![]() |
|
|
|
#11 |
![]() ![]() Drives: Yaris Liftback Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 55
|
Altitude? 1500 feet.
If you're calling me a liar, I'll give you the short log I have. I'm not as anal about keeping logs as you are I'm sure. I can tell you that only the exact same trips were performed in my before and after trips, if I had to deviate, I took my truck. The comparisons consisted of 200 miles each, with a 60-40 combination of highway and city driving respectively. Temps were anywhere between 60 and 75 degrees. My car had less than 5000 miles on it when I did the change, so the stock air cleaner looked practically new. I still have it if you want a pic. Does 1.5 MPG sound like a lot to you? Personally I was a little disappointed. Quantifying my results to your standards is not necessary for me to find out whether it helped my MPG. I tried to keep as many variables constant as possible while keeping it a real world scenario. I have no interest in whether or not people are skeptical to my findings because I am not here to sway anyone. The facts and physics of internal combustion engines in today's vehicles have been proven enough, it is an ancient technology. The fact of the matter still remains no matter if my testing had flaws or not. A properly designed(*key point) intake that increases airflow will allow the engine to operate at a higher performance level(also assuming the ECU can still manage a good air/fuel ratio). This has been proven time and time again by dynomometers. However, I will say that there is a point in performance gains where it is necessary to add more fuel than normal which leads to a loss in MPG, but this scenario is WELL beyond a simple intake modification. Again, more power leads to an overall more efficient vehicle, keeping all other things constant, including driving habits. I'm sure you've noticed how much gas can be wasted by just the smallest increase in throttle. I believe I read something you wrote about exploiting fuel mapping(which I completely believe) that falls closely with what I'm talking about. Increasing the performance of a 4 stroke engine allows you to ride in fuel mapping areas for lower throttle positions, thus saving fuel. Bailout, I understand that you have a different opinion about these sorts of things, and I'm fine with that. I don't expect you to change your opinion just on my words, you're too set in your ways to let a post influence your beliefs(that's not meant to be an insult). However, there are people out there that will look at your views, and look at mine, and decide how they feel about it. I'm only out to share my own experince with people. That being said, I won't add to this thread anymore, and let others create their own beliefs. I absolutely will not get into a "back and forth" with anyone. |
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| NEWS: TOYOTA REVEALS ALL-NEW YARIS SEDAN AT 2006 LOS ANGELES AUTO SHOW | VitzBoy | General Yaris / Vitz Discussion | 7 | 09-20-2023 08:50 AM |
| 2007 Yaris Pricing Info ! | YarisBueller | New YARIS Purchase Forum | 104 | 06-24-2009 05:54 PM |
| Fuel Level Gauge Stuck ? - 2007 Yaris Sedan | kaboom | New YARIS Purchase Forum | 9 | 05-15-2007 03:58 AM |
| Fuel consumption US Yaris vs. Canadian Yaris | Driver | Performance Modifications | 8 | 10-29-2006 03:27 AM |