Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 48

Thread: AFR Clarification

  1. #21
    cfm
    Wow, I can't believe I read all that (including links given) on only one bag of popcorn. LOL.
    You guys are all too much. Both sides. Good entertainment.
    BTW: How did AFR get pointed out as the mainstay of pollution in engines ? There is a lot more to it than that. 'Too' Lean is not always better for emmissions and/or even fuel economy. I'll leave it at that for now.
    Switching topics but still on emmissions - anybody ever see what the effects of volcanoes have on our climate and atmosphere ? If not, do some research and be prepared to get intrigued.
    If someone can find out a way to keep volcanoes from exploding we will be pretty well off. LOL.
    Yes - I believe we all have a responsibility to be 'cleaner' than we are. Not just emmissions, but garbage and a bunch of other things.

  2. #22
    ULTRA26 # 1
    Don't run from the question, just show where your facts support that 16:1 is a dangerous AF for marine app. You impressed us all with your Saleen and Cobra AF numbers (which have nothing to do with marine app) but I'm not hearing facts to back up anything relating to 16:1 in marine app. "He said, she said" isn't factual. I just want to know where you get your hard numbers to back your statement, that's all. It's not about me, my engine, SLSS, or anyone else. You made the statement.
    As far as being my "buddy"...That's rich...the two of you sound like an old married couple, which is what this thread is really about. It's just bleed over from Pol. Rhetoric, and you're still just trying to "one up" eachother. I think someone here on the boards described it a while back as "dick sword fighting". :notam:
    Here is a post from Bob at Dana Marine Products which discusses Dana's dyno testing of the 496 Mag and Mag HO with Dana's new exhaust system.
    The lean spot was basically the same on the dyno and the water, in between 3000-3800 rpm it gets pretty lean. I'm not an air flow/fuel flow expert, but the O2 temp readings were 14.01-14.02 in that range. It gets a little better at higher RPM's, but it's still pretty high, 13.8. Both the dyno guy (professional engine builder) and our brothers at ECM felt that was too high for continued usage. Once you factor in ambient air temperature, that # could change. It's one of those things, can you run them without changing the fuel pressure? The answer is yes, but I gotta tell you, it would make me feel pretty uncomfortable if I wasn't strongly urging my customers to make the change. It's such a simple change, It would be foolish not to do it.
    Wow, I can't believe I read all that (including links given) on only one bag of popcorn. LOL.
    You guys are all too much. Both sides. Good entertainment.
    BTW: How did AFR get pointed out as the mainstay of pollution in engines ? There is a lot more to it than that. 'Too' Lean is not always better for emmissions and/or even fuel economy. I'll leave it at that for now.
    Switching topics but still on emmissions - anybody ever see what the effects of volcanoes have on our climate and atmosphere ? If not, do some research and be prepared to get intrigued.
    If someone can find out a way to keep volcanoes from exploding we will be pretty well off. LOL.
    Yes - I believe we all have a responsibility to be 'cleaner' than we are. Not just emmissions, but garbage and a bunch of other things.
    In answer to your question
    Originally Posted by SmokinLowriderSS
    What's the fuel consumption comparison between a:
    lean-running carbureted 454 CID V-8 running arround 16:1 and a
    lean-running injected 496 CID V-8 running arround 16:1
    I merely pointed out that running a marine engine at 16:1 would be way too lean. From this came the lesson on internal combustion engines. I agree, it's been entertaining.

  3. #23
    SmokinLowriderSS
    Just a question for one of ya,how accurate are the a/f monitors in a water injected o/t headers? Seems like the water would cool the o2 senser and give some false readings? Are you guys running the expensive wide band set ups?(auto meter) or will the led edelb. work just as good? Curious cause I am tempted to buy one to help me get the right jetting.:idea:
    I'm not running a darned thing that involves electronic technology. Just not set up for it at all.
    Reading spark plugs and knowing how the engine runs.
    My wet headers are thru-transomed, and are water jacketed. So are ultra's manifolds I am certain.
    I do not believe you COULD run an O2 sensor with an INJECTED header of any type, for just the water contamination cooling reasons you described.
    You need $3000 sets of JACKETED headers where the O2 sensor can be kept dry untill the header cooling water is added all the way back at the back of the collector.

  4. #24
    SmokinLowriderSS
    the two of you sound like an old married couple, which is what this thread is really about. It's just bleed over from Pol. Rhetoric, and you're still just trying to "one up" eachother. I think someone here on the boards described it a while back as "dick sword fighting". :notam:
    Pretty astute observation there Steel.

  5. #25
    Blown 472
    I'm not running a darned thing that involves electronic technology. Just not set up for it at all.
    Reading spark plugs and knowing how the engine runs.
    My wet headers are thru-transomed, and are water jacketed. So are ultra's manifolds I am certain.
    I do not believe you COULD run an O2 sensor with an INJECTED header of any type, for just the water contamination cooling reasons you described.
    You need $3000 sets of JACKETED headers where the O2 sensor can be kept dry untill the header cooling water is added all the way back at the back of the collector.
    You rule

  6. #26
    IndianaTahiti
    I'm not running a darned thing that involves electronic technology. Just not set up for it at all.
    Reading spark plugs and knowing how the engine runs.
    My wet headers are thru-transomed, and are water jacketed. So are ultra's manifolds I am certain.
    I do not believe you COULD run an O2 sensor with an INJECTED header of any type, for just the water contamination cooling reasons you described.
    You need $3000 sets of JACKETED headers where the O2 sensor can be kept dry untill the header cooling water is added all the way back at the back of the collector.
    I have a old junk set of headers that I could put some bungs in and just shut off the water to them while I am using this method,seems like this would be less time consuming and cheaper than 3000 headers.Besides I dont like the look of headers that dont exit over the transom:devil:

  7. #27
    SmokinLowriderSS
    That would work just fine, and if you did 8 bungs, you could work with each cyl. separately if you wished.
    Nobody sees my headers.
    I run with a covered engine. Lowrider is a "sleeper".

  8. #28
    Blown 472
    That would work just fine, and if you did 8 bungs, you could work with each cyl. separately if you wished.
    Nobody sees my headers.
    I run with a covered engine. Lowrider is a "sleeper".
    How would you tune each cylinder?

  9. #29
    JAY4SPEED
    I have a old junk set of headers that I could put some bungs in and just shut off the water to them while I am using this method,seems like this would be less time consuming and cheaper than 3000 headers.Besides I dont like the look of headers that dont exit over the transom:devil:
    You would have to weld the weep holes shut. At higher rpms with weep holes open (essentially an exhaust leak) the exhaust stream will suck in air (venturi effect) and add additional O2 to the exhaust stream. This will skew the O2 reading, causing a false lean reading.
    In an EFI application, the ECM would respond to the lean O2 by adding unnecessary additional fuel.
    Jay

  10. #30
    SmokinLowriderSS
    You would have to weld the weep holes shut. At higher rpms with weep holes open (essentially an exhaust leak) the exhaust stream will suck in air (venturi effect) and add additional O2 to the exhaust stream. This will skew the O2 reading, causing a false lean reading.
    In an EFI application, the ECM would respond to the lean O2 by adding unnecessary additional fuel.
    Jay
    Yep, they would likely do that. I hadn't thought of it. Good call JAY.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Chevy engine clarification
    By Whisky Dick in forum Gear Heads
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-16-2007, 11:06 AM
  2. Need clarification
    By Tequila-John in forum Sandbar
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 10-12-2004, 08:58 AM
  3. more clarification of "spam"
    By XLGPP in forum Sandbar
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-13-2003, 08:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •