P plate training ...not

OF COURSE you'd be interest in these things Hammo; you're (apparantly)
interested in all kinds of silly diversions that have no relevance to the
simple point being debated!
Doesn't mean anyone else should give 'em any glimmer of attention though....

I hope I didn't keep you too long.

 

Go for it; I never say "just believe me I'm an expert" or introduce a whole
lot of irrelevance to try and confuse the argument so anything I've said is
clear and totally open to scrutiny and logical debate!

Why? Well in an attempt to confuse, obviously (DUHH!).
Same reason you post all your irrelevant crap isn't it?
It's not like "stoichiometry" has any relevance whatsoever on whether-or-not
a car uses more fuel to run headlights!

 

....we were at that stage and then it was if we can determine how much is it
a waste? I still doubt that it is as high as been claimed.

The numbers put forward have errors so high that makes them insignificant.
If it is insignificant is it a waste?

Hammo

 

Right on time and didn't disappoint.

I'm pointing out things that do have a bearing on how the load (power) is
stored and released. It not one way traffic...

Hammo (Bi-directional communications.....)

 

Don't know, don't care.
That's Andrew and you out of the way; only Nev left to convince!

 

Oh I don't doubt that it's all very important to YOU Hammo.
It just doesn't have any relevance to the points anybody ELSE is debating!

 

But waaaaaaaaaaaaaay back near the top of this thread...

to which GB replied

(GB's post has expired from Google groups).

So if this whole "lights use more fuel" thing isn't measurable on an EFI
engine.. of course there would be no measurable effect in the fuel
flow.. and if there was no change in fuel flow then surely that would be
proof the accuracy of the fuel measurement device, not, as you claim,
proof against it.

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX

 

I'm not an expert, and I don't recall where I have stated the above. Insert
the usual "please show me the quote" here (PSMTQ). My views on what is
relevant is based on what I have studied and have applied to real life
situations, or have been required to read about and consider what effects on
what things have.

I am open to discussion and debate and don't feel that trotting out a line
of argument makes anyone more clever or less challengeable. I don't feel
that winning an argument here is the be all and end all of the world as that
would be silly.

It is used by EFI, Engine management what ever you want to call to calculate
ideal conditions and from all the sensors adjusts all things to achieve
this. It has a very real applicability to be used to measure fuel use as it
is the theory for combustion. The CRO could show what changes have
occurred. I don't have the interface to talk to the car (one as my car
doesn't use one), but our mechanic has quite a sophisticated OBDII reader.
I don't know if it would list what is required to calculate the fuel use,
but it would be an interesting experiment.

I had a look at the thing when we were having Engine management problems,
some were due to O2 sensor problems, others to leaks in the plenum chamber
due to a rooted bit 'o hose. Trying to save money and work on the Ovlov
myself (despite the wife saying NO) I spoke to the mechanic, looked at the
diagnostic feed outs (often in units that are peculiar to the device, eg
resistance or voltage). I don't doubt for a moment that an interface like
that could be adapted to display the information that slot into this thread
well.

Hammo

 

Or GB was wrong. (or; your interpretation of what GB said is wrong)
I also posted waaaaay back in the thread that it (the headlight-load on the
engine) DOES show an effect on both Michelle's and gNatalie's EFI cars.

 

Yeah yeah; with anyone else I'd say "no no you misunderstood what I said..."
but with you I know THAT WAS THE POINT!

Nothing to win Hammo. You've already admitted that you weer wrong so we're
just playing for laughs now.

Interesting to you. Irrelevant to anyone actually curious about
whether-or-not headlights use fuel.

Blah blah blah [look over there] blah...

 

Now THERE's a point; acetylene headlights don't cause any engine load at
all!
(Hammo will be able to prove this too as soon as he can connect his
oscilloscope to an EFI car with them)

 

Observable and demonstrable that electrics take a load.

1) Get a 2000 KN laser (or whatever it's called outside Australia)
2) Have the engine idling and it be nighttime
3) Have the headlights on
4) Use the electric windows or turn on the A/C
5) Headlights dim

If power's being *taken* from the headlights when the system's at
minimal power and something else is added (elec window), then they're
using power. In some way shape or form the charge in the battery has
come from the fuel in the tank, or your wallet when you paid for it..
or the Free-Stored-Electricity Fairies.

There's just no such thing as a free lunch .. psst - want to buy this
perpetual motion machine ?

 

Now you're just being pedantic .. but you're right

 

It's a bit late to be jumping on the bandwagon, Clem

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX

 

They are but a mythical being. I work just around the corner from their
Australian importer, and regularly pass their premises and I'm yet to
see any sign of life there.

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX

 

Accurate? The values you gave Geoff show that you don't have any accuracy
to speak of! The values are swamped by noise. I'd say that is
insignificant.

That GB character keeps going on about something to do with pigs and
chewbacca.

I've got nearly three pages of the chemistry of fuel combustion to go with
calcs. I wonder how it will turn out?

Hammo

 

Actually, it'll depend. I don't know why I didn't think of this before!

Can you be sure that the load is increasing, or, is the engine just running
at higher rpm? If the latter, it is possible that as there is no road
speed, the stoichiometry is not equivalent and has been adjusted to run
leaner, giving a lower rate of consumption!

Hammo (bring on the CRO!!)

 

Nah, that's the air-con which leaves the little puddles behind, and I
think everyone was in agreeance that it is nothing like an alternator,
unless it is an alternator.

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX

 

AAARGHHH you bastard Nev, agreement dammit agreement ! There is no
such word as agreeance...

JL

 

As the actress said to the bishop

JL
(NB should be scientific methodology - you were entitled to a "sic"
there)