TeamSwift

Home of the Suzuki mini-compacts ! Your Home for all things Suzuki Swift, Geo Metro, Holden Barina, Chevy Sprint, Pontiac Firefly, and Suzuki Cultus. TeamSwift is a technical performance oriented community!
It is currently Fri Oct 20, 2017 4:25 am

Underbody braces, turbos and more!

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 184 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 7:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 4:57 pm
Posts: 29
Location: Connectictut
I just put the new head on, and mileage has jumped 5 mpg to 43 so far... But i was hot rodding it on that tank...


I have my EGR disconnected... I have always thought those things reduce mileage... but i read a post in here that they increase mileage.... Any proof either way?

_________________
93 Geo Metro 1.0 N/A Manual
Accell Supercoil, MSD wires, K&N Filter
Swift +10 Cam sproket & 10.5:1 Cyl head, port/polish, Economy Cam.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 8:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 6:24 pm
Posts: 61
Location: Deer Lodge, Montana
I wonder why you're only getting 43 mpg? Guess some Metros do better than others...

My Metro XFi has slowly gone from last summer's 54 MPG average to 46.5 MPG average now... not sure if it's the fuel or if I just need to do maintenance... Anynow I've ordered a 3tech head just like you got only mine will have 11 to 1 compression and I'll put the Singh grooves in it.

Jeremiah
1993 Metro Xfi, 312k miles

_________________
55 MPG daily driver


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 1:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 11:26 pm
Posts: 63
Location: Indiana
i got about 38-57 MPGs in my Metro depending on where and how fast i was driving, does any one miss the days where $5 could give us over half a tank, i have an idea if no one bought gas in the u.s. for 2 days OPEC would lose $30+ billion in those 2 days if i lost $30 billoin in 2 days i'd listen $30,000,000,000 thats alot of zeros and lower gas prices would help the counrty and auto makers

lower gas prices= more money to PAY bills with and for the auto makers lower petroleum prices would allow more money to be spent in engienering, devolopment, and production

_________________
there's no bad ideas on performance, just bad endings and hospital bills, lots and lots of hospital bills


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 4:57 pm
Posts: 29
Location: Connectictut
jsenner wrote:
I wonder why you're only getting 43 mpg? Guess some Metros do better than others...

My Metro XFi has slowly gone from last summer's 54 MPG average to 46.5 MPG average now... not sure if it's the fuel or if I just need to do maintenance... Anynow I've ordered a 3tech head just like you got only mine will have 11 to 1 compression and I'll put the Singh grooves in it.

Jeremiah
1993 Metro Xfi, 312k miles


What are the Singh grooves???

_________________
93 Geo Metro 1.0 N/A Manual
Accell Supercoil, MSD wires, K&N Filter
Swift +10 Cam sproket & 10.5:1 Cyl head, port/polish, Economy Cam.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 6:24 pm
Posts: 61
Location: Deer Lodge, Montana
The Singh grooves are talked about in this fuel economy forum http://www.teamswift.net/viewtopic.php?t=17077. What they do is prevent pinging and detonation, allowing a much higher compression ratio to be used. People have reported 30% more fuel economy with the higher compression using the grooves.

Jeremiah

_________________
55 MPG daily driver


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:36 pm
Posts: 493
Location: Roscommon, MI
I'm interested to see the effect of those grooves on the G10, but I doubt it'll do much. They'd likely work better with a larger piston providing a bit more quench area, or perhaps a higher CR. The G10 doesn't seem to have much quench, and these grooves kind of rely on it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:56 pm
Posts: 82
Location: Chilliwack, B.C.
'93 Metro 4-dr, 1.3 SOHC 5-speed, 3tech cam K&N, 2" exhaust, 4.11 final drive, 185/60/14 tires-about 435 km's combined city/hwy.

_________________
If you ask why, you don't get it.
If you ask how, you get it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 6:24 pm
Posts: 61
Location: Deer Lodge, Montana
rarson wrote:
I'm interested to see the effect of those grooves on the G10, but I doubt it'll do much. They'd likely work better with a larger piston providing a bit more quench area, or perhaps a higher CR. The G10 doesn't seem to have much quench, and these grooves kind of rely on it.


As I understand it, when you shave a head you make the size of the quench area larger, just cause you "flattened the top of the mountain" so to speak. Less "valley" area left in the head after it's been shaved for higher compression.

Somender Singh says it takes very little quench area to make the grooves functional.

In any case, in about a month or so depending how long it takes for my 3tech head to arrive, I should be able to put the "grooves in a G10" thing to rest... :) I have a camera too so you guys can see what it looks like.

Jeremiah

_________________
55 MPG daily driver


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 5:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 4:57 pm
Posts: 29
Location: Connectictut
GEO Hauler wrote:
I just put the new head on, and mileage has jumped 5 mpg to 43 so far... But i was hot rodding it on that tank...


I have my EGR disconnected... I have always thought those things reduce mileage... but i read a post in here that they increase mileage.... Any proof either way?


That tank was when I was doing my testing, so I wasn't easy on it. The next tank of normal driving and timing set is 45.6 MPG, will get an average of three, though. that's 7.6 MPG increase so far with the head and sproket.

I could definitely use a real ignition, and the cat is probably somewhat plugged. I will get around to all of that soon enough, though.

I'm hoping with a new exhaust W/ muffler & no cat, ignition, ram air and underdrive pulley i can break the 50 MPG mark.

_________________
93 Geo Metro 1.0 N/A Manual
Accell Supercoil, MSD wires, K&N Filter
Swift +10 Cam sproket & 10.5:1 Cyl head, port/polish, Economy Cam.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 2:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:36 pm
Posts: 493
Location: Roscommon, MI
jsenner wrote:
In any case, in about a month or so depending how long it takes for my 3tech head to arrive, I should be able to put the "grooves in a G10" thing to rest... :)


Cool. No matter what, I'd just like to see it done.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 08, 2006 9:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 9:37 am
Posts: 1172
Location: Memphis, TN
finally broke the 40 mark. 44.66mpg!!!!!!!!!! mixed driving


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 10:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 2:27 am
Posts: 34
Location: N.E Oregon
My car is a 96 metro with 3cyl 5 spd.it is all stock.Now I am putting in a new motor.I got around 44 mpg with the old motor.I hope that the new one will get better.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 11:38 pm 
Offline
Moderator & FAQ King
Moderator & FAQ King
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 6460
Location: Vancouver, BC
Vehicle: 1988 Chevy Sprint, 5 speed, stock curb weight (rated at 48 MPG)
Mileage: 61.5 MPG (US) / 3.8 L per 100 kms
Conditions: The vehicle has seen a mix of city and highway driving, it started this tank of fuel with wrong spark plugs and stock timing, and part way through were replaced with correct spark plugs, and timing was bumped to 15°. Idle speed does need to be knocked down a bit though. 26 liters of Chevron 94 octane were used for a distance of 471 kms.
Driving Style: I get in the car and go. I don't put extreme effort towards economical driving. I keep the car in it's powerband and drive in the neighborhood of the speed limit. There are occasional spirited bursts with a moderate amount of coasting and engine braking.
Comments: I expect better mileage in the future now that the engine is running better and that I'm running more timing now. I got this level of efficiency without really trying. I'm genuinely suprised by this level of economy. With more effort it could be a lot better.

Image

_________________
jaguar,vettes&sprints wrote:
...can you inlighten me about lihtan's
( miracle pour hole)
maybe a picture Thanks


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 4:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 6:48 am
Posts: 142
Location: Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Lihtan wrote:
Driving Style: ...There are occasional spirited bursts with a moderate amount of coasting and engine braking.


I hear that.....sounds like me at times...spirited bursts. :lol:

_________________
92 Geo Metro HB


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 6:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 5:12 pm
Posts: 139
Location: Ottawa
Just thinking, that i see several threads of these report you mpg, good idea, but unless I am missing it, I think we should create somkind of data table (ex. 1/4 mile), or better yet website database that we can post our MPG for our car and model etc, and make it searchable/browseable.

Ertman


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 8:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:52 pm
Posts: 634
Location: Eastern Ontario
Lihtan wrote:
Mileage: 61.5 MPG (US) / 3.8 L per 100 kms


Don't mean to rain on your parade, but is this calculated from the numbers shown on the receipt image you posted? If it is, you might want to double check.

_________________
Image
www.MetroMPG.com ... www.ForkenSwift.com
... www.EcoModder.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 2:42 am 
Offline
Moderator & FAQ King
Moderator & FAQ King
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 6460
Location: Vancouver, BC
There's more numbers on the back of the receipt too. "18.021877 kms/L", which is correct and "3.8246768 L/100 kms", which should actually be 5.54881153 L/100 kms. I think what happened is that I mistook the 18 kms/L for the actually amount of fuel purchased, and proceded to divide it by 4.71 (which would normally give a correct L/100kms answer). I should know better than do math while I'm driving. Plugging the raw numbers into Google results in 42.3900834 MPG. Thanks for pointing that out, the numbers seem a little more realistic.

_________________
jaguar,vettes&sprints wrote:
...can you inlighten me about lihtan's
( miracle pour hole)
maybe a picture Thanks


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:20 am
Posts: 121
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Vehicle: 1989 Forsa GLX, 5 speed, 4cyl F10 engine
Mileage: 26.2 MPG / 8.97 L per 100 km
Conditions: 40 degrees (celcius) ambient temperature. 12 km traffic road & about 20km highway, 88 octane fuel.

I guess nobody will get any worst mileage than me :( .


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 5:23 am 
Offline
Moderator & FAQ King
Moderator & FAQ King
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 6460
Location: Vancouver, BC
pumashoes wrote:
...I guess nobody will get any worst mileage than me :( .

Don't bet on it. My GTi gets 24 MPG (10 L/100 kms). It's nearly impossible to drive it in a conservative manner. :wink:

_________________
jaguar,vettes&sprints wrote:
...can you inlighten me about lihtan's
( miracle pour hole)
maybe a picture Thanks


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 7:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:20 am
Posts: 121
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Consoling enough :D , by ignoring reality that it had a G13B engine :razz: .


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 2:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 11:31 pm
Posts: 57
Location: Lummi Island
My 04 Geo has only been averaging 37mpg with moderate driving.
I haven't checked the timing or plugs yet, it is a new car to me and I am still getting in shape. I replaced a couple sensors and it is running well, but still has a check engine light on with the egr code.... I cleaned the
valve and passage once. It still smells like it is running rich too.

MM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 11:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 1:37 pm
Posts: 16
Ertman wrote:
Just thinking, that i see several threads of these report you mpg, good idea, but unless I am missing it, I think we should create somkind of data table (ex. 1/4 mile), or better yet website database that we can post our MPG for our car and model etc, and make it searchable/browseable.

Ertman


There is a website http://www.gassavers.org where they maintain a database of fuel mileage. BTW I got 69 MPG on my last tank and my record is 72 MPG. If I use the air conditioning that drops to about 40 MPG. I have a 94 Geo Metro with wheels and tires off a 95 and a cam shaft from an XFi. I drive slow and do quite a bit of engine off coasting and a very light foot.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 2:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:56 pm
Posts: 8
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
This is TRUE and was calculated CORRECTLY.

My record gas mileage is 66.8MPG in a MK2 Sprint Turbo EFI, yes EFI

I slowly accelerated and didnt go over 110KM/hr at all. By the end, I had three litres left in my tank and I had gone total of 812KM, also, my tripometer is off by about .05% so every 1000km I have to add 50km to my tripometer, so around 850KM in one tank. My car is all stock no modifications at all, except for I have advanced my timing a little bit. I was driving in alberta so it is relatively flat, but there was still some long hills to climb. You just accelerate beforehand :P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 1:37 pm
Posts: 78
Location: San Diego
if your trip is .05% off then you should be adding 5km/1000, not 50

_________________
think:speak ratio = .8:1


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: I'm wrong?
PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 1:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:56 pm
Posts: 8
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
LoL. Actually, kid, if you do your math correctly... (take any calculator, times 0.05 by 1000) Voila! you will get 50!

If I was off by 0.005 (Which is called fiveTHOUSANDTHS) Then I would add 5km...

I suggest putting your think:speak ratio higher to something like 50:1, It might be good for ya ;)

"This is TRUE and was calculated CORRECTLY. " I'm not lying lol.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 184 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 8  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group