[momzbox]

So I wanted to share with everyone that I got the chance to go to Weapon R and meet the great guys there. They prototyped a CAI for the cube off my car. WOW what a difference!!! Not only in pick up but in MPG. I drove from Hemet to San Francisco and back. I did better in MPG on way home definetly. I will post up the pics this afternoon.

 

[1HoTCuBe]

Post pics!! I want to see this!

 

[elDizzle_foShizzle]

pics? anyone? anyone?

 

[1HoTCuBe]

momz post up some pics!! haha

 

[rktect2]

I drove from Hemet to San Francisco and back.

...and you made the return trip because...?? ...lol...nothing against Hemet, I only skirted through there when bombing from San Diego to Palm Springs years ago...
...and travelling up and down the valley, you're bound to get better mileage. How much better mileage, by the way !??
Thanks!!

 

[none]

I would think MPG would go *down* since you're adding more air to the mixture (which in turn adds more fuel).

 

[dink74]

I would think MPG would go *down* since you're adding more air to the mixture (which in turn adds more fuel).

Just a big air pump the more efficient you can make it the better it will work. Less work needed for same power equals less fuel used.

Dink

 

[ChristineK]

Any pics yet?

Oxygen is fuel. Turbo chargers and superchargers add lots of it (compressed) to smaller quantities of gasoline. Think pure oxygen and no smoking

 

[none]

All I know is that the hypermile guys build hot air intakes, to limit the amount of oxygen flowing in. This in turn tells the computer to limit fuel... and viola! Higher MPG.

 

[lne937s]

New here, because I wanted to wait till I bought one to comment, but I wanted to clear something up.

Oxygen is not a fuel. Oxygen is an oxidizer that is used in the exothermic oxidation (burning) of a fuel. You need to add gasoline (or some other fuel) to the oxygen to burn more fuel. If you do not add more fuel, you end up with a lean situation where fuel burns faster and the overabundant oxygen endothermically (absorbing heat rather than creating heat) reacts with other gasses in the air like nitrogen, creating oxides of nitrogen. These pollutants combine with water and create acid rain. If you operate like this, it violates emission standards and is illegal.

Cold air intakes tend to register an insignificant impact on fuel economy in standardized government testing. While they may reduce airflow restriction at the air filter, modern cars adjust based on data from sensors to add more restriction at the throttle body to keep the air/fuel mixture the same. The impact on pumping losses for normal driving is minimal.

 

[dink74]

All I know is that the hypermile guys build hot air intakes, to limit the amount of oxygen flowing in. This in turn tells the computer to limit fuel... and viola! Higher MPG.

With an older dumber car with way less computer control a WAI works great to decrease power and fuel use. On a modern car with a good ECU like the Cube when you introduce a hot air charge above 120deg you end up with a timing cut and a rich fuel situation as the ecu does not want pre-ignition to occur. If you can keep the Intake charge between 80 and 100deg you get the most efficient fuel mixture for both mileage and performance. If you drop below 80deg you will end up with a rich mixture also as it puts the car into cold start mode. The more efficiently you can make power the better your mileage will be. Decreasing power to do the same work makes the motor work harder thus using more fuel. You can see evidence of this when you take a HEMI drive train from a RAM that gets 14mpg avg and stick it into an old Dodge Dart which now gets 30+mpg avg from the same setup. A friend and I have done this using the RAM factory everything on the Dart. The level of work needed to make the Dart go 65mph is a lot less than the level of work needed to get the Ram to go 65MPH.
If Nissan had put the 2.0l in the Cube we would all be getting better mileage as long as we could keep our foot out of it.

Dink

 

[none]

I do agree with you, but sometimes fuel efficiency is limited by the motor itself, regardless of the car it is placed in.

I don't think we'd see tremendous gains with a two liter. The VQ for example only gets about 3? MPG more in the 350Z than in the heavy tank M35.

 

[dink74]

I do agree with you, but sometimes fuel efficiency is limited by the motor itself, regardless of the car it is placed in.

I don't think we'd see tremendous gains with a two liter. The VQ for example only gets about 3? MPG more in the 350Z than in the heavy tank M35.

I agree with the 2.0 we may only see a 2 mpg change but the shits and giggles factor would be much greater with the extra power when we wanted it.

Dink

 

[lne937s]

Isn't the 2L MR basically the same as the 1.8, except for a longer stroke?

Could you just swap out the crank/con rods (might as well do the pistons while you have it apart), or are there other changes?

The undersquare (longer stroke than bore) spec of the 2L places an emphasis on torque (truck motors tend to be undersquare), which might get you better highway mileage if you picked a higher final drive ratio... but I doubt it would help in the city.

 

[none]

Perhaps someone will swap in a Busa engine (ala the Busa Smart) - now there's some serious shits and giggles *edit: if you can get traction from all that FWD power

 

[momzbox]

No But I am in talks for a turbo. Will update as I know more.

 

[palaina.kawika]

so...no pics of it yet?

 

[momzbox]

Sorry it took me so long. Show season has started again. I have had back to back shows to do.

 

[1HoTCuBe]

wow so small! haha.. i wonder how much they will charge?

 

[elDizzle_foShizzle]

wow so small! haha.. i wonder how much they will charge?

i'm sure they'll be in line with the stillen product, i.e., a couple hundred bones.