3 cylinders= better MPG

SILINC3R · Post by **SILINC3R** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:35 pm

not sure where this thread belongs. this may some dumb not smart for the car but if i was to unplug one of the boots from a spark plug would i be able to use just 3 cylinders safetly to conserve gas

93forestpearl · Post by **93forestpearl** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:40 pm

You would need to unplug the injector as well, but the engine will feel rough. If you try it you will know what I mean. You are taking a powerstroke out of the equation when it was designed to have four.

Imprezive · Post by **Imprezive** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:51 pm

your car will run rough and suck. Don't do it haha

Skruyd · Post by **Skruyd** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:56 am

if you were serious. You would need to take the plug completely out so there will me no compression stroke. The compression would be added resistance which will take some of the power or lack there of from what you will be getting from running on three cylinders.

SILINC3R · Post by **SILINC3R** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 5:19 am

ok sounds like a no go. thanks

tahiti350 · Post by **tahiti350** » Sat Jan 10, 2009 5:17 pm

Back in the gas shortage of the '70's (does anyone else remember that panic?) there was a kit to convert VW engines from 4 to 2 cylinders that inclued bob weights and cylinder block off plates. Most would get a big bore kit (1800+ cc) and split it with a friend. They'd end up with a 900 cc opposed twin that had a VERY unique exhaust note. Think Early BMW motorcycle...

Not great for racing, but out on the highway they got 30+ mgp (not bad for the timeframe...)

Buffman · Post by **Buffman** » Sat Jan 10, 2009 5:31 pm

if you could stop the valves from opening you could use the air in there a cushion. I think that's how it works on DOD for DCX> ECM shuts off oil to lifter, valves stay closed, injector doesn't fire, etc.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:17 pm

That sounds counterproductive. Not saying you're wrong, but compressing air you're not using for power would just be more pumping losses.

samandw · Post by **samandw** » Fri Jan 23, 2009 6:31 pm

This has been beat to death over on the gassavers.org forum. The verdict: don't do it unless you want less power, rough running, and likely lower mpg. In order to get any hope of improving fuel economy you'd have to deactivate the valves, as well as the injector and sparkplug ala Hemi w/cylinder deactivation. One dead cylinder on a flat-4 would put all kinds of loads on the crankshaft it wasn't designed for. If you want to improve mpg, there's much much better and cheaper ways to do it. I got at least 15% better fuel economy in my car with just the driver mod (adjusting the loose nut behind the wheel).

Aerotech · Post by **Aerotech** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:15 am

Just drive a little slower. 60 mph vs 75 will save more fuel than you're likely to with any engine mods... if you can stand it.

Then again, unplugging cylinders will net you a car that won't do over 60 anyway.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:47 am

I had no problem doing 85 on 3 cylinders with a melted exhaust valve. For about 25 miles anyway. I don't recommend melting valves to increase mileage. Especially won't save you money with all the oil you'll eat.

555BCTurbo · Post by **555BCTurbo** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:57 am

SILINC3R wrote:not sure where this thread belongs. this may some dumb not smart for the car but if i was to unplug one of the boots from a spark plug would i be able to use just 3 cylinders safetly to conserve gas

Are you fucking serious?

Aerotech · Post by **Aerotech** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 4:03 am

tahiti350 wrote:Back in the gas shortage of the '70's (does anyone else remember that panic?) there was a kit to convert VW engines from 4 to 2 cylinders that inclued bob weights and cylinder block off plates. Most would get a big bore kit (1800+ cc) and split it with a friend. They'd end up with a 900 cc opposed twin that had a VERY unique exhaust note. Think Early BMW motorcycle...

Not great for racing, but out on the highway they got 30+ mgp (not bad for the timeframe...)

I did that inadvertently back in the '80s... I had a '73 Thing done up Baja style w/ a 2110 dual Webber monster engine. It started running rough one day, low on power, etc. Drove it almost a week before I had time to look at it... found the left bank rocker retainers had broken, the whole rocker arm assembly basically fell off and was lying in the valve cover... 2 cylinder operation. Sorta sucked from a NVH / drivability perspective, but it was interesting to me that it operated as well as it did.

555BCTurbo · Post by **555BCTurbo** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 4:04 am

2110 ftw!!

Aerotech · Post by **Aerotech** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 4:22 am

Word... that Thing hauled ass.

If you've never seen one, visualize a yellow, corrugated Dumpster w/ a windshield and a steering wheel.

Kubelwagen on steroids...

legacycentral bbs

A forum for 89-94 BC-BF(BJ) Legacy Owners and Fans

3 cylinders= better MPG

3 cylinders= better MPG

Re: 3 cylinders= better MPG