ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2024
Eh the Caprice has it. Didn't seem to make a difference. I bought a 189 dollar module that disabled it.
Ford Joins the Cylinder Deactivation Party
- Thread starter SubLGT
- Start date
- Status
My county has a mix of vehicles with some Caprice,Tahoe and Suburban. When I asked a Leo about them recently he said no issues with them.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
No thanks.
+1
No thanks.
+1
Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: Bluestream
V8,6,4 all over again...
GM sells over 40,000 half-ton trucks with this technology (cyl.deactivation) each and every month. While there were some issues early on (2007) most issues have been resolved.
If you research GM's system-you will find it's a fairly straight forward technology. It's already on 4.6 million cars/trucks.
I know...I was referring to the 1981 Cadillac V8 6 4 which was problematic.
Originally Posted By: Bluestream
V8,6,4 all over again...
GM sells over 40,000 half-ton trucks with this technology (cyl.deactivation) each and every month. While there were some issues early on (2007) most issues have been resolved.
If you research GM's system-you will find it's a fairly straight forward technology. It's already on 4.6 million cars/trucks.
I know...I was referring to the 1981 Cadillac V8 6 4 which was problematic.
Originally Posted By: CKN
GM sells over 40,000 half-ton trucks with this technology (cyl.deactivation) each and every month. While there were some issues early on (2007) most issues have been resolved.
If you research GM's system-you will find it's a fairly straight forward technology. It's already on 4.6 million cars/trucks.
And Chrysler's MDS is on millions more new gen Hemis as well.
Our 5.3 and 6.0 GM engines are completely transparent in operating the AFM, it's hard for me to imagine how anyone even notices anymore. None use oil or give any sign of being "in" or "out" of AFM.
Similarly, the 5.7 Hemi in our RAM gives no clue to MDS operation except the green indicator on the dash display.
AFM on GM engines is like the Dexcool thing. Often misunderstood and hanging on way after the actual problems are long ago resolved...
GM sells over 40,000 half-ton trucks with this technology (cyl.deactivation) each and every month. While there were some issues early on (2007) most issues have been resolved.
If you research GM's system-you will find it's a fairly straight forward technology. It's already on 4.6 million cars/trucks.
And Chrysler's MDS is on millions more new gen Hemis as well.
Our 5.3 and 6.0 GM engines are completely transparent in operating the AFM, it's hard for me to imagine how anyone even notices anymore. None use oil or give any sign of being "in" or "out" of AFM.
Similarly, the 5.7 Hemi in our RAM gives no clue to MDS operation except the green indicator on the dash display.
AFM on GM engines is like the Dexcool thing. Often misunderstood and hanging on way after the actual problems are long ago resolved...
Originally Posted By: Bluestream
V8,6,4 all over again...
Wrong.
V8-6-4 was 30 years ago, in the days of throttle body fuel injection and multiple solenoids to shut down cylinders. Today, cylinder deactivation is much simpler. It is mainstream technology across multiple manufacturers. And, it works.
V8,6,4 all over again...
Wrong.
V8-6-4 was 30 years ago, in the days of throttle body fuel injection and multiple solenoids to shut down cylinders. Today, cylinder deactivation is much simpler. It is mainstream technology across multiple manufacturers. And, it works.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
The sad thing is that while cylinder deactivation might play well in the gentle driving of the EPA emissions highway cycle, it'll do nothing at all to save anyone any fuel in actual 80-85 mph interstate driving.
Lots of initial cost coupled with lots of future maintenance headaches for no gain at all.
Sad.
I think that may be a bit of an over generalization. The Charger would drop into 4-pot mode easily at those speeds, which one would assume, is saving fuel. The Jeep, being less aerodynamic as well as heavier, seems to be less eager to do so, but will. On a smaller engine, with lower output, I could see how your posit makes sense, however on many of the GM and Chrysler offerings, the engines are of significant displacement, so they can run highway speeds with the cylinder deactivation enabled.
Regarding complexity and subsequent maintenance headaches, I guess it depends on how you look at it. VCM or not, the Honda V6 is significantly more complex in terms of valvetrain components than the GM and Chrysler VCM engines, which are single-cam pushrod mills. And of course while GM has had some issues with oil consumption, and Chrysler had some timing chain issues early on with specific engines, neither problem has been as widespread as Honda's VCM issues, at least based on what I've seen on here.
I mean really, MDS isn't that much more of an added complexity than Honda's VVT technology, perhaps even less so. So in that context, I think it is a lot of fear about something that, if done properly, has proven to be not something one needs to worry about. I don't think I've ever seen a vehicle in at the local Chrysler dealer for MDS issues. I've seen more Cummins injector failures, Pentastar head issues, transmission swaps and 4.7L problems than I have with any of the MDS engines. Most of the 5.7's are in there for an oil change, nothing more.
The sad thing is that while cylinder deactivation might play well in the gentle driving of the EPA emissions highway cycle, it'll do nothing at all to save anyone any fuel in actual 80-85 mph interstate driving.
Lots of initial cost coupled with lots of future maintenance headaches for no gain at all.
Sad.
I think that may be a bit of an over generalization. The Charger would drop into 4-pot mode easily at those speeds, which one would assume, is saving fuel. The Jeep, being less aerodynamic as well as heavier, seems to be less eager to do so, but will. On a smaller engine, with lower output, I could see how your posit makes sense, however on many of the GM and Chrysler offerings, the engines are of significant displacement, so they can run highway speeds with the cylinder deactivation enabled.
Regarding complexity and subsequent maintenance headaches, I guess it depends on how you look at it. VCM or not, the Honda V6 is significantly more complex in terms of valvetrain components than the GM and Chrysler VCM engines, which are single-cam pushrod mills. And of course while GM has had some issues with oil consumption, and Chrysler had some timing chain issues early on with specific engines, neither problem has been as widespread as Honda's VCM issues, at least based on what I've seen on here.
I mean really, MDS isn't that much more of an added complexity than Honda's VVT technology, perhaps even less so. So in that context, I think it is a lot of fear about something that, if done properly, has proven to be not something one needs to worry about. I don't think I've ever seen a vehicle in at the local Chrysler dealer for MDS issues. I've seen more Cummins injector failures, Pentastar head issues, transmission swaps and 4.7L problems than I have with any of the MDS engines. Most of the 5.7's are in there for an oil change, nothing more.
The latest 4L 476HP V8 biturbo motor from Mercedes Benz will have cylinder deactivation:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2016/10/20161030-benz.html
Quote:
For even lower fuel consumption, when operated at part load the new M 176 shuts off four cylinders simultaneously by means of CAMTRONIC valve timing. This reduces the pumping losses while improving the overall efficiency of the remaining four cylinders by shifting the operating point towards higher loads.
The cylinders are turned on and off by the interplay between engine control and actuators on the cylinder head. The switchover to four-cylinder operation is accomplished by eight actuators that act on the axially movable cam parts of the intake and exhaust camshafts via a selector.
These cam parts are held on the carrier shaft by gears and are locked in the respective end positions by means of a locking mechanism. The intake and exhaust valves of cylinders 2, 3, 5 and 8 do not open due to the zero-lift cams of the cam parts. At the same time, the fuel supply and ignition are deactivated, so that no unburned mixture is left in the deactivated combustion chamber.
Cylinder shutoff is active in the engine-speed range between 900 and 3250 rpm, provided the driver has selected mode C or E with the DYNAMIC SELECT switch. Cylinder shutoff is inactive in all other transmission modes. As soon as the driver requests higher engine power via the position of the accelerator or as soon as the engine speed goes above 3250 rpm, cylinders 2, 3, 5 and 8 are reinstated within a matter of milliseconds.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2016/10/20161030-benz.html
Quote:
For even lower fuel consumption, when operated at part load the new M 176 shuts off four cylinders simultaneously by means of CAMTRONIC valve timing. This reduces the pumping losses while improving the overall efficiency of the remaining four cylinders by shifting the operating point towards higher loads.
The cylinders are turned on and off by the interplay between engine control and actuators on the cylinder head. The switchover to four-cylinder operation is accomplished by eight actuators that act on the axially movable cam parts of the intake and exhaust camshafts via a selector.
These cam parts are held on the carrier shaft by gears and are locked in the respective end positions by means of a locking mechanism. The intake and exhaust valves of cylinders 2, 3, 5 and 8 do not open due to the zero-lift cams of the cam parts. At the same time, the fuel supply and ignition are deactivated, so that no unburned mixture is left in the deactivated combustion chamber.
Cylinder shutoff is active in the engine-speed range between 900 and 3250 rpm, provided the driver has selected mode C or E with the DYNAMIC SELECT switch. Cylinder shutoff is inactive in all other transmission modes. As soon as the driver requests higher engine power via the position of the accelerator or as soon as the engine speed goes above 3250 rpm, cylinders 2, 3, 5 and 8 are reinstated within a matter of milliseconds.
Porsche also has a new V8 biturbo with cylinder deactivation:
http://articles.sae.org/14923/
Quote:
The Panamera's "halo" power unit is a new 4.0-L DOHC V8 with two twin-scroll turbochargers delivering a torque plateau rather than a curve: 770 N·m (568 lb·ft) from 1960 to 4500 rpm. ………………………………..
The Turbo has cylinder deactivation capability, a system increasingly used within VW Group. In 4-cylinder phases, fuel economy can be improved by up to 30%. Deactivation and reactivation of the cylinder is via Porsche’s VarioCam Plus, using a 2-stage sliding cam system. Under suitable load conditions, cylinder deactivation is available from 950 rpm to 3500 rpm with a 250-N·m (184 lb·ft) torque limit.
http://articles.sae.org/14923/
Quote:
The Panamera's "halo" power unit is a new 4.0-L DOHC V8 with two twin-scroll turbochargers delivering a torque plateau rather than a curve: 770 N·m (568 lb·ft) from 1960 to 4500 rpm. ………………………………..
The Turbo has cylinder deactivation capability, a system increasingly used within VW Group. In 4-cylinder phases, fuel economy can be improved by up to 30%. Deactivation and reactivation of the cylinder is via Porsche’s VarioCam Plus, using a 2-stage sliding cam system. Under suitable load conditions, cylinder deactivation is available from 950 rpm to 3500 rpm with a 250-N·m (184 lb·ft) torque limit.
Originally Posted By: FORD4LIFE
My county has a mix of vehicles with some Caprice,Tahoe and Suburban. When I asked a Leo about them recently he said no issues with them.
It's probably never activates for the most part.
My county has a mix of vehicles with some Caprice,Tahoe and Suburban. When I asked a Leo about them recently he said no issues with them.
It's probably never activates for the most part.
Originally Posted By: SubLGT
In their 1.0L 3-cylinder turbo Ecoboost engine, that is.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2016/11/20161130-cylinder.html
Significant modifications were required to get a 6% fuel economy improvement:
Quote:
Ford’s single-cylinder deactivation design reduces complexity to make volume production achievable, but also presented significant challenges in maintaining the 1.0-liter EcoBoost engine’s acclaimed refinement—delivered using innovations including an offset crankshaft configuration and deliberately “unbalanced” flywheel and pulley that counteract vibration.
A new dual-mass flywheel and a vibration-damping clutch disc help neutralize engine oscillations when running on two cylinders, especially at lower rpm, and enable a wider operating range. Intake and exhaust valves are closed when the system is active, trapping gasses to provide a spring effect that helps balance forces across the three cylinders for refinement, and also retain temperatures inside the cylinder that maintain fuel efficiency when reactivated.
New engine mounts, drive shafts and suspension bushes also will be specially tuned for refinement. The 1.0-liter EcoBoost will feature enhanced durability to cope with the different loading forces resulting from cylinder deactivation, including a new camshaft chain, and valve rockers formed using advanced metal injection moulding.
Will the 3.5L Ecoboost V6 be next in line for this tech?
CD tech to turn a friggin 3 cylinder into a 2 cylinder?
That's nuts. I don't even understand the motivation.
In their 1.0L 3-cylinder turbo Ecoboost engine, that is.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2016/11/20161130-cylinder.html
Significant modifications were required to get a 6% fuel economy improvement:
Quote:
Ford’s single-cylinder deactivation design reduces complexity to make volume production achievable, but also presented significant challenges in maintaining the 1.0-liter EcoBoost engine’s acclaimed refinement—delivered using innovations including an offset crankshaft configuration and deliberately “unbalanced” flywheel and pulley that counteract vibration.
A new dual-mass flywheel and a vibration-damping clutch disc help neutralize engine oscillations when running on two cylinders, especially at lower rpm, and enable a wider operating range. Intake and exhaust valves are closed when the system is active, trapping gasses to provide a spring effect that helps balance forces across the three cylinders for refinement, and also retain temperatures inside the cylinder that maintain fuel efficiency when reactivated.
New engine mounts, drive shafts and suspension bushes also will be specially tuned for refinement. The 1.0-liter EcoBoost will feature enhanced durability to cope with the different loading forces resulting from cylinder deactivation, including a new camshaft chain, and valve rockers formed using advanced metal injection moulding.
Will the 3.5L Ecoboost V6 be next in line for this tech?
CD tech to turn a friggin 3 cylinder into a 2 cylinder?
That's nuts. I don't even understand the motivation.
Originally Posted By: AirgunSavant
I'd like to see Ford develop a one cylinder engine with cylinder deactivation.......................
I appreciate the humor, but it also made me remember that one cylinder deactivation design was perfected 100 years ago. Hit and miss engines.
I'd like to see Ford develop a one cylinder engine with cylinder deactivation.......................
I appreciate the humor, but it also made me remember that one cylinder deactivation design was perfected 100 years ago. Hit and miss engines.
I rented a "Seat" (pronounced See Aht) Leon, (like a VW golf) with a 1.2L, direct injection, auto shutoff, variable cam timing, turbocharged engine. It too had a cylinder deactivation feature, and ran in 2 cylinder mode at times while in traffic.
I found that car interesting. First off, the 2 cylinder mode was undetectable. It had a display that told you when the engine was on 2 cyl. Second, it had full boost at 1200RPM, instant, tiny turbo boost. Third, it had some "mode" of high RPM power. Clearly the engine was tuned for low RPM power and would fall flat well before a shift at higher RPM's. However, when on the Autobahn, and going fast, the engine would switch modes again, into one that would produce higher RPM steady state power and would pull at 6500RPM quite nicely. Too bad it would not do that in the lower gears.
Economy was quite good and I achieved better than 40MPG at times. However, the 700 kilometer autobahn trips really took a toll on economy..... Top speed about 125MPH most of the time. At one point I had it over 135.
While I did not hate the car, I'd never purchase one here in the states.
I found that car interesting. First off, the 2 cylinder mode was undetectable. It had a display that told you when the engine was on 2 cyl. Second, it had full boost at 1200RPM, instant, tiny turbo boost. Third, it had some "mode" of high RPM power. Clearly the engine was tuned for low RPM power and would fall flat well before a shift at higher RPM's. However, when on the Autobahn, and going fast, the engine would switch modes again, into one that would produce higher RPM steady state power and would pull at 6500RPM quite nicely. Too bad it would not do that in the lower gears.
Economy was quite good and I achieved better than 40MPG at times. However, the 700 kilometer autobahn trips really took a toll on economy..... Top speed about 125MPH most of the time. At one point I had it over 135.
While I did not hate the car, I'd never purchase one here in the states.
Last edited:
^^^Excellent top speed for such a lil guy...
No kidding. I'd never expect a little ____ popper like that to crack 135.
Originally Posted By: Run
This is good for those who want a fuel efficient vehicle while avoiding the high cost of hybrids.
I have seen studies from different suppliers and automakers that put cylinder deactivation fairly high on the list of fuel-saving technologies as far as mpg improvement per dollar. Cylinder deactivation is worth 4-8% but is pretty cheap. Hybridization is worth 20%, but is disproportionately expensive. Another trend that is picking up speed is electrification of accessories, such as electric power steering and electric water pumps, that are only turned on when they are needed, or are controlled in proportion to engine power demand. There are a lot of technologies out there, and it is up to the OEM's to pick the ingredients that lets them achieve the fuel economy standards most cost-effectively.
On the other hand, Trump could sweep away all that EPA [censored] with a stroke of his pen.
This is good for those who want a fuel efficient vehicle while avoiding the high cost of hybrids.
I have seen studies from different suppliers and automakers that put cylinder deactivation fairly high on the list of fuel-saving technologies as far as mpg improvement per dollar. Cylinder deactivation is worth 4-8% but is pretty cheap. Hybridization is worth 20%, but is disproportionately expensive. Another trend that is picking up speed is electrification of accessories, such as electric power steering and electric water pumps, that are only turned on when they are needed, or are controlled in proportion to engine power demand. There are a lot of technologies out there, and it is up to the OEM's to pick the ingredients that lets them achieve the fuel economy standards most cost-effectively.
On the other hand, Trump could sweep away all that EPA [censored] with a stroke of his pen.
OPOC?
What is this thread 30 years old? Deactivation technology has been on the road a decade+ now. It works. Modern sensor and ecm technology makes it possible.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
