General Fit Talk General Discussion on the Honda Fit/Jazz.

Mods that increase fuel efficiency

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 8, 2009 | 04:32 PM
  #121  
huisj's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 181
From: Rochester Hills, MI
Originally Posted by jousai7
CAI = MPG loss..by bringing in colder denser air the car will add more FUEL to compensate thus generating more power and lowering your mpgs...thast why Hot air intakes are popular..run piping from under ur exhaust mainfolds into your intake alows hotter temps(~120) of air into ur engine, the car will sense this and spray less fuel, higher temps also increase atomization of the fuel, therefore you burn less better ^^
Unless the increase in power allows you to drive it more gently.
 
Old May 8, 2009 | 05:06 PM
  #122  
Darkstar12's Avatar
New Member
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 9
From: Encino, CA
Hi Contrabida Face...nice Fit. Where did you get the black headlight housing? I love that look...
 
Old May 8, 2009 | 06:38 PM
  #123  
vtecfit1's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (7)
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,620
From: Salt Lake City, UT
5 Year Member
Originally Posted by Darkstar12
Hi Contrabida Face...nice Fit. Where did you get the black headlight housing? I love that look...
WOW someone take this guy and teach him a thing or two
WELCOME TO THE FORUMS at any rate, and read up you'll get addicted just like the rest of us!!!!
 
Old May 8, 2009 | 08:30 PM
  #124  
Contrabida Face's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 523
From: Vallejo, CA
Originally Posted by Darkstar12
Hi Contrabida Face...nice Fit. Where did you get the black headlight housing? I love that look...
just like everybody that has black headlight housing here, we spray painted it. there's a DIY somewhere, just use the search fucntion.

and thanks, i appreciate it.
 
Old May 8, 2009 | 08:32 PM
  #125  
keepitpg's Avatar
i love college
iTrader: (10)
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,410
From: Monrovia, CA / SLC, UT
Originally Posted by Contrabida Face
just like everybody that has black headlight housing here, we spray painted it. there's a DIY somewhere, just use the search fucntion.

and thanks, i appreciate it.
or get an oem nhbp headlight
 
Old May 8, 2009 | 08:34 PM
  #126  
Contrabida Face's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 523
From: Vallejo, CA
that's too expensive.
 
Old May 9, 2009 | 08:47 AM
  #127  
wdb's Avatar
wdb
Member
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 977
From: the Perimeter
5 Year Member
Originally Posted by jousai7
CAI = MPG loss..
Alternatively, I have a friend who swears that short ram intakes improve mileage by 1 or 2 MPG. Says this has happened for him on two different cars.
 
Old May 9, 2009 | 09:17 PM
  #128  
Tork's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,251
From: Winthrop Harbor Illinois/ Presque Isle Wisconsin
Originally Posted by jousai7
CAI = MPG loss..by bringing in colder denser air the car will add more FUEL to compensate thus generating more power and lowering your mpgs...thast why Hot air intakes are popular..run piping from under ur exhaust mainfolds into your intake alows hotter temps(~120) of air into ur engine, the car will sense this and spray less fuel, higher temps also increase atomization of the fuel, therefore you burn less better ^^
Originally Posted by wdb
Alternatively, I have a friend who swears that short ram intakes improve mileage by 1 or 2 MPG. Says this has happened for him on two different cars.
Agree with wdb, mileage will not be worse (unless you have the go pedal down all the time cuz you are addicted to the sound ) and could be better.
I will post up an honest report after Memorial when I get time to install mine.
 
Old May 10, 2009 | 11:12 AM
  #129  
Daemione's Avatar
Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 578
From: Wilton, CT
Originally Posted by jousai7
by bringing in colder denser air the car will add more FUEL to compensate thus generating more power and lowering your mpgs...
While this is true, in practice the difference in air temps between an aftermarket CAI and stock setup (or a short ram intake) aren't that big, especially over 30mph. CAI's show a bigger advantage on the dyno because of the limited airflow available, but in real life that advantage isn't as applicable.

And not to be ignored is the reduction in pumping losses an intake grants compared to a convoluted stock resonator system.

In my experience in comparing stock w/ aftermarket intakes, mpg is a wash. Although I have yet to install one on the L15, or do any datalogging of intake temps on this car.
 
Old May 10, 2009 | 03:59 PM
  #130  
mahout's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,371
From: NC USA
Originally Posted by Tork
Agree with wdb, mileage will not be worse (unless you have the go pedal down all the time cuz you are addicted to the sound ) and could be better.
I will post up an honest report after Memorial when I get time to install mine.

Try reading some GRASSROOTS MOTORSPORTS hop-ups; they, as we, have seen losses in both power and mpg after adding AI's. Since CAI's cost around $200 long would it take to pay for a 2 mpg improvement?
 
Old May 10, 2009 | 05:05 PM
  #131  
Tork's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,251
From: Winthrop Harbor Illinois/ Presque Isle Wisconsin
Originally Posted by mahout
Try reading some GRASSROOTS MOTORSPORTS hop-ups; they, as we, have seen losses in both power and mpg after adding AI's. Since CAI's cost around $200 long would it take to pay for a 2 mpg improvement?
That is a trick question like if a plane crashed on the US/Canadian border, where would you bury the survivors???????

Cuz with a loss in MPG you wouldn't be able to get a $200 payback with a 2 mpg gain.


 
Old May 10, 2009 | 08:20 PM
  #132  
wdb's Avatar
wdb
Member
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 977
From: the Perimeter
5 Year Member
Originally Posted by mahout
Since CAI's cost around $200 long would it take to pay for a 2 mpg improvement?
At $2/gallon, 68,400 miles.
At $3/gallon, 45,600 miles.
At $4/gallon, 34,200 miles.

I'll almost certainly beat all of those mileages before I sell this car, so it's worth it to me just in fuel savings. If there is a genuine power improvement, all the better.

Although I will not, not, NOT put a washable air filter on my car -- sheesh, I don't even treat my lawn tractor that badly.
 
Old May 11, 2009 | 10:53 AM
  #133  
Tork's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,251
From: Winthrop Harbor Illinois/ Presque Isle Wisconsin
Originally Posted by wdb
At $2/gallon, 68,400 miles.
At $3/gallon, 45,600 miles.
At $4/gallon, 34,200 miles.

I'll almost certainly beat all of those mileages before I sell this car, so it's worth it to me just in fuel savings. If there is a genuine power improvement, all the better.
Exactly! Some may scoff at the payback, but they payback prolly is faster than buying a hybrid, and many people pay thousands extra for that.
 
Old May 11, 2009 | 05:54 PM
  #134  
mahout's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,371
From: NC USA
Originally Posted by wdb
At $2/gallon, 68,400 miles.
At $3/gallon, 45,600 miles.
At $4/gallon, 34,200 miles.

I'll almost certainly beat all of those mileages before I sell this car, so it's worth it to me just in fuel savings. If there is a genuine power improvement, all the better.

Although I will not, not, NOT put a washable air filter on my car -- sheesh, I don't even treat my lawn tractor that badly.

At $2 per gal, burning 31.25 gal per 1000 miles at 32 mpg versus 33.3 gallons at 30 mpg means saving 2.08 gallons per 1000 miles, or $4.16 per 1000 miles. or 48,000 miles to recover $200.
At $4 per gallon it takes only half as long - 24000 miles.

Still too long a payback for me, especially since the 2 mpg is not assured.
And I agree with not using 'wetted' filters; they have not proven successful for us in race cars, much less street, because of the contamination of the wire sensor coating problems.
 
Old May 11, 2009 | 07:47 PM
  #135  
wdb's Avatar
wdb
Member
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 977
From: the Perimeter
5 Year Member
Originally Posted by mahout
And I agree with not using 'wetted' filters; they have not proven successful for us in race cars, much less street, because of the contamination of the wire sensor coating problems.
That, and they have to do a poorer job of filtering than a paper filter in order to provide the greater aiflow they all rant on about ad nauseum.

I actually would use two different oiled air filters (on any vehicle whose intake manifold gizmos do not get fouled by the oil itself): an oil-impregnated foam filter on the outside of a paper filter, to catch the really big gunk -- you might see this on a lawn mower or similar; and an oil bath air filter such as used on antique vehicles, some diesel trucks, and even the odd 60's VW Beetle. They do a great job of filtering air but ewww what a mess to service.
 
Old May 11, 2009 | 08:00 PM
  #136  
Tork's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,251
From: Winthrop Harbor Illinois/ Presque Isle Wisconsin
actually they do a pretty good job once they get dirty, but oil is not so great on the MAF sensors.
 
Old May 11, 2009 | 10:20 PM
  #137  
Tork's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,251
From: Winthrop Harbor Illinois/ Presque Isle Wisconsin
you hear and read all this stuff, but I have used oiled CAI's for years and as long as about 80K miles on a single vehicle, so I know a truth witnessed with my own eyes and experience. And a lot of times I have found things work better than the naysayers indicated.
Oiled filters filter pretty good and actually better when they get a little dirty. No issues with MAF sensors for me and many others I know, but it is best not to over oil after cleaning.

I figure it is my money, I'll spend it the way I wish. Knocking it means not all that much, results I find on my own mean everything and I will post my honest results. Things I feel dont work that well, I take off and sell and I dont believe I have lost more than about 20-25%
Now that I see my forged wheels and lightweight pulleys have netted a good 4% + increase in MPG and a noticeable power increase, I am ready for an intake Next, Beatrush needs to get off their arse and make a GE under panel.
It is a nice thread about +MPG mods, half the fun is trying things on your own
The real payback is maybe less money goes to radical fundamentalists that would like to see us dead.
 
Old May 12, 2009 | 12:22 AM
  #138  
iKONA636's Avatar
Banned
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 923
From: Chicago!
Originally Posted by solbrothers
hot air intake.

installing a raw egg between your shoe and the accelerator pedal LOL
This might help with the fuel but wont help the smell
 
Old May 12, 2009 | 11:24 AM
  #139  
wdb's Avatar
wdb
Member
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 977
From: the Perimeter
5 Year Member
Originally Posted by Tork
Now that I see my forged wheels and lightweight pulleys have netted a good 4% + increase in MPG and a noticeable power increase, I am ready for an intake
Mind if I ask which wheels you went with?

And can anyone explain to me why a 16" tire weighs more than a 15" tire, outside diameters being equal? It boggles the mind...

The real payback is maybe less money goes to radical fundamentalists that would like to see us dead.
That's a biggie, for sure. Along that line, there are refiners who use import no crude from the Persian Gulf whatsoever, such as Sunoco. If your goal is to keep money out of the hands of Islamic extremists, you may want to research which suppliers in your area do not use Persian Gulf oil. (Of course this may mean sending money to radicals in Russia or Venezuela. Nothing's ever as simple as it seems, sigh.)
 
Old May 12, 2009 | 12:41 PM
  #140  
Tork's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,251
From: Winthrop Harbor Illinois/ Presque Isle Wisconsin
Originally Posted by wdb
Mind if I ask which wheels you went with?

And can anyone explain to me why a 16" tire weighs more than a 15" tire, outside diameters being equal? It boggles the mind...
Sure, I have a rather expensive digital shipping scale and the 16" SSR Type C I have weigh 11.32 lbs stock 09 wheels are 18.46
Tire weights
On Tire Rack the 09 16" Dunlops weigh 18 lbs, the stock GD 15" Dunlop sport tires I believe weigh 21 lbs as I remember (but 09's are a bit narrower) I know what you mean though. But from my recollection tires of the same size can vary around 3 lbs from one manufacturer to another. Want to try the Michelin Energy Saver's released here soon. Toyota found a 3%+ MPG gain and is putting them on the 2010 Yaris (and maybe the Prius as well)

Originally Posted by wdb
That's a biggie, for sure. Along that line, there are refiners who use import no crude from the Persian Gulf whatsoever, such as Sunoco. If your goal is to keep money out of the hands of Islamic extremists, you may want to research which suppliers in your area do not use Persian Gulf oil. (Of course this may mean sending money to radicals in Russia or Venezuela. Nothing's ever as simple as it seems, sigh.)
True, I know that we actually do not import much oil from the middle east but to me it is one big market. The less that gets used the more it drives the whole market down usually hurting the middle east the most as oil $ are most of the income for many of those countries. Unfortunately no Sunoco here, I do buy it when I travel I do avoid Citco (Hugo Chavez)
 



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:59 AM.