From: Boxer on

"Iain Chalmers" <bigiain(a)mightymedia.com.au> wrote in message
news:bigiain-460A5C.18160108022007(a)nasal.pacific.net.au...
> In article
> <45c9c5bc$0$25322$5a62ac22(a)per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>,
> "Nev.." <idiot(a)mindless.com> wrote:
>
>> But the diagnostics indicate that it's not using more fuel... or if it
>> is, it's less than 1 decilitre per hour per 800 rpm
>
> See my other post - wikipedia and the back-of-the-envelop suggests 1
> decilitre per hour is pretty close to what your 120W headlights
> require...
>
> Can I get you to do another experiment? I'm wondering if 800rpm is too
> slow for the alternator to be developing all the required output, and
> what you're seeing is the headlights drawing the battery charge down
> rather then being powered by the engine. I'd be interested to know if
> you see any fuel flow difference in the diagnostics if you hold the
> engine at a slightly higher speed when you switch the lights on and off
> - maybe up at 2500 or 3000 rpm?
>
> curious-big

The fuel computer on the Holden 5.7 litre is not very accurate so it is
unlikely to provide the information required.

Boxer


From: Dale Porter on
"Hammo" <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote in message news:C1F12521.11BB4%hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au...
>
>
>
> On 8/2/07 6:18 PM, in article eqeirb$1ja9$1(a)otis.netspace.net.au, "Dale
> Porter" <daleaporter(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Hammo" <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote in message
>> news:C1F11571.11BAB%hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8/2/07 4:42 PM, in article eqed8u$1hvv$1(a)otis.netspace.net.au, "Dale
>>> Porter" <daleaporter(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Hammo" <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote in message
>>>> news:C1F0F1F0.11B92%hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au...
>>>
>>>>> On 8/2/07 1:02 PM, in article slrnesl15j.3o1.sharkey(a)anchovy.zoic.org,
>>>>> "sharkey" <sharkey(a)zoic.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hammo <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Paul is correct. Feel free to point out where he is wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure. That's not how a switch-mode regulator works, at all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----sharks
>>>>>
>>>>> When you pop over, feel free to show me that is what I have....
>>>
>>>> It's all about you, isn't it?
>>>
>>> Oh,boo hoo, did you want to wear the pretty hat too? You'll have to nice to
>>> Sharkey, he is the guest!
>>>
>>>
>>
>> And that's the best you could come up with?
>
> Oh...... You really are being sooky. It'd be like kicking a puppy.
>
>

LOL. It's OK hammo. You'll get it one day......maybe.

--
Dale Porter
GPX250 -> CBR600 -> VTR1000 + VT250F-J


From: G-S on
Nev.. wrote:
> GB wrote:
>> "Nev.." <idiot(a)mindless.com> wrote in
>> news:45ca4f55$0$25321$5a62ac22(a)per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au:
>>> And you very neatly ignored the bit where I also found that it did not
>>> affect the fuel flow and therefore did not use any more fuel... no
>>> wait.. you poo-poo'd that because it didn't suit your argument. BZZT.
>>
>> I didn't ignore it at all. In fact I addressed it quite
>> comprehensively. Your fuel flow meter is not up to the task of
>> measuring fuel flow with sufficient accuracy or repeatability
>> to demonstrate the so-fundamental-that-it-shouldn't-need-discussing,-
>> much-less-demonstrating principle of physics that's being discussed.
>
> So for all intents and purposes, the amount of additional fuel consumed
> when the headlights are turned on is immeasurable, so this "lights on =
> more fuel" business exists in theory only.
>

_Not_ immeasurable... just not measurable by a standard car consumption
gauge.

We have flow rate meters at work that are sensitive enough to measure
this effect.

Place the reading device at the test point, turn on the coach
headlights, driving lights and interior lights and the fuel consumption
at idle increases measurably as the engine takes the additional load of
driving the dual alterators to produce more current (averaging an extra
60 amps according to the current draw gauge).

No I can't do this test moving as the test equipment isn't that movable,
but that doesn't invalidate the results.


G-S
From: Nev.. on
Boxer wrote:
> "Iain Chalmers" <bigiain(a)mightymedia.com.au> wrote in message
> news:bigiain-4E0BD6.18012908022007(a)nasal.pacific.net.au...
>> It's a more than a thimbleful, but small enough to disappear into the
>> noise for most people I suspect... My little bike gets around
>> 4.75L/100km so I _might_ notice a 0.1L increase, but it's only got 60W
>> of headlight. I suspect Nev's lucky to get less than 20L/100km out of
>> his car, and he'd be unlikely to notice a 0.1L/100km increase - it'd
>> almost certainly be overshadowed by head/tail winds, traffic delays,
>> imperceptible inclines, etc...
>>
>> bored-at-work-big
>
> My 5.7 litre HSV gets an average of about 16.5L/100km in the city and
> 10.0L/100km on the highway.

I get 10.0 on the highway too.. I've done Melbourne to Adelaide on a
tank a few times. Around 14.3 in Melbourne, but then I don't drive in
the city or inner suburbs often, or in peak hour traffic ever, and a lot
of the commuting I do is on a freeway or 70 & 80kph roads with minimal
controlled intersections.

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX
From: G-S on
Dale Porter wrote:
> "Hammo" <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote in message news:C1F12521.11BB4%hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au...
>>
>>
>> On 8/2/07 6:18 PM, in article eqeirb$1ja9$1(a)otis.netspace.net.au, "Dale
>> Porter" <daleaporter(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Hammo" <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote in message
>>> news:C1F11571.11BAB%hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 8/2/07 4:42 PM, in article eqed8u$1hvv$1(a)otis.netspace.net.au, "Dale
>>>> Porter" <daleaporter(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Hammo" <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote in message
>>>>> news:C1F0F1F0.11B92%hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au...
>>>>>> On 8/2/07 1:02 PM, in article slrnesl15j.3o1.sharkey(a)anchovy.zoic.org,
>>>>>> "sharkey" <sharkey(a)zoic.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hammo <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Paul is correct. Feel free to point out where he is wrong.
>>>>>>> Sure. That's not how a switch-mode regulator works, at all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----sharks
>>>>>> When you pop over, feel free to show me that is what I have....
>>>>> It's all about you, isn't it?
>>>> Oh,boo hoo, did you want to wear the pretty hat too? You'll have to nice to
>>>> Sharkey, he is the guest!
>>>>
>>>>
>>> And that's the best you could come up with?
>> Oh...... You really are being sooky. It'd be like kicking a puppy.
>>
>>
>
> LOL. It's OK hammo. You'll get it one day......maybe.
>

Rule 1... Hammo is never wrong.

Rule 2... If Hammo is wrong then Hammo sees rule 1 :)


G-S
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42
Prev: new tv project
Next: Honda VTR coolant boiling ?