 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Toyota / Toyota Cars / April 2007Heating Intake Air
I have a 1998 Toyota Corolla LE that get's really good gas mileage. Recently I purchased something called a "Scangauge", which is a diagnostic tool that connects directly to the vehicle's OBD2 connector. It lets me see in real time several engine parameters at a glance. I noticed that on warmer days the mileage was much better. My morning commutes to work nets me around 32 mpg average : that's for a 23 mile commute that's mostly highway miles, where I NEVER exceed 58 mph. In the afternoon, when it has warmed up considerably, I have hit averages of between 37 and 40 mpg's, on the same exact route. I have read that the optimum intake air temp is around 95 to 100 degrees (f). Has someone found a good way to boost intake air temp on cold days? I'm thinking in terms of placing a small heating element in the air plenum, in the ductwork between the grill and the air cleaner housing. I'd love to hear any ideas! Thanks! George >I have a 1998 Toyota Corolla LE that get's really good gas mileage. > Recently I purchased something called a "Scangauge", which is a [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > George The improved fuel economy on warmer days is not from higher intake air temperatures. The warmer the ambient air temperature, the more quickly the car's computer will reduce the high idle associated with startups, the more quickly the automatic transmission will upshift, and the more quickly the emissions controls will go into closed loop operation. You will get little, if any measurable improvement in fuel economy from heating the intake air temperature. In fact, cold air tends to be denser than warm air so the engine burns fuel more efficiently with cool air than with warm air, which is why people trying to get more power from their engine run cool air intakes out the front of the car or up on the hood.  SignatureRay O (correct punctuation to reply) > The improved fuel economy on warmer days is not from higher intake air > temperatures. The warmer the ambient air temperature, the more > quickly the car's computer will reduce the high idle associated with > startups, the more quickly the automatic transmission will upshift, > and the more quickly the emissions controls will go into closed loop > operation. And the faster the oil heats up and the greater the chance it will get close to 210F, reducing frictional loading on the engine. > You will get little, if any measurable improvement in fuel economy > from heating the intake air temperature. By the time the intake air gets into the combustion chamber, it's already about 175F. Remember the throttle body is heated with coolant bypassed from the block, and radiant heat in the intake plenum and runners add their own heat to the air. Just try to touch the intake runners on a hot engine. > In fact, cold air tends to > be denser than warm air so the engine burns fuel more efficiently with > cool air than with warm air, which is why people trying to get more > power from their engine run cool air intakes out the front of the car > or up on the hood. Toyota already does this on many, if not all their models. Even our lowly Tercel has a factory "cold air" intake. SignatureTegger > I have a 1998 Toyota Corolla LE that get's really good gas mileage. > Recently I purchased something called a "Scangauge", which is a [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > George I would not attribute your increase in mileage with increased intake temperatures. First, make sure that you are not running the defrost mode in the morning which will decrease mileage. Colder air is denser than warm which would equate into higher efficiency in the combustion process. I have noticed this decrease in mileage affecting small engines associated with colder temperatures as well. It could be that the engine displacement being relatively small is very sensitive to loads placed on it, and in turn uses more fuel. Cold outside air temperatures have a direct effect on the viscosity of all lubricants, (engine oil, transmission oil, bearing greases, ect.)usually increasing them, and in turn, increasing engine loads. Temperature swings will even slightly affect your rolling resistance associated with tire pressure. Operating temperatures in cold (winter) conditions can be substantially lower than during warm (summer) conditions. A head wind or tailwind can be a factor as well. It's my opinion that the increase in load for the reasons mentioned increases fuel consumption. I have read no particular data to back this up. I don't think that this would be as noticeable if a larger engine was compared. It will be interesting to read others opinions on this. > I would not attribute your increase in mileage with increased intake > temperatures. First, make sure that you are not running the defrost mode [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > being relatively small is very sensitive to loads placed on it, and in > turn uses more fuel. Up to a point! If the air is TOO cold, the engine can't get to normal operating temp and doesn't operate as efficiently. Warm air isn't too good, either. I find that temps between 45-60 degrees gives the optimum performance. Judging by my Mazda, all winter I could barely crack 25MPG, usually LESS, but when we had a week of temps ~52-65 degrees, it jumped up to 29 MPG! >> I would not attribute your increase in mileage with increased intake >> temperatures. First, make sure that you are not running the defrost mode [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Judging by my Mazda, all winter I could barely crack 25MPG, usually LESS, > but when we had a week of temps ~52-65 degrees, it jumped up to 29 MPG! The stoichiometric ratio (optimum air/fuel ratio) for gasoline is 14.7:1 by mass. Simply put, colder intake air offers a higher DENSITY of oxygen (oxygenators) that improve the efficiency (fewer emissions) of the combustion process which in turn equates to a higher energy output of the engine. Colder fuel can also increase efficiency by entering the combustion chamber at a higher density than warmer fuel (racing fuel cool cans). Colder INTAKE air is always beneficial and the colder the better (ram air, inter coolers, ect.) unless we are talking absolute temperatures because it is denser (turbochargers, superchargers, ram air effect). The modern liquid cooled engine will attempt to reach operating temperature set by thermostat temperature choice and coolant system pressure in some instances. Even in extreme cold if the thermostat is operating closed at times it will open enough to prevent overheating in the jackets and then cycle again. (This usually happens one cycle every time we start our cars from dead cold.) Again Hachi, I think it's the load placed on the small displacement engines due to the increased viscosity of lubricants when it's cold outside. But I could be all wrong. IMHO. OBTW, I took the blade off the truck again. ;^) >>> I would not attribute your increase in mileage with increased intake >>> temperatures. First, make sure that you are not running the defrost [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > it's cold outside. But I could be all wrong. IMHO. OBTW, I took the blade > off the truck again. ;^) 1. Are you a Physicist or something?!?! 2. Yes, I definitely know the advantages of cold (or cooler) air in the intake of the engine, and the density of cooler air. I was trying to figure out a way to wrap tubing from the A/C around the air intake on my 'Hachiroku' to cool the air heading to the plenum. And, I had a 'cold air intake' on the Tercel. It may not have doen much for HP, but I did notice that off-the-line starts were a LOT smoother after installing it, and my fuel economy went from 38MPG over all to 44-45MPG overall. 3. Put that damn blade back on! They're predicting snow all day Thursday! I'm never going to get my Supra out of storage at this rate! > Hachiroku ???? wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > it's cold outside. But I could be all wrong. IMHO. OBTW, I took the blade > off the truck again. ;^) I think the reduced fuel economy in cold weather is due the longer time it takes for the engine to reach operating temperature, and because the ECT will delay upshifts until the coolant has warmed up. During the summer months, the formula for fuels change, resulting in poorer fuel economy. The spring and fall, where temps are warm enough for the engine to warm up quickly, and where summer blend fuels are not in use yet, are when most people get the bet fuel economy. SignatureRay O (correct punctuation to reply) >> Hachiroku ???? wrote: >>> [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > quickly, and where summer blend fuels are not in use yet, are when most > people get the bet fuel economy. In the fuel refining process for seasonal changes, do they not formulate winter blends to vaporize/atomize easier (for starts) than summer blends that they try to suppress vaporization/atomization rates? If vaporization is enhanced for winter blends, would there not be fewer BTU's and in turn reduce fuel mileage? Usually a fuel with higher vaporization/atomization rates (more volatility) is refined farther from the beginning natural product (crude oil) and in turn less efficient (fewer BTU's)? An example being the available BTU's in fuel oil compared to gasoline. Interesting Ray. Thanks. <snipped> >> During the summer months, the formula for fuels change, resulting in >> poorer fuel economy. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > being the available BTU's in fuel oil compared to gasoline. Interesting > Ray. Thanks. Chemistry is not one of my strong points so I do not really understand the differences between summer and winter fuel blends. A friend is a chemist who works for UOP's R&D department formulating fuels, and he has mentioned that summer fuels burn more cleanly but get slightly less fuel economy, so that was the basis for my statement. If I think of it, I'll try to remember to ask him if more refining reduces BTU content next time I see him. SignatureRay O (correct punctuation to reply) I found that my 42 mile commute gave me better mileage in the morning than the evening. Upon inspection, it turns out that my house is about 1500 feet above seal level and my job was about 200 feet above sea level. I was basically driving down hill on my way to work, and up hill on the way home. Going to work should have given worse mileage because ofthe serious stop-n-go traffic, but the reality turned out differently. >I have a 1998 Toyota Corolla LE that get's really good gas mileage. > Recently I purchased something called a "Scangauge", which is a [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > George > I found that my 42 mile commute gave me better mileage in the morning than > the evening. Upon inspection, it turns out that my house is about 1500 feet [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Thanks to all of you for responding. I appreciate the input. George <snipped> > Thanks to all of you for responding. I appreciate the input. > > George You're welcome! SignatureRay O (correct punctuation to reply) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.