A.E.M. in N/A.

[David P]

All the component parts were a perfect fit.

It's the 'dog's danglies'.

Edited December 15, 2009 by David P (see edit history)

[David P]

I have reconnected the ring earth for the sensors which has cured the flashing overdrive light, and a multitude of other minor issues and the engine is back on song at last.

 

Now that the engine is running properly, and I have been on the first run for a while, as requested, I have kept a careful note of the statistics.

 

Brimmed the tank with 95 ron, drove exactly 126.1 motorway miles at a steady 75 to 80mph, then brimmed the tank again, 14.77 litres used.

 

14.77 x 0.219969157 = 3.24894435 gallons

126.1 ./. 3.24894435 = 38.8126069 mpg

 

Current modifications as shown in present signature, with inlet cam set at 0o, and exhaust set at -1o.

Temp +3oC, weather raining, wipers and dipped headlights on and carrying around 200 kg of Supra parts.

Including a set of coilovers in the back and a diff in the passenger footwell.

 

I expect to better 40mpg for motorway cruising when finished, yet suspect that without the added weight and the wet conditions, I already have.

 

The return journey was stop start traffic, diversions and 3 tunnels to roar through in second gear and lots of fun with the 'X' amount of horses. :)

No refueling on return.

 

If that is not proof enough, you will have to come for a trundle some day and witness it yourselves.

Edited December 18, 2009 by David P (see edit history)

[Ian C]

If that is not proof enough, you will have to come for a trundle some day and witness it yourselves.

 

I volunteer I'll video it and get photies, I'll even pay for the fuel - I want to see 600miles out of a tank in an NA Supra because then I can get one for myself

[paul mac]

although i admire the fact you have the courage of your convictions something just cant be adding up here, you are now getting better fuel consumption than my wifes 1.8 litre 3 year old Honda Civic, how do you explain this from a 15 year old + 3 litre Toyota that weighs at least 300kg more

[Dave17]

Can i also add that the Supe was never designed to be outstanding on the fuel, and it is somewhat missing the point of the car trying to get it to do this.

[Thorin]

Is the odometer reading right? I've seen dodgy speedo conversion units give wildly inaccurate mile readings.

[Kirk]

There was a generation of direct injection 2JZ's that were more aimed at eco but still couldnt do more than 30mpg. I'm just struggling to see how an aem and a load of exhaust mods and tin foiled intakes suddenly boost eco by that much

Edited December 17, 2009 by Kirk (see edit history)

[David P]

Ian,

 

With pleasure.

 

As soon as I have completed the engine mods and installed the more efficient 5 speed flappy paddle controlled gearbox, we can go on a test trundle at your expense.

 

Although I hope you are better company in person than on here, or you might have a very long walk home.

Edited December 17, 2009 by David P (see edit history)

[David P]

m,

 

Read my signature and/or my car profile.

The AEM is not in yet.

[David P]

Thorin,

 

Kettering A14 BP services, to Maidstone services junction 8 M20.

 

Check it out and let me know.

 

I am not cheating.

[Kirk]

i stand corrected but still i just cant see that much increase with not alot of work...

can i ask why go to all the expence and fancy boxes? not that i dont admire the work but its a fair bit of work

[David P]

Please excuse me, it's not I, but 'you' who are missing the point.

Should you take notice of my modifications, you will see that all I have done is to focus on making the engine more efficient.

As I have said many times before, when driven like a granny, it gives more mpg, however, press the load pedal and it goes similar to a stock Jap TT.

 

Here are the fuel receipts, that include departure and arrival times.

 

Route taken; A14, M11, M25, M20.

Check the miles on Google and crunch the numbers yourselves.

 

Edited December 22, 2009 by David P (see edit history)

[David P]

m,

 

The N/A (and their owners ) are the 'Cinderella' models, and have been mostly overlooked in favour of;

MUST HAVE A BIGGER AND BIGGER AND EVEN BIGGERER TURBO OR TWO.:blink:

 

Undoubtably, this is the route for maximum power, however, the route I have taken gives more than sufficient power for entertaining road use, is more reliable by far, is frugal enough to be a daily driver, the insurance is half the price and the purchase and running costs less than half.

 

I prefer to drive my Supra every day, when compared to driving a 'scabby' eco runabout and only enjoying my Supra at the weekend.

 

If I could afford it, I would also have a monster turbo'd 1000bhp 6 speed manual to scare the congregation on Sundays.

But even if I could, there is not enough room in the street for the one I have now, let alone another.

Edited December 17, 2009 by David P (see edit history)

[paul mac]

As I have said many times before, when driven like a granny, it gives more mpg, however, press the load pedal and it goes similar to a stock Jap TT.

 

thats just the point, from previous posts you are claiming 32 mpg when driven "for a short time" at 150 and cruising at 120 this is total and utter fantasy, as Thorin says you either have something wrong with the odo or you cant cant add up, your figures are impossible, sorry mate but i am unsubscribed from this thread as its decending into comedy

[David P]

I tire of blatant ignorance.

 

I have posted the fuel receipts that show from where to where, including departure and arrival times and fuel used.

 

Will someone please turn on their brain and independently confirm the distance and crunch the numbers, instead of closing their eyes and sticking their head up their arse.

 

I am going for a pint, I shall decide wether to bother to tolerate such determined blind ignorance later, maybe it is simpler to just ban me for being original enough to do what no-one has managed to do before.

 

Einstein must be turning in his grave. :blink::blink:

[Neil-NA]

Dude just keep the updates coming.

 

I'm interested to know how it turns out, fuck the fuel economy just want to see what power you make. You have put alot of work (and money) into it and people are always going to dispute the claims but aslong as you are happy then keep doing what you are doing

[Thorin]

Mixing up US and imperial gallons?

[Wez]

Mixing up US and imperial gallons?

 

Figure is still high

 

14.77 Litre(s) = 3.2489393654 Gallon(s)

126.1 / 3.2489393654 = 38.81mpg

 

14.77 Litre(s) = 3.9018209907 US Gallon(s)

126.1 / 3.9018209907 = 32.33mpg

[Thorin]

Voodoo?

[Wez]

Whats the book mpg on these motors?

[icemanv6]

Dude just keep the updates coming.

 

I'm interested to know how it turns out, $#@! the fuel economy just want to see what power you make. You have put alot of work (and money) into it and people are always going to dispute the claims but aslong as you are happy then keep doing what you are doing

 

 

[David P]

Neil & Ice,

 

Thank you for a positive post, they are as rare as rocking horse shit on here.

 

Many Not Applicable members p.m. and/or Email in preference to posting, because they too are sick of the loud minority of depressive

Tiny Todger and Need Another Todger members.

 

Although I must admit, your user title is a little ‘worrying’.

 

Neil-NA

"Anal...its not for pussys"

Club Member

 

 

This negative Supra aura appears to be unique to the site, and I am not alone in the belief that this community is in dire need of a new ‘Sheriff’, or a group buy for Supercharged Prozac.

 

I will leave the ‘Sado’s' to prattle amongst themselves for a while, whilst I get on with more positive activities, and should I not be excluded for having a brain that fires on all cylinders.

 

When the job is jobbed, I will post the achieved figures.

 

However, I can guarantee that regardless the evidence given, it will fuel mostly : further negativity.

Edited December 18, 2009 by David P (see edit history)

[Tricky-Ricky]

I tire of blatant ignorance.

 

 

I have posted the fuel receipts that show from where to where, including departure and arrival times and fuel used.

 

Will someone please turn on their brain and independently confirm the distance and crunch the numbers, instead of closing their eyes and sticking their head up their arse.

 

I am going for a pint, I shall decide wether to bother to tolerate such determined blind ignorance later, maybe it is simpler to just ban me for being original enough to do what no-one has managed to do before.

 

Einstein must be turning in his grave. :blink::blink:

 

 

 

Sorry but i too am beginning to tire of blatant arrogance:tongue:

 

Edit! Having just read the above post, I'm not sure it was Worth all the typing! do you think you are the only person on here that understands how and why engines work?

And these are the people you are getting the flack from, because you have come up with nothing to back up your claims other than some receipts for petrol and a couple calculations which you think is adequate to back up your claims.

 

 

I have yet to see anything that you have provided in terms of engine mods and explanations of what they are going to achieve, other than pointing at you sig!

 

And now it seems by your response that you obviously feel threatened by the questions![/color]

 

 

However i do support you diligence, and you are obviously dedicated to your goal, which is commendable.

 

But I'm afraid unless you are a very talented mechanical and electronics designer/engineer, i cannot possibly see how you can improve on the original Toyota 2JZGE engine design enough to extract the fuel consumption that you state.

 

From your list of mods and adjustments etc there is no way sorry!, the very fact that you are currently running a STD ECU says its not possible, as it cannot improve the fuel economy anymore than its set maps allow.

 

The parameters available within the set maps due to the imputs from the various sensors, like IAT, MFA, MAP etc is narrower on the N/A than the turbo.

 

Also the lambda feedback is only capable of keeping things to stoic 14.7 AFR and that is what the Toyota engineers based there MPG calculations on, along with the already mentioned set ECU maps, had you already fitted the AEM ECU i would have said that by keeping the AFRs even leaner than stoic there is a vague possibility that your MPG figures are vaguely feasible.

 

Have you changed the valve timing by more than the -1deg on the exhaust? or changed the original ignition timing? both of which could have an influence on MPG, but would likely bring other problems.

 

Perhaps you would like to outline to us just what you consider are the modifications you have made to your engine that you consider are the main contributers to the increased efficiency and MPG?

Edited December 18, 2009 by Tricky-Ricky (see edit history)

[Thorin]

It's not like we're having a go at you or deliberately insulting you.

 

Your MPG figures are significantly higher than any other NA owner, and so naturally are being taken with a pinch of salt.

[David P]

At last............ some sensible questions.

 

I had planned to fit the Torsen today, but I am verging on 'man flu' and don't fancy laying under the car in the snow, yet without the LSD it wouldn't even get out of the street.

 

I am 'grounded' so might aswell try and explain.

 

I have been modifying engines for the last 38 years, yet admit that this is my first go at a Supra.

Information on how to 'gee up' N/A engines is thin on the ground, so I have relied my past experience to lead me.

The T.T. however, has been modded extensively, and provides a selection of both new and used compatible parts that can be encorporated.

 

I will go through each section at a time, and post some snaps that many are to lazy to look at, even though there is a link below.

 

(I think the snow improves the rear body line)

Edited December 22, 2009 by David P (see edit history)