TOPIC: Get the right setup rather than modify what you've got

So I am all for fixing the world one car at a time. It is the only way to help the general public and make a business model out of this technology…..but i just have to ask, How to make the ideal setup? 100mpg is the old story for petrol being fully vaporised and I think there are some people out there that might make the effort to go all in. 100 mpg is definitely attractive proposition/economy.
Petrol vaporises at a temperature little less than water boiling, vacuum can also cause it to vaporise. The groove increases vacuum effect, so why not increase temperature as well?
I have been a part of this site since 2013, mostly I have been enjoying the benefits of Propane and diesel powered vehicles. I have grooved around 4 petrol cars and only the most recent one have I really tried to get the groove working, sadly I have failed so far- but I have learnt stuff and seen enough to still have faith in the groove and to see great value in what Ron has created.
I am hoping for some feedback so to get the ball rolling I will tender my thoughts on what the ideal setup would be:

1. Create a hot air box around the exhaust manifold and draw intake air from it so the intake air is hotter – this way less vacuum will be needed to get full vaporisation. Using a V engine would make this much harder to get at exhaust manifolds, so I think an inline 4, or 6 cylinder motor is best.
2. Use a “distributor” ignition system with advance weights that can be removed or glued in a fixed position. Expect to set timing permanently at around 5 degrees BTDC.
3. Fit an alternator from a diesel engine that has a vaccum pump to supply vacuum for brakes and disconnect intake manifold from brake booster. so the manifold vacuum can be optimised /saved for vaporising fuel (electric Vacuum pumps are used on some cars to)
4. Obviously disconnect/block PCV valve and idle speed control.
5. Use a grooved carburettor. Carbs are great cos they balance the pressure in the float bowl, i.e a badly blocked aircleaner doesn't cause a carb to suck more fuel into the increased vacuum cos the fuel bowl sees the same amount of vacuum to balance it, conversely blow-through turbos pressurize the fuel bowl allowing petrol to still go into the motor despite the boost pressure. With this in mind I propose it is possible to modify a carb and refit the throttle above the venturi,(crazy?!) it should still work and the venturi would be in max vacuum all the time (similar to having very blocked air filter), and any venturi effect would create stronger vacuum beyond intake vacuum.
6. Increase the coolant temperature by increasing thermostat temperature if possible.
7. Intake manifold- I presume modern manifolds mess up the groove (I think a factor on my current ride). Does anyone have advice on what manifolds work best? I think multi-path manifolds reduce the grooveseffect, at a guess long runner basic design manifolds more often get groove results? But perhaps old fashioned log manifolds are best?
8. Carburettors- I presume some carbs love the groove and others don’t. Does anyone have advice on good or bad carbs? A single barrel would be my choice but not that many to choose from. Stromberg is certainly the most common that I can get.
9. Dunno about compression ratios. Does anyone have experience about getting the groove working better with higher or lower compression ratios? While there is lots of talk about high compression I have information that about 8to1 is best for unleaded petrol. So what many would call low compression?
I am sure there is a wealth of knowledge about this so please make comments.

Neil,

Someone just starting to learn this tech should start a thread whenever they're doing a modification. The first reason is sometimes there are issues that are unique to a particular configuration (vehicle) that others have discovered were thwarting their success. Second (and of greater global impact) is other people get informed of what we do and what we face, as well as how we work together to solve problems.

Family.

So please start one on this temporary "failure" and let's put our heads together to fix it!

neil wrote: I am hoping for some feedback so to get the ball rolling I will tender my thoughts on what the ideal setup would be:

1. Create a hot air box around the exhaust manifold and draw intake air from it so the intake air is hotter – this way less vacuum will be needed to get full vaporisation. Using a V engine would make this much harder to get at exhaust manifolds, so I think an inline 4, or 6 cylinder motor is best.

Indeed. I had this idea a few months ago and started inviting people to make just such a configuration. So, great minds DO think alike!

neil wrote: 2. Use a “distributor” ignition system with advance weights that can be removed or glued in a fixed position. Expect to set timing permanently at around 5 degrees BTDC.

Unfortunately, this is simply not worth pursuing on more modern cars. Starting 1996 (and before) all I know were operating on distributorless ignition, or with distributors that were adjustable only through the ECU. That being said, once you understand how the systems operate, you can "persuade" the ECU to retard the timing. Primary reference point (according to Mike Holler) is the IAT or Intake Air Temperature Sensor. This is why #1 is such a great idea. The ECU simply thinks it's in a warmer environment (less dense air) and so adds less fuel, as well as retarding the timing!

neil wrote: 3. Fit an alternator from a diesel engine that has a vaccum pump to supply vacuum for brakes and disconnect intake manifold from brake booster. so the manifold vacuum can be optimised /saved for vaporising fuel (electric Vacuum pumps are used on some cars to)

This is news to me! I have yet to see an alternator with a vac pump! This must be European... Pics in its own thread might be very illuminating! (HINT, HINT!)

neil wrote: 4. Obviously disconnect/block PCV valve and idle speed control.

Oh, no. And you were doing so WELL! The Idle Speed control should not be messed with. While earlier on, I did REDUCE the amount of air passing through the IAC valve (Idle Air Control), this was done only on TBI systems (GM Truck class from 86-95) and is a rare bird, indeed, thanks to Obamalamadingdong's "Cash for Clunkers" program!) There are other likewise rare exceptions, such as the 7.0 GM engine with the PDV under the intake manifold. In cases such as this, yoiu simply plug the source of the air, which still allows vac to be applied, but reduces the lost vacuum.

neil wrote: 5. Use a grooved carburettor. Carbs are great cos they balance the pressure in the float bowl, i.e a badly blocked aircleaner doesn't cause a carb to suck more fuel into the increased vacuum cos the fuel bowl sees the same amount of vacuum to balance it, conversely blow-through turbos pressurize the fuel bowl allowing petrol to still go into the motor despite the boost pressure. With this in mind I propose it is possible to modify a carb and refit the throttle above the venturi,(crazy?!) it should still work and the venturi would be in max vacuum all the time (similar to having very blocked air filter), and any venturi effect would create stronger vacuum beyond intake vacuum.

This is the opposite of my experience, Neil. As the vacuum increases with the blockage in the filter, it increases the amount of fuel being sucked into the intake manifold. At least here in North America, I don't know of a configuration that "balances" the pressures. (Again, pics on it's own thread might help...?)


6. Increase the coolant temperature by increasing thermostat temperature if possible.
Agreed. But with the proviso the engine has received The Groove. This reduces the BTU content of the coolant so temperature management concerns become a thing of the past, for sure, but a warmer environment WILL allow for higher vaporization rate which promotes more complete combustion. This is a GOOD thang!

7. Intake manifold- I presume modern manifolds mess up the groove (I think a factor on my current ride). Does anyone have advice on what manifolds work best? I think multi-path manifolds reduce the grooveseffect, at a guess long runner basic design manifolds more often get groove results? But perhaps old fashioned log manifolds are best?
My personal focus is and has always been to take factory equipment and making it run more efficiently, using as few add-on parts as possible (they cost money!) so I've not resxearched the style:efficiency aspect whatsoever, but PLAY ON!!!

8. Carburettors- I presume some carbs love the groove and others don’t. Does anyone have advice on good or bad carbs? A single barrel would be my choice but not that many to choose from. Stromberg is certainly the most common that I can get.
Every carburetor I have done ran better, without exception. I have only found ONE that couldn't be done, and that is the one I lovingly call the "Quadrajunk" or Quadrajet by GM in the 70's and early 80's. I am sure there are others, but you can only do so much... As ton 1- 2- or 4-bbl, I would choose the one with the lowest flow rates. I put a 650 cfm carb on an engine that "required" an 850. And the guy got about 20% better mileage and was very impressed with the power delivery. So, that's what I do when called to replace the carb.

9. Dunno about compression ratios. Does anyone have experience about getting the groove working better with higher or lower compression ratios? While there is lots of talk about high compression I have information that about 8to1 is best for unleaded petrol. So what many would call low compression?
I am sure there is a wealth of knowledge about this so please make comments.[/quote]

Neil, it is obvious you are a thinking man. This is good, but I want to encourage you to keep a strong caution ever present. 1) "Perfect is the enemy of good." We always want to make things better-especially things we discover. So much so that many never contribute their discoveries and so never create a product, service or modification that benefits anyone but themselves. Bad robot.

2) A common condition is called "Analysis Paralysis". Don't get caught up in trying to calculate and examine and research to the point you don't get anything done. One of the best things I have heard in this regard came out of the entrepreneur circle and is advice I have followed as much as possible.

You see, if you never DELIVER something of benefit to this planet and/or her peoples, then you have been only a drain on our resources. And no one should have to live with that guilt!

So, figure something out and share it (and the process of DEVELOPING it!) with the world! (starting with US!)!!!



At least you will have done SOMETHING!

Ron

4 appearances at bat and you've struck out each time, Neil? That bears investigating.
Were the cars in a generally good state of repair when you grooved them? You used bits purchased from Ron or Tracy?
You followed the instructions in the manual, and then came here to ask questions when the results weren't as expected? And then followed the suggestions/recommendations/instructions of those who have grooved more than your 4 cars (or have grooved those 4 cars, specifically) when they told you what, in their experience, has worked?

I have to laugh at "ideal setup" because it varies from engine to engine, car to car. achieving "gadgetman" status means having a bunch of tools at your disposal you can use in many ways to achieve the desired result; carpenters don't learn "hammer" they learn carpentry - similarly, you can't look at this like X + Y + Z = raspberry. It's like adjusting the picture on your television - you have to play with tint, contrast and brightness until you've got what looks best to you and the people watching. Remember when you had to move the rabbit ear antenna to get a station to tune in, and then you could fine tune with a dial at the channel selector knob? (woah did I just date myself there...yeah, I remember analog tv, in black and white, with no cable and antennae...yikes how things have changed!) That's how you have to approach this...sometimes the aluminum foil reflector got your show on that station to come in best...and who'd've thunk it?

Would you be so kind as to post links to the threads here of the cars you've grooved please so we can look them over? I seem to recall you might be a guy in Australia who had an Isuzu pickup and we had a long convo about computers and oxygen sensors...but I am quite probably mistaken.

I'm not sure what you mean by "modern manifold." If you mean the plastic ones that crack and warp, yeah, they're problematic. other than that, I suspect they've been optimised by designers to channel air past intake valves and into the cylinders more efficiently/effectively than ever before...it's the computers that mess things up the most, with all the sensors and convoluted logic that's been prescribed by law at the hands of certain vested interests.

Hi Greg,
Yes you correctly remembered me, 2001 Isuzu V6 needing some hope. Anyway the V6 is still pretty much unchanged on fuel economy. I feel the car is in good shape so I'm not interested in any more general checks that you previously recommended cos I'm sure I can move into diagnostics with it now. I liked how Ron put it so if you can reply; quoting Ron "sometimes there are issues that are unique to a particular configuration (vehicle) that others have discovered were thwarting their success" I will address it. I am a little blunt on this job since I've just decided to drive the car the way it is for a while. If you make any suggestions can you please include mileage gains you experienced to each suggested problem that you think I could address next. I think the last thing i did was take the plug gap past .070 thou, but I did this without knowing if it has ever got anyone else's groove to work/ better and it didn't change my economy either.
I would love a troubleshooting guide built from experinece the steps that mostly are the next most likely in line to get a response from the groove all the way down to the least likely. Each step should only be included with MPG improvement examples from other people.

Hi Ron,
Intake manifold designs. I categorize them in 3 types
1. LOG MANIFOLD, This design is old, basic and compact. I thought it is possible the groove works best with this type of manifold cos it has the shortest distance to the cylinder. They also usually had hot water plumbed through them for cold starts, so they had a good heat source to assist vaporisation of fuel.
2. LONG RUNNER MANIFOLD,This design has lindividual long runners for each cylinder drawn from a Plenum chamber. These are usually fitted in conjunction with multipoint injection, also having an injector for each cylinder. I have collected much evidence that this Intake Mainfold design adds a healthy 10KWs of power. I thought this design might work well with the groove cos there is more time for vaporaisation before it gets to the cylinder and a lot more air speed/movement. The individual runners usually are small and can limit ultimate power. at high RPM This led to the third design of intake manifold.....
3. ECU OPERATED "SWITCH PLATE" ALTERNATING BETWEEN LOG (for high rpm) and LONG RUNNER (for low rpm)
Inside the manifold there is a plate that directs air either way, it is controlled by the ECU. I personally detest this design and feel it would never be used by manufacturers except that they see a need to always increase engine output in KW's, an easy way to increase KW is to increase RPM (6000 rpm!), and as stated the long runner is limited for high RPM. In reality TORQUE is what we want, and this manifold design won't help with torque at normal rpm ranges. I would expect this manifold design to hinder the groove's operation. I guess it is on most cars...and mine! I note Claudio's post where he removed the plate and was happier with the driving afterwards.
Perhaps this will bring some experience forward about the groove etc. Probably should also reminisce here about the very old pre-crossflow motors where the exhaust mainfold literally bolted underneath the intake manifold (maybe 6 cyl Hemi and canadians) Such a good heat source!...I have a feeling the groove would have been really good on them LOL!
I wasn't sure about making another thread for this subject...

neil wrote: Hi Greg,
Yes you correctly remembered me, 2001 Isuzu V6 <SNIP>
If you make any suggestions can you please include mileage gains you experienced to each suggested problem that you think I could address next.
I would love a troubleshooting guide built from experinece the steps that mostly are the next most likely in line to get a response from the groove all the way down to the least likely. Each step should only be included with MPG improvement examples from other people.

Well, it's nice to see you back Neil - most people just make like a puff of smoke when they get disappointed and discouraged with their results. It's wonderful you're willing to fight for yours.
I seem to recall that your Isuzu's v6 is similar to mine...could you include a photo of what's under the bonnet?

I started researching and chatting with people here before I got my bits and trying things cautiously before grooving my daily driver, to excellent results every step along the way.

First was a PCV system cap and re-route, which I seem to recall got me 1-2 MPG pre-groove
(truthfully, I was pretty good at documenting what I did and how it responded in my now 12 page megathread: GadgetmanGroove Forum - 2007 Buick Rendezvous 3.5litre V6 - Groovy Forums )
Water injection/induction generally gets people between 10 and 50% mileage improvement (you can google that yourself)...I'm in the 20ish percent range on mine, over and above the groove. If you live in a drier part of your country, you may benefit more than I have

70 thou plug gap is either too big or too small, but that depends on compression and timing. and some other things: I have These plugs (which are .090' or more) and These wires with the stock (and original, I believe) Ignition coil.

I was getting decent results with a MAP sensor circuit enhancer until I added water induction, which turned around 180 degrees when I removed it.

I'm not sure about adding hot air - it's less dense and has less oxygen, so it stands to reason that you'd need to use less fuel. but at what cost to power? would you need to be consistently at higher throttle angles, which some car computers interpret as higher engine demand, meaning "add more fuel at the injectors"? and then the oxygen sensor corrects based on how things actually go down inside the cylinders...so if those two things are too far out of alignment, your computer will light it's engine malfunction indicator. That happened to me as I was getting my EFIE on my upstream o2 sensor adjusted, but a bit of fiddling and I got back on track. Is your o2 sensor still disconnected/bypassed - and do I remember that part of our earlier convo correctly as well?

I will get a photo soon....unfortunately I am now beholden to a few other projects.
Yes my ECU is still in open loop and I can still turn a knob on my dash any time and reduce the fuel until the motor won't run, barely any help for fuel economy... Thanks for your info below.
Regarding the worry of hot air VS density. It reminds me of the old say "look after the pennies and the pounds look after themselves". It is a cautionary saying that can catch you out if you spend too much time concentrating on pennies it may cost you in pounds.
I agree there will be some reduction in air density but if it becomes key to experiencing the grooves vaporising potential I doubt a small percentage of density will matter. Intercoolers on diesels in my opinion are not, as most describe being for reducing density, I believe they are primarily to prevent the diesel burning at different (faster) rates cos different burn rates mean that the set injection timing must then become incorrect. Newer diesel common rail should be able to adjust quickly tho. So stabilizing intake temperatures is easiest and keeps injection timing correct PLUS has the benefit of increasing air density.
Certainly older diesel injector pumps, and most up to around the year 2000 could only advance timing based on RPM, pretty sure boost compensation only changed quantity of diesel injected. Pretty strange really cos petrol have been able to advance timing for engine load for ever and ever....
Did taking your plug gap out to 090 thou ever, at any stage make a measurable change in your economy or have you just gone to the maximum?

photo/other projects - You've said that every time. How about making time for this, if you're at all serious?
pennies/pounds - elaborate. please let us all know how you think that increasing intake air temperature relates and could end up costing more
less dense air = less elastic medium to expand when in combination with an appropriate amount of fuel = less power, no? you'd need a similar knob on your dash to adjust the hot bleed air, I'd think, to keep the density differential (offset?) as small as necessary.
Intercoolers are to cool the increased air charge from the turbo, INCREASING density...on gas or diesel engines. more air + more fuel = more power, gasoline/petrol or diesel

And I think this is where your disconnect might be: the groove better mixes the air and fuel so the metering and control mechanisms on the car can get the most out of every drop.
In the grand scheme, it's optimizing the work to fuel ratio. there's no magic power boost; you don't get something for nothing. You get more and better for what you do put in. The psychology:
"Wow, I don't have to push on the accelerator to get moving anymore; just taking my foot off the brake and feathering the gas does it since I got grooved"
"look at that, I can get 4 round trips between home and work out of a tank rather than 3 since I got grooved...one free trip for the same amount of money is a savings!"

I put the Torquemaster plugs in my car in advance of attempting a plasma ignition system (that I still haven't gotten around to), for the plasma event being much more exposed to the air-fuel charge in the cylinder than conventional j-strap plugs - the gap is the gap on them, but because I'm getting significantly more of the coil secondary's electrical energy to the gap(s) with the wires, I've seen better mileage/fuel economy/lower fuel consumption (however YOU prefer to regard that). Have you read through my adventure with my Wendy?

Hi Greg, I am not sure why you think I have stalled in the past...I thought I did a lot in a short time. Altho it is true I have an excessive amount of things on the go most of my lifeB) .
Anyway see the picture of the car, I purchased the bits from Ron, I grooved the throttle body, I disconnected the PCV from intake manifold, I completely blocked the IAC (not needed I know but consequences are fine by me). Opened the plug gap to 70 thou, disconnected the O2 sensor so it runs in open loop and fitted a variable resistor in the air flow meter and can now control the amount of fuel motor gets. This car does just over 12l/100kms. It is slightly better than the average for this model. If you can make a suggestion backed up by a good experience i will get it done.
Perhaps I am wrong but the way I see getting the groove to work is probably just a case of finding the thing that gets it over the line, and getting the groove working to it's potential is again different altogether. So regarding air density - I look at it like if I heat 1 litre of water to boiling point I don't end up with two litres of hot water, or anything like it. As stated I have driven many long distance trips over years with a hot air box. Yes densities change but if hot air gets the groove over the line, or even better, extends it to its full potential no-one is going to worry about 15 percent density change. For density of air the calculation is P1 times V1 over T1 equals P2 times V2 over T2. Temperature must be in Kelvin scale (degrees celcius plus 273 is Degrees Kelvin). Pressure is irrelevant so I think the calculation is if ambient Temperature is 15 degrees Celcius then T1 is (273 plus 20) 293 degrees Kelvin and if T2 is increased 70 degrees celcius (approx boiling point of petrol without considering vacuum) it is 363 degrees Kelvin. Then 363 divided by 293 is 1.238. I.E the air would expand from 1 litre to 1.238 litres. I hope this is right, I think it is!
I would be dissapointed if the air temp needed to go all the way up to fuels boiling point, the groove, injector atomisation plus the manifold vacuum ought to contribute much to vaporizing petrol.
My point was just saying that if increasing air temp brings huge benefits the loss of density becomes insignificant and negates any fabled loss due to density reduction of the air. Hence was my analogy of counting pennies and letting some pounds be lost.
Your statement of "turbo engines using inter-coolers is solely to increase amount of air" can be argued at length. I have first hand knowledge of a performance diesel engine air charge before the inter-cooler getting up to 250 degrees CELCIUS. There would be other serious problems with intake charge this hot! I maintain intercoolers increasing air density is only one part of what they do, and the use of them on some turbo diesels is not testimony for a need to avoid hot air around the groove.
I apologise that I have not recently read about your car. I like to believe that I can recall reading it in the past. I did spend a lot of time reading posts at one time and I struggled to find descriptions that included an actual mileage, then a mod, then the new milage, then the next mod and the next mileage....ultimately leading to a mileage outcome that was great. At some time I will look again and i can't promise it will be soon tho.
Regarding me using these ideas....The vehicle I am driving also had an option of a 2.6 litre inline 4 cylinder engine, it is fuel injected and has a distributor. I do have an unlicensed one of these at my disposal and sort of now regret my V6 is not one of these motors, I am tempted to play with the other motor but it is a big undertaking I am not committing to ATM.
My intention here is to open the discussion on these matters to investigate if anyone has done it, If anyone wants to try or, or just to hear some opinions on its feasibility.
I hope I covered everything.
Kind regards, Neil

It's a good photo -thank you- but I can't zoom in close enough to see what's happening on your TB without going blurry.
Blocked IAC? how did you compensate? by readjusting the throttle idle stop screw? If so, did you also adjust (if possible) your throttle position sensor to reflect that change?
check and see what that's (TPS) telling your computer - that may be the source of overfuelling. a few degrees may make for enough of a voltage change to get the computer thinking it needs to increase injector pulse duration.

Another thing I need to have you reconsider is that in your equation, Pressure is NOT irrelevant. (Why bother with converting to Kelvin if you're not going to take all the units involved in the published equation into account? just because you can show a bigger number with your use doesn't mean you're correct; you can't prove what that number MEANS because of the lack of reference to units) Remember, this is chemistry...and there are physics involved before the pistons can move turning a crank and transmission and differential and wheels.

Let's walk through a theoretical calculation using Standard Temperature and Pressure (16 degrees C - 29.92inHg) and one liter (or gallon or Sh!tload...doesn't matter) on one side of that equation :
P1 times V1 over T1 is (29.92 times 1) / 16. that works out to 1.87 ignored Units.
Now, we've got a running engine making 20" of vacuum in the manifold, so P2 is 9.92inHg, and there's still one volume of air, but if it's 70 degrees because you warmed it in a hot box, the numbers now work like this:
9.92 times 1 / 70, which works out to 0.1417 ignored units.
The equation doesn't balance. 1.87 does not equal 0.1417, regardless of the units
You'd need a LOT more air, a lot LESS vacuum (when was a vacuum leak a good thing?)

More science: Vapour point and Boiling Point are NOT the same thing. Read for yourself Note: it mentions pressures.

You have mis-read (or misinterpreted) what I said about intercoolers. I said, "Intercoolers are used to cool the increased air charge from the turbo." Jamming more air into a container of a fixed size will change its pressure, because the Mass of air is increasing, so it's temperature must react to keep another equation balanced...and again, units matter here are we talking kilos or litres or what?

Don't change your engine - change your mind. Please. I'm trying to help you here. Start by looking at your throttle position sensor.
it has to agree with what the computer has been ingrained with (before we can teach it a new normal for the groove), and by doing what I suspect because of the IAC mod you've made, they are out of whack, and that'll make the oxygen sensor work in not-right ways...

Sorry it took me so long to respond. We'll get this machine sorted yet, I'm sure!

Gentlemen,
When you are referencing other threads, if you want people to see them, you will need to be posting the link in your messages.

Please do this as often as possible, as this will increase the traffic and the acceptance by visitors of ALL our offerings!

Ron

That’s a pretty nice Intro to Snake Oil video, Ron.