Evolve AMS Installed! But gas mileage went down?
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Joined
·
4,679 Posts
Re: Evolve AMS Installed! But gas mileage went down? (CM2RAS)
HAHA no you didnt screw up, its called your playing with the intake to hear the noise it makes; your basically racing the engine for now, but that will all subside once you get it out of your system.
| Quote, originally posted by CM2RAS » |
Maybe I screwed something up when I put it in? But my mileage is down and the Miles to empty jumps all over the place. Could I have screwed up MAFS when I installed it in the AMS unit?
|
HAHA no you didnt screw up, its called your playing with the intake to hear the noise it makes; your basically racing the engine for now, but that will all subside once you get it out of your system.
Joined
·
495 Posts
Re: Evolve AMS Installed! But gas mileage went down? (PureDrive07)
LOL You know I thought about that so I am trying to drive normal, maybe not so I will give it time.
![]()
| Quote, originally posted by PureDrive07 » |
HAHA no you didnt screw up, its called your playing with the intake to hear the noise it makes; your basically racing the engine for now, but that will all subside once you get it out of your system. |
LOL You know I thought about that so I am trying to drive normal, maybe not so I will give it time.
Re: (CM2RAS)
anything greater than 100 PON is a waste of money
| Quote, originally posted by CM2RAS » |
| Your probably right. Just curious has anyone ran 112 octane unleaded? I can get it at the pump at Infineon Raceway(not cheap) on the way home and have been thinking about running a tank. |
anything greater than 100 PON is a waste of money
Re: (CM2RAS)
I had an open intake like that on my old S40 and my MPG went down as well. Part of it had to do with the amazing sound it produced and me stepping on the throttle too hard, and part of it was that the engine was simply sucking more air. More air = more gas added to the mix, and there goes your MPG.
I had an open intake like that on my old S40 and my MPG went down as well. Part of it had to do with the amazing sound it produced and me stepping on the throttle too hard, and part of it was that the engine was simply sucking more air. More air = more gas added to the mix, and there goes your MPG.
Re: (tomedkaz)
Unless you have negative pressure within the airbox, which is probably not the case with an S40; you're not getting anymore air with an open filter element.
| Quote, originally posted by tomedkaz » |
| I had an open intake like that on my old S40 and my MPG went down as well. Part of it had to do with the amazing sound it produced and me stepping on the throttle too hard, and part of it was that the engine was simply sucking more air. More air = more gas added to the mix, and there goes your MPG. |
Unless you have negative pressure within the airbox, which is probably not the case with an S40; you're not getting anymore air with an open filter element.
Re: (xman03)
somehow I got worse MPG
![]()
The stock airbox is ver restrictive - i'm talking abotu a small hole for fresh air.
| Quote, originally posted by xman03 » |
Unless you have negative pressure within the airbox, which is probably not the case with an S40; you're not getting anymore air with an open filter element. |
somehow I got worse MPG
The stock airbox is ver restrictive - i'm talking abotu a small hole for fresh air.
Re: (tomedkaz)
How are you all coming to the conclusion that you are getting worse gas mileage than before. Actual testing or just assumptions on previous averages... On my 2000 S40 I had prior, to the R (sucker hauled) I had an EST Intake and mileage improved on a 150 trip that was pretty much cruise control all the way from 25.6 / 26.1 to an increase of 29.8 / 31.1 on the exact same trip. So I would consider that conclusive testing considering the same road same cruise set speed, adjusted for averages on wind speed, humidity and temperature and you notice the fluctations in the numbers. Turbo cars if tuned well produce good gas mileage to power for the size of the engine. Look at the SRT-4, 30 mpg stock for a 2.4 liter engine that can run 14.00 out the box... The R is easily capable of 30 mpg on a cruise control highway drive with the right add ons
![]()
. For no reason should an intake reduce gas mileage. I know you all are hammering down then letting off for the swooshh phishhh sound of the CBV.
![]()
How are you all coming to the conclusion that you are getting worse gas mileage than before. Actual testing or just assumptions on previous averages... On my 2000 S40 I had prior, to the R (sucker hauled) I had an EST Intake and mileage improved on a 150 trip that was pretty much cruise control all the way from 25.6 / 26.1 to an increase of 29.8 / 31.1 on the exact same trip. So I would consider that conclusive testing considering the same road same cruise set speed, adjusted for averages on wind speed, humidity and temperature and you notice the fluctations in the numbers. Turbo cars if tuned well produce good gas mileage to power for the size of the engine. Look at the SRT-4, 30 mpg stock for a 2.4 liter engine that can run 14.00 out the box... The R is easily capable of 30 mpg on a cruise control highway drive with the right add ons
Joined
·
11,628 Posts
Re: (CM2RAS)
Totally not needed as someone has already said. I know here on the West Coast we can only get 91octane, but this completely sufficient for our R's.
Maybe and only maybe if you were running insane boost and were trying to deter detonation I would say you could add some octane boost.
| Quote, originally posted by CM2RAS » |
| Just curious has anyone ran 112 octane unleaded? I can get it at the pump at Infineon Raceway(not cheap) on the way home and have been thinking about running a tank. |
Totally not needed as someone has already said. I know here on the West Coast we can only get 91octane, but this completely sufficient for our R's.
Maybe and only maybe if you were running insane boost and were trying to deter detonation I would say you could add some octane boost.
Re: (kmg_S60R)
I don't own that car anymore but I noticed WORSE fuel economy after I put on my EST intake. That's it. I'm not sure if it's related to me stepping on the throttle too much or what, but it got worse. Then, when I chipped it, it went back to above-normal levels. Maybe I'm just crazy
| Quote, originally posted by kmg_S60R » |
| How are you all coming to the conclusion that you are getting worse gas mileage than before. Actual testing or just assumptions on previous averages... On my 2000 S40 I had prior, to the R (sucker hauled) I had an EST Intake and mileage improved on a 150 trip that was pretty much cruise control all the way from 25.6 / 26.1 to an increase of 29.8 / 31.1 on the exact same trip. So I would consider that conclusive testing considering the same road same cruise set speed, adjusted for averages on wind speed, humidity and temperature and you notice the fluctations in the numbers. Turbo cars if tuned well produce good gas mileage to power for the size of the engine. Look at the SRT-4, 30 mpg stock for a 2.4 liter engine that can run 14.00 out the box... The R is easily capable of 30 mpg on a cruise control highway drive with the right add ons
|
I don't own that car anymore but I noticed WORSE fuel economy after I put on my EST intake. That's it. I'm not sure if it's related to me stepping on the throttle too much or what, but it got worse. Then, when I chipped it, it went back to above-normal levels. Maybe I'm just crazy
Re: (tomedkaz)
Naw your not crazy buddy, maybe some cars A/F ratios are altered more than others based on enviroment and other conditions that aren't accounted for. I know that my increase was purely Hwy tested not City so that could be a factor... Though initial testing of my EST intake my jaw dropped to the floor when I heard the CBV shout, when I cut throttle at the end of a 0-30 sprint in L...
![]()
It was awesome...
![]()
Provoked more people to umm do something that won't be mentioned, by holding a gear and squeezing the throttle with a quick build of boost then choping the throttle.
![]()
I know that didn't help my gas mileage and before the EST had never even thought about doing that...
![]()
| Quote, originally posted by tomedkaz » |
| Maybe I'm just crazy |
Naw your not crazy buddy, maybe some cars A/F ratios are altered more than others based on enviroment and other conditions that aren't accounted for. I know that my increase was purely Hwy tested not City so that could be a factor... Though initial testing of my EST intake my jaw dropped to the floor when I heard the CBV shout, when I cut throttle at the end of a 0-30 sprint in L...
Joined
·
4,248 Posts
Re: Evolve AMS Installed! But gas mileage went down? (CM2RAS)
LOL!! your LEAD FOOT is kicking in, extra waight lol
LOL!! your LEAD FOOT is kicking in, extra waight lol
Joined
·
21,340 Posts
Re: (850arrrsaylikepirate)
This is definitely not the case. R's DEFINITELY like Octane above 91.
What Jim said was that anything over 100 PON was a waste, not 91.
The racing gas blended with 91 to get somewhere around 96 works very nicely.
Do a search on here for toluene and Torco.
| Quote, originally posted by 850arrrsaylikepirate » |
Totally not needed as someone has already said. I know here on the West Coast we can only get 91octane, but this completely sufficient for our R's. Maybe and only maybe if you were running insane boost and were trying to deter detonation I would say you could add some octane boost. |
This is definitely not the case. R's DEFINITELY like Octane above 91.
What Jim said was that anything over 100 PON was a waste, not 91.
The racing gas blended with 91 to get somewhere around 96 works very nicely.
Do a search on here for toluene and Torco.
Joined
·
11,628 Posts
Re: (Needsdecaf)
I am sure the R will like the higher octane but at what cost?
I know this has been discussed a lot here and don't think it needs to be reopened in this thread. A search is in order...
I am sure the R will like the higher octane but at what cost?
I know this has been discussed a lot here and don't think it needs to be reopened in this thread. A search is in order...
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Join the discussion
