Sarah Palin is my neighbor. For real! She's a sweetheart and we're the same age. Didn't go to HS with her though...+
Cylinder deactivation?
- Thread starter mpack88
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
- Messages
- 2,847
The six speed has been around since when '06 or '07? At 40,000 units a month-you can do the math and tell me how many zeros are behind that decimal point for failures. And you can do the same on AFM lifter failures.
The irony in all of this is I would think there's a lot of the V8 buyers who want the power of their V8 all the time. They don't want to deactivate or castrate the system to accomplish that. To me it seems sad in a way. Technology that many of us don't want is forced on us if we want the power of a V8. I guess my age is showing, time to suit up again.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
- Messages
- 2,847
You took the words right out of my mouth! Such systems are far more of a headache than they're worth.
Last edited:
I asked you the math problem first.....
AZjeff
$50 Site Donor 2023
You need to catch up. The latest iteration is called DFM, Dynamic Fuel Management and to quote GM, This industry-first cylinder deactivation technology enables the engines to operate in 17 different cylinder patterns to optimize power delivery and efficiency. I read when the '19s came out these will run on 8,7,6,5,4,3,2 cylinders and it will fire different ones in say 4 cylinder mode to pass around the wear. All computer controlled of course.
Just give me a V6 GM... and a module to lose the DFM or AFM whatever it's called...
I've said that more than once to a few people over the years, that it would be a good idea to pass the wear around instead of shutting down the same cylinders. I was told the old system was tested and proven and there was no real wear to speak of when shutting the same cylinders all the time. My reply was BS. Having said that my earlier opinion for buying a V8 remains the same, if I buy a V8 I want it to be a V8 all the time. It's nice to dream I guess.
As a side note it isn't only distributing wear, there are the deposits that also occur in an ICE engine that will be distributed.
I generally run around with MDS disabled via range select in my truck, as Zee09 said it’s kinda like having turbo lag without the fun of a turbo. If I’m just cruising down the highway I’ll let it do it’s thing, but on country/hilly roads it gets pretty annoying. My wife on the other hand cannot tell when it goes into or out of MDS ever.
My parents Honda Pilot (3rd generation) is their first with VCM, their prior two did not have it. They ran the last 2 to 200k miles and just follow the maintenance minder and bring to Honda dealer for service, we will see if this one goes the distance the non-VCM J35's did. They are sitting prob around 80k miles at this point.
I have driven it on some longer 1.5-2 hour trips on state roads that were 55-65MPH and it was 99% unobtrusive, on occasion there would be a barely perceptible shudder when switching modes. I honestly doubt my parents even know it has VCM and even if I tried to tell them about it they prob would be like 'ok whatever...it starts and drives'.
I have driven it on some longer 1.5-2 hour trips on state roads that were 55-65MPH and it was 99% unobtrusive, on occasion there would be a barely perceptible shudder when switching modes. I honestly doubt my parents even know it has VCM and even if I tried to tell them about it they prob would be like 'ok whatever...it starts and drives'.
I read and am intrigued by this.
Given they never really finished with the AFM scheme Im very curious to see how this scheme gets implemented.
No way to really optimize a motor mount for this.
It depends on the design, and whether it will actually improve fuel economy or not. On Honda / Acura they don't do much and the engine end up with problems if you don't bypass them as said. On some other vehicles they work very well and they do save a lot of fuel, improve emission, etc. IMO you are better off with better transmission to keep the engine rpm low, and to get a smaller engine so you don't need a V6 to deactivate. I'm still not sure if deactivating a V6 is better than turbo a 4 cylinder or not in reliability.
Welcome to yesterday smaller engines with turbo trumps that ancient wet dream.
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2024
The 6.4 Ram has AFM in the 3/4 ton and up trucks. The old GM 6.0 and the new gas 6.6 do not have AFM in the 3/4 ton and up trucks and don't suffer the hemi tick or AFM failures. The Ram AFM has suffered similar issues as GM. The 6.0 at least is anvil solid with the 4L80E or 6L90E (which does not suffer the same issues as the 6L80E) The 6.6 remains to be seen.
Yes, the 6.4L has AFM, but its more simplistic management system that doesn't suffer near the casualties as GM's nightmarish, overly complex AFM disasters. Same goes with the 6.4L tick issues, it's not its smaller Hemi brother with inherent oiling issues.
The 6L GM V8 and related transmission were/are a good combo -- rather bulletproof. The current 6.6L GM DI HD truck engine is weak or anemic as compared to the new Ford 7.3L and veteran Ram 6.4L engines. I wouldn't have one. They are weak and untested over time. I portend its DI-only architecture will be a long-term problem for this engine series.
As compared to the anemic, DI-only 6.6L GM engine, Ford has a massive upper-hand with its combo port and direct injected 7.3L Godzilla. Massive!
I'm so happy I've kept my Gen III L59 5.3L engine and truck. I'm so much better off as compared to GM's current V8 offerings. It and Ford's 7.3L gasser will still be running when these newer combo DI AFM disasters are junked.
Cheers.
Last edited:
