AutoblogGreen

A responsible journalist would get 3rd party verification before running a story. Then again, this report did come from the mainstream media and we all know that has NOTHING to do with responsible journalism.

TV news is there to get viewers, gain ratings, sell advertising time & entertain, NOT inform or educate. Only a complete fool would believe that there is any real weight in what they have to “report”.

Now, where is the independent 3rd party verification of their claims?

Reply

To the author of this article:

Power or 0-60 times? Are you kidding? If I could double or triple my mileage by hooking up a small silver box, do you think it would matter to me if my Bonneville took 20 seconds to get to 60 instead of 16?

Why should the reporter have asked those questions?

Reply

Just so you know, the tax law in NC has changed to "exempt biodiesel produced by an individual for personal use in a private passenger vehicle from motor fuel excise tax".

Reply

What are you, an oil company shill? If this guy can produce those results he should be encouraged, not taking cheap shots from you!!

Reply

Wouldn't cylinder deactivation have to be engineered into the intake system and/or the manifold somehow?

It's not enough to just quit sending a spark to the plug in a cylinder if the intake system is still pumping fuel into it. Then you're just flushing gas through the system without burning it.

Or maybe his system does address that. I've just seen how enough of these "OMG HUGE MILEAGE GAINS" things turn out which, coupled with the aforementioned lack of veracity from local news sources, didn't give me any desire to watch the report.

Reply

0-60 times and power? Gee, if you watch the video he tells you that you have to flip a switch to activate the injector shutdown. One can assume that if you want max power you would turn the injectors back on?

Does it work on modern cars? His Taurus is a 1996-2005 model after all.

I really wonder where he comes up with 65% savings ($100->$35 fuel bill) by shutting off half the injectors. Especially when the valves are still working (OEM's shut off the valves too) so all the pumping losses are still present.

#5: the device deactivates the fuel injectors, not the spark.

Reply

I can get you infinite miles per gallon for $100. Just give me a week to find an old 10 speed bike on craigslist for you.

Seriously, we already know you can get more efficiency if you drastically reduce performance, but the market won't buy cars like that in any serious volume. That makes a car like this a bad business case and a bad way to have a significant impact on fuel consumption.

Reply

All this gentleman is doing is cutting the fuel injection and ignition for some of the cylinders. The other cylinders receive extra fuel to maintain torque, which means the throttle is opened up and they run more efficiently. If additional power is required, operation can return to normal mode.

However, *all* pistons and *all* valves are still moving, so any unfired cylinders are simply pumping excess air through the system. This wasteful and renders the three-way catalyst inoperative (i.e. there's lots of NOx coming out of the tailpipe). It is illegal to modify your vehicle such that its emissions are increased. Also, I'd be surprised if there's any fuel economy gain at all with this very simple strategy.

Honda, GM and other go one step further, they also switch off valve actuation for the unfired cylinders with special, hydraulically activated lost motion elements. The unfired cylinders therefore act as gas springs, which is a lot more efficient and also avoids emissions issues. The ECU has to frequently and transparently switch between fired and unfired modes to keep the whole engine warm.

The snag is that even with this far more complex control strategy, the unfired pistons are still moving and generate internal friction. Also, the gas springs are not adiabatic because the unfired cylinders are still cooled. Total fuel savings are just 5-7%, but the additional hardware costs peanuts.

True cylinder deactivation implies the use of not one large but two small engines. Their cylinder counts and displacements may or may not be identical. One or both engines may require inertial compensation elements. They may share the block, oil carter and peripheral elements, but there are two independent crankshafts and valve trains. At low power levels, only one or the other engine is active. The other is not supplied with coolant nor with oil. At high power levels, both engines run at the same speed but indeterminate relative phase.

Note that firing up an engine when the other one is already running doesn't require an electric starter motor, but it does require careful clutch control and a combustion-assisted run up to speed. During this process, which may take a couple of seconds if the operating point calls for high revs, both engines will be running but at different speeds - that should make for an interesting sound effect.

A special transmission strategy is required to support a two-engine configuration, e.g. a group of phase-shifted symmetric four-bar linkages located topologically between the clutches and the first set of gears. Another option is to pair up a conventional FWD drivetrain with a small genset that drives an electric motor mounted on the rear axle.

Finally, note that it is possible to join the two exhaust systems at a location upstream of the catalytic converters. A butterfly valve at the join location is fully open when only one engine is active and fully closed when both are. This ensures both converters are exposed to hot exhaust gas at all times.

All told, true cylinder deactivation is something no manufacturer offers today, perhaps because it is considered too exotic or believed to be too expensive.

Reply

Just wondering how do we get in contact with Fred Crane, if this thing really works is he selling them??? Let me know.

Reply

I have to agree some of the viewers with regards to the journalistic irresponsibility in reporting news stories without addressing some key issues.

I can imagine all of the viewers rushing out to start dumping cooking oil into their regular car gas tanks without modifications...or "pulling the plug" on half of your cylinders without regards to the balance of modern computer-driven engines, not to mention voiding warranties and perhaps causing VERY costly repairs if one starts blowing cyclinders or gaskets.

I almost went to the kitchen to get some oil to dump into my own gas tank, and as a former mechanic, I KNOW BETTER!

Reply

Yes I would like contact information for Fred Crane also.

Best Regards,
Steve

Reply

How about this. What if, and this is just a long shot, but what if we just take the time to think about DRIVING SLOWER!!!

Reply

Sounds like exaggerated claims to get more interest and sales. Independent testing is needed, his own tests could be inadvetently or deliberately biased in favor of his device. Anecdotal evidence doesn't count, users can be biased, and anecdotes can be made up.

Concerns about pumping losses and problems with emission controls are valid, but there may be ways to minimize that. If the deactivation was sequential, with each cylinder being deactivated only once in every 2, 3, or 4 cycles, the residual heat in the cylinder would expand the air slightly, scavanging some energy that would otherwise be lost. (hmm, reminds me of that 6 cycle engine!) That salvaged heat could also avoid cooling the exhaust too much for the catalytic converter to work. Note that most engines inject extra air into the exhaust, that air injection pump would not be needed with this system in place.

rgseidl: I like your "dual engine" idea, it would be mre efficient than the other cylinder deactivation schemes. Using differential gearing, the output of the two engines could be combined even if running at different speeds. Planetary differential gears could even compensate somewhat for differences in torque and power output - that is how Toyota combines electric and IC engine output in their hybrids.

A Series Hybrid arrangement would make it even easier to combine dual engine outputs, but would have slightly greater energy conversion losses

It would not be necessary to use a butterfly valve in the exhaust, the intake/exhaust valves of the shut-down engine would block backflow, only the EGR valve would need to be closed.

Reply