-
Tervetuloa uudistetulle moottoripyora.org -foorumille! Onko ongelmia? Palautetta? kerätään tähän ketjuun kootusti asiat. Mikäli et pääse ketjuun kirjoittamaan, voit myös olla sähköpostilla yhteydessä. Teknisen tuen sähköposti löytyy yhteystiedot -sivulta. Mikäli et pääse kirjautumaan, yritä ensin salasanan palautusta.
Icat kipinäntehostin
- Keskustelun aloittaja fazer78
- Aloituspäivä
Ytsför
oma "titteli"
Artikkeli
Lainaus:
A typical claim is that the combustion with the device fitted is somehow "better" or "more complete". There is never however any detail as to what is meant by this. And it is a firmly established engineering fact that, on any reasonably modern engine under normal operating conditions, the burn is already at least 98% complete. The unburnt fuel in the exhaust (even before the cat) represents 1 or 2% at most of the input fuel. If you factor in the energy in the CO emissions, the figure still only rises to 3% maximum. So even if the fuel "saving" device could totally eliminate unburnt fuel and CO in the exhaust, and give an absolutely 100% complete burn, you would only save 3% of fuel. Claims that 10%, 20% or even more of the fuel is not burnt and escapes into the exhaust are entirely false - the unburnt fuel figure is higher when the engine is stone-cold, and at high load and speed conditions, but since the engine only spends a small fraction of its time under these conditions their contribution to overall fuel consumption is small.
Lainaus:
A typical claim is that the combustion with the device fitted is somehow "better" or "more complete". There is never however any detail as to what is meant by this. And it is a firmly established engineering fact that, on any reasonably modern engine under normal operating conditions, the burn is already at least 98% complete. The unburnt fuel in the exhaust (even before the cat) represents 1 or 2% at most of the input fuel. If you factor in the energy in the CO emissions, the figure still only rises to 3% maximum. So even if the fuel "saving" device could totally eliminate unburnt fuel and CO in the exhaust, and give an absolutely 100% complete burn, you would only save 3% of fuel. Claims that 10%, 20% or even more of the fuel is not burnt and escapes into the exhaust are entirely false - the unburnt fuel figure is higher when the engine is stone-cold, and at high load and speed conditions, but since the engine only spends a small fraction of its time under these conditions their contribution to overall fuel consumption is small.