicago
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Hermie
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 09, 2009 - 04:08 AM
|
|
Posting Freak
Joined: Jul 11, 2009
Posts: 723
Location: Lebanon, OR
Status: Offline
|
|
I'm pretty sure it's a good seal. I got it a bit farther back, so it's at a bit of an angle (thankfully the offset in/out works perfectly- My tailpipe is right in the middle of the cutout after a bit of work) and tightened the clamp as much as I could. It won't budge, so I'm pretty sure it's good. Though there was a harsh vibration around 3000 RPM, but it could have been the tailpipe vibrating against the bumper. I have a strap around it holding it in the middle of the cutout.
It seems like there's a little bit more pull now, at least in the midrange. I've been driving slow partially because my car isn't exactly registered (temp CA registration expired, and paperwork issues stalled registration in OR), but I'll be getting that taken care of in the morning. |
_________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
jtzins
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 09, 2009 - 05:19 AM
|
|
Blabbermouth
Joined: Oct 23, 2003
Posts: 1254
Status: Offline
|
|
| Yes, I'm sure there's more pull now. If it's louder, it's also faster. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
PerformanceWithEconomy
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 09, 2009 - 01:24 PM
|
|
Moderator
Joined: Dec 23, 2007
Posts: 1107
Location: South Suburbs of Chicago
Status: Offline
|
|
"Sensations of speed", eh Jtzins???
This is why some type of repeatable testing comes in handy. Underoath109 conducted some simple tests involving a location that he was well familiar with. Obviously, one has to have a point of reference BEFORE making any changes in order to provide a reasonably accurate baseline to judge from. Since Hermie doesn't make mention of doing anything like this, and is in relatively unfamiliar surroundings, it may be hard for him to provide any concrete evidence one way or the other.
Should Hermie see a consistent difference in his gas mileage, good or bad, that would indicate that something has changed. Could be for the better due to increased efficiency or it could be worse. If it gets worse, it probably has more to do with him trying to take advantage of the potential power increase and change in sound rather than this specific muffler being less efficient than the factory stock muffler.
After learning of the differences in flow potential, there should be little doubt in anyone's mind which muffler is capable of producing higher levels of efficiency and exhaust scavenging. Whether or not this potential gain comes into play in the real world will depend on the condition & efficiency of the motor as a whole and one's driving style and road conditions. Sean
< |
_________________
92 White / Red 2.3 MTX 130K miles, 93 Cayman Green / Grey 2.3 MTX 140K miles, 94 White / Grey 2.3 MTX 196K miles, 94 Red / Grey 2.3 ATX 70K miles, SouthSide Chicago
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Hermie
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 09, 2009 - 03:45 PM
|
|
Posting Freak
Joined: Jul 11, 2009
Posts: 723
Location: Lebanon, OR
Status: Offline
|
|
There isn't much more volume, actually.
When accelerating, I press the pedal as little as possible, almost always giving it the same pressure.
Also, I said it "seems" like there's more pull, because I don't have a concrete way to test. When giving it the same pressure on the gas I usually do, it felt like my neck muscles needed to strain a little more than usual to keep it straight. Whether that's from an actual power change or possibly environmental factors, I'm not totally sure.
With the vortex generators alone, it seems like it actually cost me an MPG or so. My last tank measured out to around 23-24, when my last was 25, give or take. Let's see if the added lip spoiler can keep the turbulent flow on the trunk in check. Then again, my last tank also had about half an hour's worth of putting around a parking lot, waiting for a spot, and more city driving than usual. There was also quite a bit of rain and windy driving.
I also still have that SES light on.
EDIT: Actually, I do have something concrete. When putting around a parking lot in D without touching the gas, it'll cruise at 5 MPH. With the new muffler, it gets up to 8, and gets up to speed quicker. |
_________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
jglen490
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 09, 2009 - 09:51 PM
|
|
Posting Freak
Joined: Jul 13, 2007
Posts: 517
Location: Montgomery AL
Status: Offline
|
|
The reality is, that with MPG measurement in "real world" conditions, it's almost impossible to recreate every condition of travel, atmospherics, and state of mind. Therefore, a week to week compare is meaningless.
What you can do, is keep track of your MPG over a long period of time (weeks, months preferably), then affect some change (or not), and track MPG again over a long period of time. Once you have that habit, as you keep your log you can make note of any changes (oil, tuneup, tires, alignment) in the same log. And before you know it, you have a complete maintenance record and you'll be able to better predict what the effect of a change might be.
Think long term!! |
_________________
I feel more like I do now than I did when I got here.
=====================================
'92 Plymouth Grand Voyager, 3.3L - "Old Guy"
'94 Tempo GL 4-door, 2.3L, autotragic - "Bonz"
'97 Ranger 3.0L - "Abe"
'05 Dodge caravan, 3.3L - "George"
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
PerformanceWithEconomy
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 10, 2009 - 03:34 AM
|
|
Moderator
Joined: Dec 23, 2007
Posts: 1107
Location: South Suburbs of Chicago
Status: Offline
|
|
I agree that there are TONS of variations that can alter one's mileage. Having said that, if one travels the same routes day in and day out at the same appr times of day, it's not hard to follow trends. Granted, sudden changes in weather can throw you a curve, but even that can be somewhat predictable if tracking mpg's long enough.
I wouldn't be so concerned about a difference of 1 or even 2 mpg's. As previously mentioned, changes in temp, humidity, traffic conditions, etc... can easily account for something like this. Seeing differences of 4+ mpg's all of a sudden better have some type of explanation though.
Having said that, i have noticed changes in mpg on that scale simply by changing fuels for several tankfuls. We've discussed this before, and as always, there are even variables here. Some regions have multiple different fuel suppliers whereas other regions may all come from one or maybe two refineries. As such, Brand X fuel in Chicago may be completely different from Brand X in Dallas or Seattle. On that same note, Brands A, B & C might all come from the same refinery in Boise. When i last checked, we had appr 6 different refineries within a couple hours drive of the Chicagoland area. As such, we may have a wider range of fuel formulations than many other locations.
Like others have said, pay attention to what's going on with your car and driving habits and record your mileage, fuels used, etc... Even if you don't get the results that you would like to see, you'll at least have a point of reference to work from. Sean
<
PS... changes in idle speed is something that i never thought of checking. Obviously, one would want to baseline this on a flat surface, as going up a slight incline would obviously net you a slower speed than going down a slight decline. Apples to apples works best. |
_________________
92 White / Red 2.3 MTX 130K miles, 93 Cayman Green / Grey 2.3 MTX 140K miles, 94 White / Grey 2.3 MTX 196K miles, 94 Red / Grey 2.3 ATX 70K miles, SouthSide Chicago
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Hermie
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 10, 2009 - 07:31 PM
|
|
Posting Freak
Joined: Jul 11, 2009
Posts: 723
Location: Lebanon, OR
Status: Offline
|
|
I've made sure to give my calculations a +/- 2 MPGs, but I see your point about normal tant-to-tank variations. What I should have done was kept a fuel log when I got it compared to now.
Also, if I remember right, E10 makes your mileage take a hit, doesn't it? |
_________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
jglen490
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 10, 2009 - 10:00 PM
|
|
Posting Freak
Joined: Jul 13, 2007
Posts: 517
Location: Montgomery AL
Status: Offline
|
|
| Probably. But track it in your log, to figure it out!! |
_________________
I feel more like I do now than I did when I got here.
=====================================
'92 Plymouth Grand Voyager, 3.3L - "Old Guy"
'94 Tempo GL 4-door, 2.3L, autotragic - "Bonz"
'97 Ranger 3.0L - "Abe"
'05 Dodge caravan, 3.3L - "George"
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
