Does the 00/01 ECU run rich?
08-06-2010, 03:41 PM
#31
Originally Posted by gernby,Aug 6 2010, 04:33 PM
How dense can you be? If you are going to claim 33 MPG, you need to divulge your cruising speed! If you were cruising at 55 MPH, then 33 MPG isn't very impressive, but if you were cruising at 85 MPH, then I would say 33 MPG is impossible.
This guy is just being an ass.
08-06-2010, 06:54 PM
#32
Registered User
Originally Posted by gernby,Aug 6 2010, 02:54 PM
I can't tell if you are joking here, so I apologize if you are, but you really seem to be missing the point here. Fuel economy and speed are VERY, VERY related. As speed increases, aerodynamic drag increases EXPONENTIALLY, so MPG goes down exponentially as cruising speed increases. If you cruise at 55 MPH with the top up, you'll probably get over 35 MPG. If you cruise at 85 MPH with the top down, you'll probably get less than 25 MPG.
Wind resistance does increase, I believe, as the square of speed. But rolling resistance of tires, friction loss in bearings, pumping losses in an engine that is lightly loaded, etc. do not. So the decrease in mileage is a bit less than the square of speed would indicate.
60**2 = 3600
70**2 = 4900
I doubt that increasing the speed from 60 to 70 would cut mileage 27%. That would be from, say, 28 mpg at 60 to about 20.5 at 70 mph.
But you are right: drive faster, get fewer mpg. The basic laws of physics can't be bypassed.
08-06-2010, 10:28 PM
#34
Registered User
Originally Posted by CosmosMpower,Aug 5 2010, 12:23 PM
Since my S2000 was turned strictly into a commuter a few years ago I started paying a little more attention to the MPG. I've been getting roughly 23/24 mpg driving 80% highway at around 75-80 mph (usually close to 4,000 rpms) cruising.
While I was washing the car the other day a friend of mine commented on how black the exhaust tips were. This lead me to wonder if the S2000 is tuned to run pretty rich. My car is pretty well maintained (clean air filter, oil, tranny, diff fluids, spark plugs) and I think it should be getting better than 23/24 mpg with nearly all highway driving.
While I was washing the car the other day a friend of mine commented on how black the exhaust tips were. This lead me to wonder if the S2000 is tuned to run pretty rich. My car is pretty well maintained (clean air filter, oil, tranny, diff fluids, spark plugs) and I think it should be getting better than 23/24 mpg with nearly all highway driving.
08-06-2010, 11:32 PM
#35
Originally Posted by gernby,Aug 6 2010, 03:33 PM
How dense can you be? If you are going to claim 33 MPG, you need to divulge your cruising speed! If you were cruising at 55 MPH, then 33 MPG isn't very impressive, but if you were cruising at 85 MPH, then I would say 33 MPG is impossible.
08-07-2010, 05:26 AM
#37
Originally Posted by RedY2KS2k,Aug 6 2010, 09:54 PM
Your point is valid, and I'm not trying to start a p#$%%ing match here.
Wind resistance does increase, I believe, as the square of speed. But rolling resistance of tires, friction loss in bearings, pumping losses in an engine that is lightly loaded, etc. do not. So the decrease in mileage is a bit less than the square of speed would indicate.
60**2 = 3600
70**2 = 4900
I doubt that increasing the speed from 60 to 70 would cut mileage 27%. That would be from, say, 28 mpg at 60 to about 20.5 at 70 mph.
But you are right: drive faster, get fewer mpg. The basic laws of physics can't be bypassed.
Wind resistance does increase, I believe, as the square of speed. But rolling resistance of tires, friction loss in bearings, pumping losses in an engine that is lightly loaded, etc. do not. So the decrease in mileage is a bit less than the square of speed would indicate.
60**2 = 3600
70**2 = 4900
I doubt that increasing the speed from 60 to 70 would cut mileage 27%. That would be from, say, 28 mpg at 60 to about 20.5 at 70 mph.
But you are right: drive faster, get fewer mpg. The basic laws of physics can't be bypassed.
I did several controlled tests in my previous car, and found that I could get over 35 MPG at 60 MPH, but only 30 MPG at 70 MPH. That was in a Lexus IS350, which is quite a bit more aerodynamic than an S2000.
08-07-2010, 03:02 PM
#39
Registered User
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by gernby,Aug 5 2010, 01:41 PM
Have you ever replaced your O2 sensor?
If I go to a 02/03 ECU do I need a re-key etc or does it just PnP?
08-07-2010, 05:21 PM
#40
Originally Posted by CosmosMpower,Aug 7 2010, 06:02 PM
Top up average 75 mph around 3,800 rpms ish to work. Never replaced the O2 sensor, never got a CEL for it. I might try just slowing down, who wants to get to work in such a hurry anyway
If I go to a 02/03 ECU do I need a re-key etc or does it just PnP?
If I go to a 02/03 ECU do I need a re-key etc or does it just PnP?
If you get an '02-'03 ECU, it will improve open loop performance (power), but it will NOT improve highway fuel economy. You would have to get the ECU programmed to your keys.