| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
hagar Hillbilly Tuner

Joined: 11 Mar 2006 Posts: 2247 Location: Near Lund B.C. Kanada.
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 9:05 am Post subject: Old guy Old Rabbit. |
|
|
SAGA : wolf_walker bravo you are getting there., to verify that hagar is not full (completely) of bovine tips.
go to the BOSCH Bible.. More than not I am trying to explain , BUT remember this is not my Mother toungue .
WHY ? do I say "COMPLICATED" so many times ? answer there are Kazillion variables..
The way the governor moves the control collar is NOT proportional to pedal movement.. From a steady state say at 50 mph even a slight push on pedal and collar goes to full load., then retracts to a new steady state is reached..
We do not have any way of variing the mixture with the so called "RIGHT FOOT" read my lips.
Ok, somebody devise a test and figure this out. If the guy can post a video of a cutaway pump running to show governor action surely someone here can come up with something to settle this.
Those cut open pumps to see the internals move are nice. I have seen many over the years..
hagar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
hagar Hillbilly Tuner

Joined: 11 Mar 2006 Posts: 2247 Location: Near Lund B.C. Kanada.
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 10:03 am Post subject: Old guy Old Rabbit. |
|
|
SAGA : Op-Ivy and ALL :. your options on MIXTURE are unlimited. SO ? how do you know when your nice Jetta is in super lean ? Pull the airline from manifold to LDA , now you are in ECO mode. .Then you turn full load stop screw counter clockwise to she will not do any more than 50 km/h with pedal to the metal. THAT is super lean. . A better setting is say 80 km/h .
hagar.
PS : did you install the glow plug fuse I gave you ? if not DO IT. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
hagar Hillbilly Tuner

Joined: 11 Mar 2006 Posts: 2247 Location: Near Lund B.C. Kanada.
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 10:23 am Post subject: Old guy Old Rabbit. |
|
|
SAGA : mattbondy , said However, ignoring volumetric efficiency is probably pretty reasonable . correct.
At this time we are talking about how to adjust MIXTURE . entering volumetric's would only muddy the waters.
That discussion comes under advansed and brings in the Turbo.
hagar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wolf_walker Cetane Booster
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 Posts: 67 Location: North Carolina
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 11:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| libbybapa wrote: | | Assuming timing and atomization are the same, \ |
But they are not.
I understand what you are saying and it makes sense, it has from however many posts back you first said it in this thread. A better way of thinking of it might be to use the example of a steady speed generator application with a given steady load, if you reduce fuel it will decelerate under that load. Part of the function of the control collar and governor setup, though less so in the automotive application, is to maintain rpm or rate of increase, with varying load. It does a lot of work when we are just dumbly sitting there with our foot on the throttle.
Which brings me to another point. The more learned and technical people say control "mixture" with your foot. I've been driving these noisy little SOB's for a long time. Hell I learned how to drive in one twenty something years ago(I still have it). To me, it's 2nd nature to back off throttle at a certain point where I feel I'm not accelerating any faster, coincidently on the average VW diesel, this is where it starts to smoke visably. Now joe-blow who is new to these, and has grown up seeing trucks smoke and either thinks it's cool or in the least think's it's pretty normal, just barrels on smoke and all since these things are dirt slow in stock trim compared to anything remotely modern. Now, joe-blow reads up a little here and says to hissef, "lemme turn in this smoke screw a bit till it quits smoking and see what happens. Ta-da, he's "leaned" his mixture and is getting better MPG, here's proof right here at fillup.
It isn't technically correct, but it's hard to argue with to a less than really technical person like "joe-blow" above. This isn't an unusual chain of events in the automotive field either, result C being mistaken as evidence of the validity of A, when B was really the culprit.
It's just a thought, and it explains both sides of things better than anything else. One of you is right in principle, and one is right in practice. _________________ 81 Caddy D, 601K
73 Mercedes 280
82 Rabbit LS D |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
libbybapa Turbo Charger
Joined: 17 Nov 2005 Posts: 2356
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wolf_walker wrote: | | libbybapa wrote: | | Assuming timing and atomization are the same, \ |
But they are not. |
That's not true. The accelerator lever on the pump and "mixture" have no effect on atomization ever, and have no affect on timing unless, as I mentioned earlier, it is a late model ('90+) 1.6 pump.
Actually by turning the max fuel screw in you don't "lean the mixture" you reduce the "richest mixture" you can achieve when the pedal is pushed to the floor. For any operational load or rate of acceleration, the mixture is the same as before. Said another way, for any given load or rate of acceleration, the control collar is in the exact same position, only the position of your foot relative to that load is different. The exact same effect could be seen, as Rabitman stated, by placing a shim under the accelerator pedal. If you feel that the best way to achieve your fueling goals is to eliminate options, then by all means reduce the max fuel screw, but be aware that you're not doing anything other than would be accomplished by pressing the pedal a bit less hard. I prefer options and enjoy exercising my self-control WRT how much I use those options. An understanding of the theory goes a very long way to making educated decisions on how to put it into practice. I've been using both the theory and practice for many years. FWIW, I don't want to "argue" anything to "joe-blow". I might make an attempt to explain it, but if he can't grok it, then it's no skin off my teeth. Attempting to explain something in an erroneous manner just because you feel the person you're explaining it to doesn't have the capacity to understand it accurately is both belittling and a step in the wrong direction, IMO. I'd rather assume better of people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wolf_walker Cetane Booster
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 Posts: 67 Location: North Carolina
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 1:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I didn't say it was nice, just that it is. People are people, grok?
And note when I say mixture it's "mixture". Difference. I'm not arguing against you exactly. Your presentation of the fact is rough though.
l talk to people about cars all day, five days a week, for the last ten years, to talk them out of there money and into having there car working and them happy(sometimes despite themselves). And this isn't Honda's and cheap autozone parts, this is expensive European junk and (mostly) not stupid owners. If I have to dumb something down to get the above goals accomplished, it will be done. I prefer a functional understanding in a person rather than an incorrect principal understanding. As an extreme and sexist example, you've tried explaining car stuff to a woman with no background? Isn't it better to just say look, when this light comes on, STOP. You don't have to give them a course in cooling or lubrication systems. It isn't nice or pretty and I don't intend you stop preaching about the absence of mixture adjustment, just understand why the idea "works" in people's heads.
Re: timing/atoms
I wasn't thinking throttle lever changing timing, but I do think if you have reduced max fuel quantity enough one would tend to rev the motor higher, which changes timing. So does temperature, fuel viscosity, who knows what else. Say ole Joe-Blow who has now cranked down max fuel on his pump see's it's not smoking anymore and thinks, huh, neat, now I can give it more "gas", and does so. RPM=timing. Much difference? Maybe, maybe not, if my observation about most tired pumps is true none of them are advancing much as they should anyway.
I think it's important to understand why people come to conclusions that they do, especially if they are wrong. Any teacher will tell you it does not work to say flat out "no you are wrong it's this".
The term "fueling goals" is pretty damn funny for some reason. I always just drove the damn things. _________________ 81 Caddy D, 601K
73 Mercedes 280
82 Rabbit LS D |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
libbybapa Turbo Charger
Joined: 17 Nov 2005 Posts: 2356
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| WRT atoms/timing, I stated for a given speed (engine speed) and load the "mixture" does not affect either atomization or timing. Yes, if you change the speed it will. If you are running 5,000 rpms in 4th gear vs. 2,500 in 5th it will indeed change the timing of injection and fuel consumption. I wouldn't ever imply otherwise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wolf_walker Cetane Booster
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 Posts: 67 Location: North Carolina
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| libbybapa wrote: | | WRT atoms/timing, I stated for a given speed (engine speed) and load the "mixture" does not affect either atomization or timing. Yes, if you change the speed it will. If you are running 5,000 rpms in 4th gear vs. 2,500 in 5th it will indeed change the timing of injection and fuel consumption. I wouldn't ever imply otherwise. |
Good.
Just remember an engine/car/driver are a many varied thing. Textbook is good, out in the world is more important. To me anyway.
I was always a "where the metal meets the meat" kinda fellow. _________________ 81 Caddy D, 601K
73 Mercedes 280
82 Rabbit LS D |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
libbybapa Turbo Charger
Joined: 17 Nov 2005 Posts: 2356
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Everything that I have come to know about the pumps and presented here is practical to tuning them and driving them. I am not speaking about theory that does not apply to everyday real-world practical experience. I am speaking about a practical understanding backed up by considerable firsthand experience. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wolf_walker Cetane Booster
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 Posts: 67 Location: North Carolina
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| libbybapa wrote: | | Everything that I have come to know about the pumps and presented here is practical to tuning them and driving them. I am not speaking about theory that does not apply to everyday real-world practical experience. I am speaking about a practical understanding backed up by considerable firsthand experience. |
Good, keep at it.
Speaking of yonder smoke screw..
I always adjusted that thing such that it'd not smoke other than a light bit on WOT in 3rd or 4th on flat ground. I was never into the "smoke screen" stuff.
Think I did that with the last turbo I had but it's been ten years ago now I guess. Anyhow I didn't figure cutting fuel more than enough to make er quit smoking more than a hair was productive to getting out of my own way(or the way of large trucks and busses). Haven't messed with one since.
I suspect, and this is just that, suspicion from observation and some reading hither and yon, that with lazy advance it'll smoke more for the same amount of fuel, so the two get a little crossed together there and some field guessing is required. Seems so anyway. I guess that's where Hagar's timing info comes in, eh? We'll see. Too much to do anymore. _________________ 81 Caddy D, 601K
73 Mercedes 280
82 Rabbit LS D |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fatmobile Global Moderator
Joined: 30 Oct 2002 Posts: 5407 Location: north central Iowa
|
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 12:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
I get what libbybapa is saying. Given a certain pump. The foot controls the level of smoke, reguardless of how the pump is adjusted,.. as long as the max fuel screw (the one that sets the max amount of fuel available when floored at any given RPM) is set to provide enough.
I'm not sure what wolf_walker is saying.
I mean I understand the part about backing off when you are getting no more power out of it,.. that's an example of what Andrew is saying.
Driver controls the mixture.
I also see what you mean when someone backs off the max fuel screw and gets better fuel mileage,.. because the driver's foot controls the mix and that driver wasn't doing it right.
I'm not sure where you are both disagreeing.
I had always thought the more air in the mix, the better the fuel mileage.
A major point Andrew is making is that isn't true.
I'm changing that view after what Andrew has posted.
Pumping in more air until the exhaust is clean doesn't mean it is running at it's most efficient zone.
wolf_walker, do you agree that more air in the mix doesn't mean more efficiency? _________________ '91 Golf gasser converted to turbo diesel.
'83 Rabbit gasser, converted to diesel, then converted to run on vegetable oil.
2, '84 GTI projects cars |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
hagar Hillbilly Tuner

Joined: 11 Mar 2006 Posts: 2247 Location: Near Lund B.C. Kanada.
|
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 12:52 am Post subject: Old guy Old Rabbit. |
|
|
SAGA : Op-Ivy said : I'm going to try tuning my car
for maximum smileage soon. Hagar, what is your opinion on fueling? I've
heard that leaning the fuel out too much can will give you less lower end
grunt, resulting in the need to use higher rpm more often.
Your engine is rated 68 HP by VW . running LEAN HP is a
product of RPM and Torque SO ? to get maximum power in lean you must
increase RPM , easy to do., and yes shifting gears is normal way to do
it..
Experi,ment by juggling Load stop and Idle screws.
hagar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wolf_walker Cetane Booster
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 Posts: 67 Location: North Carolina
|
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 4:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fatmobile wrote: |
wolf_walker, do you agree that more air in the mix doesn't mean more efficiency? |
I think we differ on matters of presentation, andy and I.
As for the air in the mix, search me. I'm a NA guy for the time being, they suck(no pun intended) much as they can. I have too many other things on my automotive plate to even start to try and wrap my head around the best practices for turbo's (I'm assuming you meant turbo as in more air in the mix?) I had one for a year or so around 1998, that was back when I was happy and oblivious and just changed oil, changed belts and drove a lot, ahh the good old days. Smoke isn't accomplishing anything productive that I know of, you could call it rich I guess if one wanted. VW liked the idea of shoving more air and not more fuel in there enough to build a car for it, that eco-thing few years back. It made a little more power on paper than the NA did, but not what the turbo with the extra fuel did, I guess it was for smog regs. Air alone don't make power, might clean up the exhaust just like air injection did on stuff in the 80's but that's bout it. If they warmed up as fast in the winter as the turbo's do that'd be nice though. I'm sick of cold.
Sooo, a NA can be rich(smoke) but not too lean?
A TD can be rich(smoke) and... lean?(force fed more air but not enough fuel?) _________________ 81 Caddy D, 601K
73 Mercedes 280
82 Rabbit LS D |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fatmobile Global Moderator
Joined: 30 Oct 2002 Posts: 5407 Location: north central Iowa
|
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Someone decided disagreeing with Hagar was a bad thing and sent a nasty PM to Andrew. Something about picking on an ill old man
There will no longer be anyone telling us that way overinflating your tires is a bad idea.
No one to say more air doesn't mean more efficiency.
There will be no more checks and balances,..
you will only be allowed to hear one side,..
or half of one side in some cases.
...and be forwarned; if you decide to disagree with Hagar someone might send you a nasty PM, doesn't matter if you are right
I'm not sure who it was,.. maybe they won't be too ashamed to admit it.
Andrew won't be posting here anymore,..
and I don't want to get a nasty IM so I won't be disagreeing with anything on this post either.
You'll have to sort the truth out yourselves.
Censorship works in many ugly ways _________________ '91 Golf gasser converted to turbo diesel.
'83 Rabbit gasser, converted to diesel, then converted to run on vegetable oil.
2, '84 GTI projects cars |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bscutt Turbo Charger

Joined: 10 Mar 2003 Posts: 948 Location: Springfield, VA
|
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That is unfortunate to say the least. Andrew contributed all sorts of excellent information to this forum. The debates and conversations between participants on this forum is what helps sort out the good technical information.
Too bad someone did not grasp the importance of free speech. Hagar always holds his own and never seems to have any issues with others disagreeing with him. I believe he also fully understands the importance of different viewpoints and experiences. _________________ Bob
'06 Jetta TDI
'79 Rabbit 1.5NA
'82 Rabbit 1.6NA
'90 Corrado G60, 86 AMC Eagle, 88 Corolla
Honda, F150, S10 Blazer, '41 Chevy Coupe |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|