P plate training ...not
in [Aussie Motorcycles]
|
Prev: new tv project
Next: Honda VTR coolant boiling ?
From: Knobdoodle on 15 Feb 2007 03:21 "Nev.." <idiot(a)mindless.com> wrote in message news:45d30726$0$31843$5a62ac22(a)per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au... > Knobdoodle wrote: > >> Or GB was wrong. > > It's a bit late to be jumping on the bandwagon, Clem :P > Just covering all the possibilities Nev; no matter how unlikely! -- Clem
From: Knobdoodle on 15 Feb 2007 03:29 "Hammo" <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote in message news:C1F954A7.26AE6%hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au... > > > > On 14/2/07 10:25 PM, in article > VkCAh.1059$4c6.386(a)news-server.bigpond.net.au, "Knobdoodle" > <knobdoodle(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >>> >>> (GB's post has expired from Google groups). >>> >>> So if this whole "lights use more fuel" thing isn't measurable on an EFI >>> engine.. of course there would be no measurable effect in the fuel >>> flow.. >>> and if there was no change in fuel flow then surely that would be proof >>> the accuracy of the fuel measurement device, not, as you claim, proof >>> against it. >>> >> Or GB was wrong. (or; your interpretation of what GB said is wrong) >> I also posted waaaaay back in the thread that it (the headlight-load on >> the >> engine) DOES show an effect on both Michelle's and gNatalie's EFI cars. >> -- >> Clem >> (Unless you're trying to say that increased engine-load doesn't equate to >> increased fuel usage) > > Actually, it'll depend. I don't know why I didn't think of this before! > > Can you be sure that the load is increasing, or, is the engine just > running > at higher rpm? If the latter, it is possible that as there is no road > speed, the stoichiometry is not equivalent and has been adjusted to run > leaner, giving a lower rate of consumption! > [scrunches up brow] What on earth are you Hamsturbating about now?!!? When the engine is idling and you switch on the lights the RPM drops. On the older car car it stays down and on the other it then returns to the original idle speed. -- Clem
From: Knobdoodle on 15 Feb 2007 03:33 "Toosmoky" <toosmoky(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Hammo wrote: > >> Can you be sure that the load is increasing, or, is the engine just >> running >> at higher rpm? If the latter, it is possible that as there is no road >> speed, the stoichiometry is not equivalent and has been adjusted to run >> leaner, giving a lower rate of consumption! > > Nice one, centurion. I'm wondering if there's actually a case to be made > that any fuel consumption increase/decrease is not even detectable in some > engines. > > Given the large number of variables, it may be that the variance between > any measurement of fuel used in one test compared to another may not be > reproducible. In some engines. > Perhaps. Low-wattage lights, dodgy regulators, slipping fan-belts and low-power alternators would also contribute to it being hard or impractical to measure. Doesn't change the principle though. -- Clem
From: Knobdoodle on 15 Feb 2007 03:40 "Nev.." <idiot(a)mindless.com> wrote in message news:45d3bfb5$0$24729$5a62ac22(a)per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au... > GB wrote: >> G-S <geoff(a)castbus.com.au> wrote in news:12t6seih1kdoe49 >> @corp.supernews.com: >>>> to which GB replied >>>> > Won't work on an EFI anything. >>> The bus I tested the effect on _is_ an EFI device, the main difference >>> is that more fuel is being used (both to run the motor and to run the >>> lights) so the effect is more easily measurable (since it is >>> significantly larger in total ml although not by %). >> >> Nah, I was trying to dumb it down for Nev. Of *course* the effect >> still happens, it's just harder to observe by sitting in the shed >> eyeballing the tachometer. What I meant by "won't work on an EFI >> anything" is that my test - turn the lights on and watch the tacho >> drop by 50 revs or so - won't work on EFI things because EFI things >> will tend to change other things to compensate for the increase in load >> and keep the engine idling at the same 'designated' idle speed. > > How does it go? "Look at the silly monkey." > > So lets see the score.. before.. G-S and Clem were right.. and GB was > wrong. Now apparently GB and G-S are right, and Clem, (Who did the > experiment on EFI vehicles and found that the revs DID drop, completely > contraditing your latest assertion) is wrong... so that would make Hammo > right, and he agreed with me to some extent, so I must be right. > Actually it's the bloke who's trying to score points by doing silly selective quoting who's looking like the goose at the moment Nev! -- Clem (Leave the Hammoflage to Hammo; no one is expecting him to make sense.)
From: Knobdoodle on 15 Feb 2007 03:58
Hang on a tick; it's a bloody Volvo. The headlights are ALWAYS on!! -- Clem |