The future of LBC engine swaps?

[BlownMGB-V8]

Just an empty canvas for you guys to fill. I noticed Art was talking about the extremely lean AFRs of direct injection engines. Personally I know next to nothing about those engines but I'd welcome some information on them. Do they have a place in our future? How long will we have to wait? And how much will it cost?

Jim

[roverman]

Jim, I got my "headache" from reading Road and Track ? Many of the oem's are using this technology currently. Chevy "Traverse V6", has been in production several years. Sounds like, for now, one would definately need the oem. computer ? GM di. crate motors soon ? I suspect ebay and wreckers have some of these ? Why stop there, why not a variable displacement hemi ? Onward, roverman.

[ex-tyke]

Why stop there, indeed, Art.
 Back in 2000, International Trucks engine division introduced "camless diesel" engine technology that used electronics and hydraulics to actuate the valves (no cam and no pushrods). Imagine infinite adjustment of lift and duration for emissions/power/fuel economy.....not sure if it ever made it to production though

[mgb260]

How about Ford's all aluminum DOHC Duratech  Direct Injection Eco-Boost Twin turbo V6. Last years technology though and could use a shorter name.

[socorob]

I was reading an article in a doctors office car magazine a few month ago about Mercedes working on electric valves, sort of like solenoids. It was talking about how much smaller the heads could be without losing power. Im all for smaller engines, as my engine bay is about the size of a metric shoebox.

[roverman]

Robie, aren't all shoeboxes a "foot" long ? Reportedly, the next big thing is laser ignition of fuel. I think this might work for an opposed piston, headless motor. Odds are, I'll run out of time before I would get to build it, lol. roverman.

[Spitfire 350]

From what I've read, direct injection engines respond to boost better than any other configuration. There are supposed to be no mixing or atomization issues. I assume that once you apply enough boost to max out the available pressure and duty cycle of the stock injectors, you could install larger capacity injectors to accept even more boost. The logical next step would then be to start adding multiple injectors per cylinder. Lord help the bottom end on these engines.

[crashbash]

anyone remember Dick Tracey's magnet coupe?.......

[302GT]

Direct injection gasoline engines were invented in the 1930's and were (of course) all mechanical then. The combustion is somewhat like a diesel engine in that the fuel is not mixed with the air before it enters the cylinder. This means the fuel can burn at a very lean overall air/fuel ratio beacuse the local air/fuel ratio (where the fuel is) is still at a high enough concentration to burn. It is much like a gasoline fire in an open container, it will burn locally but would not if it were dispersed through the whole atmosphere. Anorther advantage of direct injection is that higher compression is possible because only air is present during the compression stroke, the fuel is not added until it needs to burn, so preignition problems are reduced. With direct injection now widely available, I would avoid buying a new car with conventional injection. The advantages of direct injection are significant.

[MG four six eight]

GM has several vehicles with gasoline direct injection, they seem to be very reliable and run quite well. About the only thing we've had to repair relating to the direct injection, is a couple of mechanical high pressure pumps and even those have been few and far in between.
Definately the wave of the future.

Bill

[BlownMGB-V8]

Is anybody making them in a V8 configuration?

Jim

[MG four six eight]

Jim

Not sure about the other manufactures, at this time GM just has them in 4 cyl and V6 configurations.

Bill

[Dan B]

Apparently the UR Toyota engine, introduced to replace the UZ series in 2007 has D4-S direct injection according to Wikipedia.  Also Audi and Mercedes have direct injection V8s, and GM has one in development.  I did a quick google search.

[socorob]

I think all the new Ford aluminum  DOHC engines are direct injection, the 4,6 and 8.

[302GT]

As i recall, Ford is waiting to introduce direct injection on their new engines so it can be advertised as an upgrade later once the newness has worn off.

[BlownMGB-V8]

So would you say that, as usual the domestics are behind the curve?

Jim

[roverman]

Jim and clan, I suspect most oem's hold back implementation of technology/secrects, from their vaults. I liken this to a hi-stakes poker game,(don't show your ace till you must). This equals skilled marketing ? Maybe like release dates for big sceen movies. I thought GM was among first to market direct injected gas engines here ? Onward, roverman.

[BlownMGB-V8]

Well, like it or not, it seems to me that the Japanese have a superior business model. Domestic attempts to follow suit amount to little more than sleight-of-hand and trickery to get compliance documentation from regulatory and quality agencies (Kaizan, KanBan and the like) I've been there and seen it first hand, and been right in the middle of it, and seen the very same supplier company bending over backwards to meet import demands while assembling the most slip shod products for the domestics imaginable and doing nothing but making excuses. It's not strategy, it's the way we do business. It is an inferior method and that shows, primarily in NOT being the market leader. And if your not the leader the view is always the same. Cut corners to cut cost and try (ineffectively) to compete on the basis of cost. It's a downward spiral that never ends well.

Jim

[socorob]

The eco boost engines have direct injection, not the 5.0.

[302GT]

Direct injection became popular in Germany first. GM adopted it here because they use Opel technology in their cars (only trucks are actually designed in the US). The Japanese have been even slower than the US manufacturers to adopt direct injection. Other European countries (besides Germany) build almost nothing other than diesel cars which are even more economical than direct injection gasoline cars. For example, it is not well known, but the "Smart" car is diesel everywhere except in the US. Although most German cars are diesel, Germany still has a market for high powered gasoline cars and that is probably why direct inject took off there. Asia seems to build cars specifically for the US market or for Europe. For the US, technology does not sell, especially in the sedan market which may be why these manufacturers have been slow to adopt direct injection. Let's face it, I do not think the average Camay buyer would have any interest or understanding at all in direct injection; I bet most of them have no idea even how many cylinders the engine has (or even what a cylinder is). So why spend the money to add a feature that will not increase market appeal. For Europe, the Asians sell diesel cars almost exclusively. I know that Toyota also makes their cars more European in trim for the Europeans and this may even extend to chassis tuning. But these cars are diesel so there is no need to add direct injection gasoline engines...

[socorob]

A few years ago  I had a Nissan Frontier V6. It got 19 mpg going downhill with a tailwind. It's was 4x4 supercharged. I went to Europe at that time and saw the same trucks as mine, except they were called Navarra over there. They were turbo diesel v6 with like 200 hp and got 30+ mpg.  I wish they had those here.

[BlownMGB-V8]

You may yet get your wish. About a decade ago we went to England and I was amazed that the cost of gas was about the same as what we paid here for a gallon, except that they were selling it by the LITER for that price. And the people were rather shabbily dressed. That is very understandable when so much of your income goes to fuel costs, and it can't help but make the public very concerned about economy, regardless of the technology that it takes to get it. You don't have to understand it to benefit from it.

Our leaders have been seeking parity with Europe for many decades now. Their agendas have nothing to do with the living standards of the general populace... well, maybe it does, if they can divert more of it into their own pockets. They've made great strides in that direction in many areas and the fuel costs are gradually coming into line. So as a side benefit we may yet get the more efficient technologies. Better for the planet, but as for the general public as individuals, well maybe not so much. Matthew made an interesting observation: According to his studies, ALL revolutions come about at the point where the common public is no longer able to put bread on the table. Regardless of political upheavals, human rights, or any other motivation, the public is content to sit back and watch up until they as a whole begin to go hungry, and at the outbreak of every revolution has been catastrophic crop failure, natural disaster, or some other cause of famine. I'd never thought of it myself but it does make sense. If the government can't or won't see to it that we are fed, or even causes the problem itself, then the government has to go.

Which leads to a kind of weird inversion of technology. Could it be that the countries most vulnerable to economic melt down are the ones most likely to embrace cutting edge technology in order to ease the pressure towards revolution? Sort of a last ditch effort to stave off the wolves at the door? I suspect in most cases it would be too little too late just due to the nature of bureaucracies, but wasn't this the driving force in Germany back in the 30's?

So in that sense as a common populace maybe we should be grateful that we still have gas guzzling 12mpg vehicles on the road, and wary because of the 30+mpg vehicles now selling. The sooner we get to 50mpg cars that we can't afford to drive across the country, the closer we are to crisis.

Of course individually, the sooner we can get to that 50mpg LBC with acceptable power and driveability the better. Perhaps a Euro spec V6 diesel would do it?

Jim

[roverman]

Let's get some perspetive here. How many of us are using our beloved LBC's for every day use or leisure/performance driving ? One argument from hot rod and older car users, for exemtion of manditory emissions testing, is we are very small in numbers and miles driven. SOFM, I'm not overly concerned that "Hemi Healey" might get 13 mpg instead of 15 mpg. Rocket Ships are not usually rated by their fuel economy, but they must attain enough "G's", or there's no point. Nobody buys a"Veyron" based on mpg.  HP cost MPG., how much do you want ? Do I feel guilty about this ? Maybe after the"Oh Blessed Mother of Accelleration" wears off- but I doubt it. In the auto big picture, I suspect we're a gnat on the bumper of a Peterbuilt. Cheers, roverman.

[BlownMGB-V8]

When mine runs, I use it as my daily driver and runabout for everything except nasty weather, and when I say nasty I mean salt on the roads. Then I drive the truck. So, yes, mileage is important to me. How important? Enough to try by fairly conventional means to get into the 20-25 mpg range and hope for more. Not enough to install a V6 or stop in the middle of the upgrade and select a more efficient engine. But if I was starting a new swap I certainly think that would be worth looking at. Especially if I could get 30+ with excellent performance and good driveability. I do not think I would be happy with stock performance even at 50 mpg, but at 150+ horsepower I could definitely see going there.

Jim

[DiDueColpi]

Just for some info, I rented an Alfa 159 1.9 jtdm diesel in Italy a couple of years back.
We filled it with 4 adults and all of our luggage and then hit the autostrada.
This car, fully loaded, ran 130-140 mph (220kmh) all day long (yah I know it's over the speed limit but no one checks). After 3 weeks and 2500 miles we used 4 tanks of fuel.
Why can't we do that here? I have 2  Alfa 156's that I service here in Canada and they impress me every time that I drive them.