Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 83
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

LPG needs a high compression ratio to realise its full potential. Dual fuel vehicles don't really show off gas because you have to tune it for the lowest denominator. LPG is a much cleaner alternative to petrol and currently it's cheaper, but it seems the govt has already started to dig its claws in there too :\ Bastards. But yeah, rebuild an engine to run on pure LPG and it'll be cleaner and will potentially make more power too. I heard someone had made LPG injectors too, dunno whether it's true or not but effectively having to go back to a carby system (mixers) was always one of the shortfalls of an LPG system.

gas is still made from crude oil. burns in a similar way and gives off most of the same chemicals. your prob thinking of hydrogen gas not lpg. when the oil goes, so does lpg.

Yeah, but we have excess LPG and it is cleaner

IanB: Haha, ride a pushie to uni... I'll leave 9pm and get to uni in time for classes at 9am!

Hydrogen isn't viable yet.

I don't know anything about the performance side of LPG. Don't know much about fuel either in regards to performance :(

Mush: 50L.

The car does have horrible fuel consumption though - living in a hilly area doesn't help. I just can't afford a replacement :)

Ska: LOL. Maleny is two townships away. About 15 minute drive.

Edited by Midol
Ska: LOL. Maleny is two townships away. About 15 minute drive.

So you are in Montville, oh dear god, an upper-class HIPPIE!

I have no idea whay my posts have to do about this thread but all hippies should be shot, oh yeah and we all should read up on peak oil, it is very interesting subject:

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=peak+oil...rch&start=0

There is no train station at USC. (Ok, so it'd take 3hrs to ride, not 6.)

When I go to QUT though I will be taking the train. Might even ride there some days! It's only a 30 minute ride to the station so it aint that far, but the roads arn't made for bikes so I'd probably get hit, lol.

Guess what everyone. The petrol was cheaper yesterday than it was today! Because thats what happens.

Low and f*&king behold the earth didnt stop spinning!

And I still got 10kms/L with my headlights on, wipers on, a/c on, and stereo right up driving in the rain.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...