Restaurant damaged by car.
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Do escape lanes work?
Next: Coalition government: Transport Secretary Philip Hammond ends Labour's 'war on motorists'
From: Adrian on 21 May 2010 05:05 boltar2003(a)boltar.world gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>>>>>Bloater seems to think this is somehow relevant to lean burn >>>>>>petrols. >>>>> Because a lean burn engine basically gets rid of throttling losses >>>>> so is more efficient at lower rpm when the throttle would otherwise >>>>> be partially closed. >>>>ITYM "diesel". Lean-burn petrol is still throttled in the usual way - >>> No they're not. Thats the whole point you numpty. >>So - do tell us - how DOES it work? > It reduces throttling loses by regulating engine speed by regulating the > amount of fuel on a more or less constant throttle. Thats where the very > high air to fuel ratios from. Did you think the combustion in the > chamber was somehow magically different to a normal petrol engine that > meant it could generate the same power from less fuel? That's exactly how it works, yes. Yes, it can also be throttled by modifying the air volumes through adjusting valve opening and duration - same as a normal petrol can. I've already mentioned BMW's ValveTronic. > You get max power you when the fuel is completely burnt and that > already happens in a standard petrol engine anyway. Small problem - maximum power is developed considerably richer than 14.7:1. Lambda=1 is only required because of the flakiness of the three- way cat.
From: Adrian on 21 May 2010 06:02 "GT" <a(a)b.c> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > OK, lets make it simple for the people that clearly didn't study and > maths. Given 1 gallon of fuel, a car that can propel itself for 50 miles > is more efficient than a car that can propel itself only 40 miles. > Simple as that. The car with the higher MPG, burns fuel more > efficiently. It's _a_ measure, yes. If everything else is equal. If everything else ISN'T equal, then it's not directly comparable in and of itself. So - taken in isolation - it is not the whole story. More information is required. As you said... > That clear?
From: GT on 21 May 2010 06:16 "Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:85n40pFn9gU8(a)mid.individual.net... > "GT" <a(a)b.c> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > >> OK, lets make it simple for the people that clearly didn't study and >> maths. Given 1 gallon of fuel, a car that can propel itself for 50 miles >> is more efficient than a car that can propel itself only 40 miles. >> Simple as that. The car with the higher MPG, burns fuel more >> efficiently. > > It's _a_ measure, yes. Ahh, finally we agree that MPG is a measure of efficiency. Thank you. > If everything else is equal. Which it is - the two cars start from the same point on the same test track and drive until their gallon of fuel is used up. > As you said... >> That clear? Crystal!
From: Adrian on 21 May 2010 06:17 "GT" <a(a)b.c> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>> OK, lets make it simple for the people that clearly didn't study and >>> maths. Given 1 gallon of fuel, a car that can propel itself for 50 >>> miles is more efficient than a car that can propel itself only 40 >>> miles. Simple as that. The car with the higher MPG, burns fuel more >>> efficiently. >> It's _a_ measure, yes. > Ahh, finally we agree that MPG is a measure of efficiency. Thank you. I've never said it wasn't. I've been quite clear that it is not the only measure of efficiency. >> If everything else is equal. > Which it is - the two cars start from the same point on the same test > track and drive until their gallon of fuel is used up. Which - as I keep pointing out - ignores all the other factors - fuel density, fuel refining and supply chain, emissions, etc etc. Assuming, of course, you are comparing two ostensibly identical cars.
From: boltar2003 on 21 May 2010 06:22
On Fri, 21 May 2010 11:16:09 +0100 "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote: >"Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >news:85n40pFn9gU8(a)mid.individual.net... >> "GT" <a(a)b.c> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >> >>> OK, lets make it simple for the people that clearly didn't study and >>> maths. Given 1 gallon of fuel, a car that can propel itself for 50 miles >>> is more efficient than a car that can propel itself only 40 miles. >>> Simple as that. The car with the higher MPG, burns fuel more >>> efficiently. >> >> It's _a_ measure, yes. > >Ahh, finally we agree that MPG is a measure of efficiency. Thank you. I'd be interested to know what other types of efficiencies in cars Adrian thinks are important. Its oil usage? The amount of screen wash it gets through? B2003 |