• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Honda debuts new Variable Cylinder Management in their 3L V6s

Does anyone here remember when the Cadallac back in the 50's had a deal that cut out 1/2 of the cyls. at highway speeds to same fuel? By the way it flopped.

Bleep
 
cool concept. i hope honda gets it working smoothly.

/the way i drive, it's never gonna use three cylinders 😛
 
Originally posted by: BigSmooth
Originally posted by: Bleep
Does anyone here remember when the Cadallac back in the 50's had a deal that cut out 1/2 of the cyls. at highway speeds to same fuel? By the way it flopped.

Bleep
Click to expand...
That was in 1981 according to this link: http://ca.autos.yahoo.com/020710/11/njjp.html 😛

GM is coming out with their new "Displacement on Demand" system next year.
Click to expand...
Caddilac's Sixteen will have it I believe. I was at the NY autoshow at the Javits Center, and the GM/Caddy spokesperson was explaining how they would idle random cyclinders, utilize more cylinders when more power is needed, and use at the least 4.

 
Originally posted by: LittleWolf
Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN
Link

btw, the Inspire is pretty much our USDM Accord.
Click to expand...

No big deal and GM had it long time back. Plus the mileage is still crappy. so what's the point?
Click to expand...

Well hopefully this will be successful, unlike GM's version.

Also M-B had this on their S-class a few years back but canned the idea after they couldn't get the mileage improvements that they wanted.
 
Originally posted by: Viper GTS
I hope it varies which cylinders are running/idle...

Viper GTS
Click to expand...
Nope, it just says it idles the intake/exhaust valves of the rear cylinder bank.

I also found this interesting,

When operating in 3-cylinder mode, engine vibration is reduced by extrapolating vibration from the change in crankshaft rotation speed and sending the information to the 'active control' engine mount, which compresses / extends an actuator in same-phase, same-period motion to dampen the engine mount. Similarly, a speaker creates an opposite phase sound or 'active noise control', to provide a canceling effect, for a quieter interior which leaves the driver unaware of changes in cylinder activation.
Click to expand...
 
This is retarded. How can halving the displacement possibly do much good for fuel economy? You just end up with 3 cylinders doing the same work that the 6 would be doing, and you also have them pulling the weight of the 3 idle ones. And you know what? It doesn't do much good. 27mpg??
 
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
This is retarded. How can halving the displacement possibly do much good for fuel economy? You just end up with 3 cylinders doing the same work that the 6 would be doing, and you also have them pulling the weight of the 3 idle ones. And you know what? It doesn't do much good. 27mpg??
Click to expand...

Yes, because you know more than the Honda Engineers. I mean, they didn't think of that at all when they designed the engine
rolleye.gif


http://espanol.autos.yahoo.com/newcars/details/honda03accordsedan/

That means the V6 gets better fuel economy than the I4.
 
Originally posted by: Angrymarshmello
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis This is retarded. How can halving the displacement possibly do much good for fuel economy? You just end up with 3 cylinders doing the same work that the 6 would be doing, and you also have them pulling the weight of the 3 idle ones. And you know what? It doesn't do much good. 27mpg??
Click to expand...
Yes, because you know more than the Honda Engineers. I mean, they didn't think of that at all when they designed the engine
rolleye.gif
http://espanol.autos.yahoo.com/newcars/details/honda03accordsedan/ That means the V6 gets better fuel economy than the I4.
Click to expand...

Cool.

Also, for WinkO, when you're on the highway cruising, not much power is needed to keep you at a certain speed, and you certainly don't need then all running when you're breaking. The 3 cylinders that are on will not be doing the work of 6. If the power ins't needed, why have all 6 running.

And about your comment on the engine only yeilding 27mpg - I believe that the MPG amount that was given was for the city, so you can see a DRAMATIC improvement over any v6 on the market. Hmm, I'd be willing to say that the vehicle could get near 40mpg on the highway, which is fvcking awesome for a V6 engine. If this were to come to the US, it would be the most fuel effecient V6 on the market.
 
Originally posted by: rbloedow
Originally posted by: Angrymarshmello
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis This is retarded. How can halving the displacement possibly do much good for fuel economy? You just end up with 3 cylinders doing the same work that the 6 would be doing, and you also have them pulling the weight of the 3 idle ones. And you know what? It doesn't do much good. 27mpg??
Click to expand...
Yes, because you know more than the Honda Engineers. I mean, they didn't think of that at all when they designed the engine
rolleye.gif
http://espanol.autos.yahoo.com/newcars/details/honda03accordsedan/ That means the V6 gets better fuel economy than the I4.
Click to expand...

Cool.

Also, for WinkO, when you're on the highway cruising, not much power is needed to keep you at a certain speed, and you certainly don't need then all running when you're breaking. The 3 cylinders that are on will not be doing the work of 6. If the power ins't needed, why have all 6 running.

And about your comment on the engine only yeilding 27mpg - I believe that the MPG amount that was given was for the city, so you can see a DRAMATIC improvement over any v6 on the market. Hmm, I'd be willing to say that the vehicle could get near 40mpg on the highway, which is fvcking awesome for a V6 engine. If this were to come to the US, it would be the most fuel effecient V6 on the market.
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is the same work is just split between fewer cylinders, so it's not like it's twice as efficient as all 6. If it were running on 6, each cylinder would be doing half the work of each of the 3.
 
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
Originally posted by: rbloedow
Originally posted by: Angrymarshmello
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis This is retarded. How can halving the displacement possibly do much good for fuel economy? You just end up with 3 cylinders doing the same work that the 6 would be doing, and you also have them pulling the weight of the 3 idle ones. And you know what? It doesn't do much good. 27mpg??
Click to expand...
Yes, because you know more than the Honda Engineers. I mean, they didn't think of that at all when they designed the engine
rolleye.gif
http://espanol.autos.yahoo.com/newcars/details/honda03accordsedan/ That means the V6 gets better fuel economy than the I4.
Click to expand...
Cool. Also, for WinkO, when you're on the highway cruising, not much power is needed to keep you at a certain speed, and you certainly don't need then all running when you're breaking. The 3 cylinders that are on will not be doing the work of 6. If the power ins't needed, why have all 6 running. And about your comment on the engine only yeilding 27mpg - I believe that the MPG amount that was given was for the city, so you can see a DRAMATIC improvement over any v6 on the market. Hmm, I'd be willing to say that the vehicle could get near 40mpg on the highway, which is fvcking awesome for a V6 engine. If this were to come to the US, it would be the most fuel effecient V6 on the market.
Click to expand...
What I'm saying is the same work is just split between fewer cylinders, so it's not like it's twice as efficient as all 6. If it were running on 6, each cylinder would be doing half the work of each of the 3.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't believe that the workload of the 3 cylinders will be going up. They will all be working the same amount as if the other 3 cylinders were on. Not a lot of power is need to maintain a vehicle at a constant speed, and 3 cylinders is enough to do it.
 
Originally posted by: rbloedow
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
Originally posted by: rbloedow
Originally posted by: Angrymarshmello
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis This is retarded. How can halving the displacement possibly do much good for fuel economy? You just end up with 3 cylinders doing the same work that the 6 would be doing, and you also have them pulling the weight of the 3 idle ones. And you know what? It doesn't do much good. 27mpg??
Click to expand...
Yes, because you know more than the Honda Engineers. I mean, they didn't think of that at all when they designed the engine
rolleye.gif
http://espanol.autos.yahoo.com/newcars/details/honda03accordsedan/ That means the V6 gets better fuel economy than the I4.
Click to expand...
Cool. Also, for WinkO, when you're on the highway cruising, not much power is needed to keep you at a certain speed, and you certainly don't need then all running when you're breaking. The 3 cylinders that are on will not be doing the work of 6. If the power ins't needed, why have all 6 running. And about your comment on the engine only yeilding 27mpg - I believe that the MPG amount that was given was for the city, so you can see a DRAMATIC improvement over any v6 on the market. Hmm, I'd be willing to say that the vehicle could get near 40mpg on the highway, which is fvcking awesome for a V6 engine. If this were to come to the US, it would be the most fuel effecient V6 on the market.
Click to expand...
What I'm saying is the same work is just split between fewer cylinders, so it's not like it's twice as efficient as all 6. If it were running on 6, each cylinder would be doing half the work of each of the 3.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't believe that the workload of the 3 cylinders will be going up. They will all be working the same amount as if the other 3 cylinders were on. Not a lot of power is need to maintain a vehicle at a constant speed, and 3 cylinders is enough to do it.
Click to expand...

Woah that fvcked all the spacing up. I don't think the intent was for it to be twice as efficient as all 6. Imagine you're cruising at XX speed - low load required of the engine - the car and engine already has inertia - little is actually needed to keep it going at that rate of speed. It doesn't make sense to use more fuel to have all 6 cylinders do the work.

The 'Variable Cylinder Management' system analyzes throttle opening, vehicle speed, engine speed, and gearing to determine that the car is cruising, and then idles the intake and exhaust valves of the three cylinders in the rear cylinder bank. With zero valve lift, the cylinders are sealed, and no fuel is injected. Pumping losses are thus reduced by as much as 65% and low fuel consumption is realized.
Click to expand...

You might be right in the fact that the 3 cylinders does take on the other 3's work - however, the purpose is for fuel economy. I doubt the other 3 cylinders would get 2x the amount of fuel injected. If anything it stays the same
 
Originally posted by: iamwiz82
It has been done before. 27.3MPG isnt that spectacular for the amount of R&D put into it.
Click to expand...

I was gonna say....I mean my Maxima gets me ~30mpg (mostly interstate driving, but also some back-roads driving as well so it averages out).
 
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
Originally posted by: rbloedow
Originally posted by: Angrymarshmello
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis This is retarded. How can halving the displacement possibly do much good for fuel economy? You just end up with 3 cylinders doing the same work that the 6 would be doing, and you also have them pulling the weight of the 3 idle ones. And you know what? It doesn't do much good. 27mpg??
Click to expand...
Yes, because you know more than the Honda Engineers. I mean, they didn't think of that at all when they designed the engine
rolleye.gif
http://espanol.autos.yahoo.com/newcars/details/honda03accordsedan/ That means the V6 gets better fuel economy than the I4.
Click to expand...

Cool.

Also, for WinkO, when you're on the highway cruising, not much power is needed to keep you at a certain speed, and you certainly don't need then all running when you're breaking. The 3 cylinders that are on will not be doing the work of 6. If the power ins't needed, why have all 6 running.

And about your comment on the engine only yeilding 27mpg - I believe that the MPG amount that was given was for the city, so you can see a DRAMATIC improvement over any v6 on the market. Hmm, I'd be willing to say that the vehicle could get near 40mpg on the highway, which is fvcking awesome for a V6 engine. If this were to come to the US, it would be the most fuel effecient V6 on the market.
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is the same work is just split between fewer cylinders, so it's not like it's twice as efficient as all 6. If it were running on 6, each cylinder would be doing half the work of each of the 3.
Click to expand...

It takes all of 30hp to keep a car cruising at freeway speeds, which 3-cylinders can do on very little gas (see the Geo Metro). Whats more important however, is making use the wear is even across both banks of cylinders.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top