User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27

Thread: Lpg

  1. Default Lpg

    Hi Guys,
    During one of my many Google searches I came across LPG direct injection. Has anyone else looked at this or have any idea who I can talk to about it? Now I know that a lot you may have negative things to say about LPG and its many previous applications, but on the face of it, it looks like a good idea. Especially with PULP prices nudging $1.70.

    Vialle Alternative Fuel Systems - LPdi_UK -

    Regards
    Karl

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Werribee, Vic
    Posts
    472

    Default

    Mmm, early testing by an aussie mob with liquid gas injection (not Direct injection) showed better power and better fuel economy than petrol in an unmodified engine...

    This was put down to the cooling effect of the boiling LPG as it chaged state from liquid to gas...

    Could be very interesting in our direct injection, high compression, high boost engines (more intercooling FTW?)

    Chris.

  3. #3

    Default

    Hi Karl, I have looked into LPG direct injection on my MPS6 and can share some information with you.

    Recently a system has been introduced for the new Commodore SIDI engines which features vapour port injection. This system shuts off the petrol injectors and injects LPG through the port injectors added in the conversion. Apparently this system has certain strategies to avoid petrol injector failure (petrol cools injectors as it flows through and this protects from the combustion chamber heat) however there have been a number of reported issues where the petrol injectors have still been damaged. I would not consider this system as it would not offer suitable performance or reliability.

    I have been reading with interest on a direct LPG injection system from ICOM called the JTG HP. It taps into the high pressure fuel rail and injects LPG through the existing petrol injectors. There are a number of advantages to this system, it reduces injector failure by maintaining fuel flow for cooling, will result in identical (if not improved) performance, better economy and importantly it uses less added parts therefore the cost should be less.

    Australian LPG Warehouse seem to be the authorised distributor for this system and I have contacted them regarding suitability for the MPS6/3, the gentleman I spoke with didn't seem to know what I meant so I explained that the 2.3L MZR DISI Turbo engine in the MPS6/3 and CX-7 are fundamentally the same and he told me that they are looking to release a system for the CX-7. When questioned about timeframe, he suggested 6 months or more.

    It certainly sounds interesting as there are few disadvantages with modern LPG systems (with the exception of the tank). In fact, I have seen improvements of 5kW in the FPV F6 and 15kW in the Toyota Aurion!

  4. Default

    Thanks Chris and Andy for your input. I'm surprised that on a forum as active as this that this has not been looked into before (did a search with nil find). I like the idea of LPG. Obviously the cost, but the increased performance and hopefully a reduction in black smoke from the exhaust is up there as well. I can only assume that in the right hands the tuning potential would be huge because of the much higher octane rating.

    I have only had limited experience with gas vehicles before, the last being in 2006 when I was driving general duties Falcons. Fortunately, I have now moved on to a XR6 turbo . I was approached by a mechanic specialising in LPG fit outs to supply, fit and maintain a Liquid Injected LPG system to one of the Turbos and the powers that be knocked it on the head. Considering the NSWPF will only allow us to run 91 octane fuel, the performance and savings potential would of been huge across the fleet. Especially, taking into account most HWP vehicles are lucky to realise 25-28l/100km.

    Has anyone else fitted Liquid LPG injection to their cars? What are your thoughts?

    Karl

  5. #5

    Default

    You could tell me, why do all NSW HWP XR6 Turbos have BA F6 Typhoon wheels?

  6. Default

    They are fitted with the larger tyre/wheel package because the brakes are upgraded to Brembos (on the front anyway) and wont fit the standard wheels because of the diameter. The rears are off the territory. Brilliant brakes BTW.

  7. #7

    Default

    Interesting, will make it easy to spot a second hand one

    But back to LPG cars, I can't imagine your opinion would have been too great with a Falcon XT on gas, they're a pretty low-tech sort of system. My uncle has just gotten out of an AUIII Dedicated LPG and into an FG E-gas, and while it goes alright, the sticker consumption is huge, the power is down and it's stuck with the 4 speed auto.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,659

    Default

    LPG in an MPS? Why bother? You buy a performance car, but don't wanna pay the premium tag that goes along with it?
    Shame shame shame.
    LPG = money saving
    Sports car = money spending
    One or the other... Not both.
    BTW, I'm a mechanic by trade. I know the risks of using LPG on an engine without a built bottom end. Reason Ford refuses warranty with aftermarket gas systems. Dedicated LPG vehicles have forged internals. MPS' do NOT. LPG is an unpredictable fuel. Wanna risk it?
    Would I use LPG in a 30 year old car? Bet your ass I wouldn't...

    My 2.3 cents...
    ___,...--'--..--...,,,
    [__--_;=-o-:iiiiiilll.===
    ``/ /-'|___|;;;;;;;;:

  9. Default

    Andy,
    The wheels get swapped back to stock once the car gets decommissioned. So I guess if you're looking for one just look for one that looks like the wheels and tyres are brand new and you wont go far wrong. Word of advice. Never, ever buy an ex police car. They get absolutely raped! My last XR6 had 3 turbos in 2 years, plus engine mount issues, coolant leaks, squeaks, shakes and rattles. The SS seem to fair a bit better. Anyway I digress

    Grajy, I understand your mentality, to a degree, in relation to the MPS being a performance oriented car. But imagine if you could have the same or better performance, lower emissions (though hardly a concern to the individual) and ultimately lower running costs along with a decreased dependence on off-shore oil supplies. All this with the only inconvenience of losing the spare tyre well (which some cars have done away with in any event). Why wouldn't you?

    Just to clarify. If the car makes the same or nearly the same power on LPG that it does on petrol why would it need strengthened internals? Surely, there would be no increase in internal stresses leading to metal fatigue or wear issues?

    Can someone clear this up for me?
    Karl

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Moorooka, Brisbane
    Age
    48
    Posts
    7,059

    Default

    They do this a lot for diesels. You can get tremendous range improvements based on the increased economy from a better burn. Plus there is a performance gain as well. But is all about economy.

    My car is all about performance. It's economic enough, 8l/100ks, but I drive to have a good time. I wouldn't ever consider a second tank plus the ancillary equipment that goes with it.

    Want economy and power, maybe buy a euro diesel and chip it. Or an electric car :P

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,659

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nemesis214 View Post
    Andy,
    The wheels get swapped back to stock once the car gets decommissioned. So I guess if you're looking for one just look for one that looks like the wheels and tyres are brand new and you wont go far wrong. Word of advice. Never, ever buy an ex police car. They get absolutely raped! My last XR6 had 3 turbos in 2 years, plus engine mount issues, coolant leaks, squeaks, shakes and rattles. The SS seem to fair a bit better. Anyway I digress

    Grajy, I understand your mentality, to a degree, in relation to the MPS being a performance oriented car. But imagine if you could have the same or better performance, lower emissions (though hardly a concern to the individual) and ultimately lower running costs along with a decreased dependence on off-shore oil supplies. All this with the only inconvenience of losing the spare tyre well (which some cars have done away with in any event). Why wouldn't you?

    Just to clarify. If the car makes the same or nearly the same power on LPG that it does on petrol why would it need strengthened internals? Surely, there would be no increase in internal stresses leading to metal fatigue or wear issues?

    Can someone clear this up for me?
    Karl
    LPG is a very unstable and unpredictable fuel inside a combustion chamber. It goes 'bang' whenever it wants, resulting in pre-ignition, causing bent rods/melted pistons. Anyone noticed how much an LPG car backfires???
    Like E85, it needs MORE fuel to maintain correct running. Nobody notices this because LPG is so cheap compared to petroleum.
    I agree with lower emissions and longer service intervals. Better performance I don't.
    Also, IMO, cost vs value... Not worth it.
    If you want to do it, go for it. Post up how it goes and continues to run. If I were you, and was going ahead with this, I'd forge my bottom end (including head bolts) and dyno tune it, as a minimum. I'd also speak to some dyno tuners first too. Not just a LPgas fitter that would love your dollars...
    Just another thought, extra kgs in the rear would make it handle much differently.
    P.S. Sorry if I sounded like an arse in my last post. I was on my mobile and was typing on the fly.
    ___,...--'--..--...,,,
    [__--_;=-o-:iiiiiilll.===
    ``/ /-'|___|;;;;;;;;:

  12. Default

    It's good to be getting some alternate view points on this subject. I agree that I could get great economy and moderate performance from a chipped euro diesel, but that would be missing the point of this post. I love my MPS. I don't want to trade it on the above mentioned type of vehicle. Would a diesel with a sticker price of around 20k perform like my MPS does? Definitely not! Could I have my MPS, and the performance it offers but with the running costs of a diesel? It seems so on the face of it. You get the cake and get to eat it as well!

    Grajy, being a mechanic, I'm hoping you can clear this up? The higher the octane rating of the fuel, the more resistant to knock (pre-ignition) is that right? Is it the fuel itself that causes the back fires or is it the old type of carburetor system that fills the intake with gas that causes it? There is no doubt that you need more of it due to the lower calorific value of the fuel but if it is half to a third of the price, as stated, it is greatly offset.

    If I were going to go ahead with it I would definitely get it tuned properly and get some solid advice from people like you that are in the know. I agree the extra weight would blunt the performance somewhat. I guess the alternative to that is to make it dedicated gas and remove all the petrol components (tank, lines etc) to offset the weight gain. Big job in any event.

    On the flip side of this argument does anyone offer multiple tunes for the MPS that includes a economy tune with lean burn activated? I'm currently using around 10-11l/100km which isnt bad but every time I look there is a ring of black soot attached to the back of the car at the exhaust (thats without WOT running).

    Separate issue, has anyone else melted the plastic bumber above the exhaust tip?

    Thanks in advance
    Karl

    P.S Grajy, I didn't think you sounded like an arse. Come to work with me for a day. You'll meet a few of them.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bathurst
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,930

    Default

    I don't think this idea is economically viable. And more draw backs than gains.
    You'll lose boot space, gain weight (removing petrol tank and lines won't cancel the weight gain), then you have the fitting cost, R&D time, engine rebuild etc.
    To do it properly, i wouldn't expect much change from $10,000.
    Its too late to do the maths, but simply, thats a hell of a lot of fuel you could spend that money on and a aweful lot of km to get your money back, if you ever would.

    Great idea in theory, but i don't think its worth it.

    There was a member here some time ago "pockets" who has a tuned Mazda 3 diesel. Everyone who saw that thing was blown away by how well it went. A definate match for a MPS on the road.
    If economy and performance (two words you don't usually put together) was what you are after, a chipped mazda diesel will give far better economy with just a little less performance

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Wahroonga
    Age
    36
    Posts
    903

    Default

    I looked into this a couple of years ago, I just couldn't find a suitable kit or I'd have done it. A mate of mine has a tuned XR6T which is mostly bolted. On a Dyno he showed up in excess of 30rwkw more on lpg liquid injection (not vapour) vs 98 oct. According to the tuner, the car experienced far less knock on gas. We assumed this to be down to its cooling effect as it vaporises.

    I just want to say that calling LPG too volatile is a bit of a stretch. Is it more volatile than petrol? Yes. But hey Petrol is waaaay more volatile than diesel. We still use petrol yes? A proper lpg kit will always come with either a piggy back for the ecu or an updated firmware for the ecu. Running lpg without either the piggy back or a re-flashed computer would be akin to filling you're petrol tank with dynamite and turning the key...

  15. #15

    Default

    The Mazda3 diesel is an awesome car, point to point easily a good match for the MPS (plus the diesel gets a few good thinks like big brakes and such). The diesel 6 also has some pretty nice 80-120 times. If you chip and tune them, I would think they'd become a very handy sleeper.

    I think the development need to run LPG on an MPS would be fairly high, just trying to get the existing ECU to cope with the different fuel and injectors.... mega bucks needed. IMO when the ChipTorque easyflash unit comes out, you'd be best asking for a economy map and a performance map (so you run the eco map for daily driving and high power map for the weekend). Keeping in mind that any tuning for economy would mean a loss in power.

    Also I'd be thinking about water/methanol injection too, but again I would think that integrating this into the existing fuel system on the MPS would be a bit of a pain... however the reduction in intake charge temps would be worth it, esp for people keeping TMICs (like me) and also there's always that nice buffer with water/meth injection to prevent pinging. I've seen an old school turbo v8 with pre-turbo carbies and methanol injection with condensation on the intake plenum, which was pretty insane... but it was VERY unreliable and would go out of tune even if you just thought about turning the key.

  16. #16

    Default

    The Icom JTG HP system uses the original injectors and would most likely have a piggy back computer, and has less system components than traditional dual fuel systems so should be cheaper to buy. Unless of course there is a technology premium...

  17. #17

    Default

    The people who say performance and economy don't go together need to get with the times. Just because they didn't in the past doesn't mean it's an unreasonable expectation now. I mean have a look at these cars 2008 Audi TT 2.0T - Feature - Car and Driver and take into consideration the article is from 2008, but you've got 6.2 litre 436hp v8 Corvette which is more fuel efficient than the MPS or Audi TT which can get down to 7.6l/100km on the freeway. Hell even the new 2012 Hyundai Genesis sedan luxo barge with a 430hp 5.0l v8 will return 16/25 mpg. The DIZI engine was a good idea, but the end effect was not better than any other port injected turbo'd engine of the era.
    Nuliaj: Hatches are only really half a car anyway.
    shinslinger66: And you forgot to add that they are also a girls car!

  18. #18
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bathurst
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,930

    Default

    It's simple really, if you are considering doing all this to a car because of the current price or future price of fuel, you have too much money, give me some of it please.

    It is completely uneconomical. You will never break even.
    On the new HSV GTS with the LPI option, even after the government rebate it will take something like 56,000km to cover the extra cost of the option.
    Now do that with an untested car, you can probably double that at least because of the development cost.

  19. #19

    Default

    Considering 56000km is roughly 2 years of ownership for the average driver, why wouldn't you? Most people still have their cars after 2 year. That doesn't take into account the cost of fuel which has gone up about 20% over the last 2 years. If you're planning on keeping the car for 5 or 10 years, it seems to make sense.

  20. Cool

    How is Redland Bay GrayJ ??

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •