Bigger Motor for PT Cruiser?

L, not -L wrote:
> On 4-Mar-2005, "PT_Sean" > wrote:
>
>
>>That flash was to cause the a/c to disengage when the accelerator was
>>mashed.
>>
>>There would be no way to show a definite 10% increase in mileage unless
>>you
>>drove the same roads, same way, same conditions before and after the flash
>>
>>and had the whole thing monitored.
>
>
> Since 95% of its use was to drive to and from work, it was driven on the
> same roads, by the same driver (thus likely the same way), in pretty much
> the same conditions. All I know for sure is, for the way I used the car -
> before the flash change I averaged 20 mpg, after flash avg was 22. The only
> other change I know occurred was the fuel line recall - but I don't recall
> it being a leak, it was a more obscure situation.

The biggest change you would notice would be better acceleration
whenever the compressor would otherwise be on. I wouldn't expect any
real change in mpg, since the compressor will just have to run that much
longer after the period of acceleration to maintain the same cabin
temperature - unless the effect were so great that it couldn't maintain
the desired/set temperature, in which case you might as well turn the
temp. knob down (for the same mpg increse (and be warmer).

Bottom line, the by-far major motivation in a.c. compressor cutouts
during acceleration is to give the effect of more power (a "bigger"
engine) when the a.c. is running.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')

just so you know pt any fuel injected d.c vehicle with the pedal mashed drops
the ac operation period

"L, not -L" wrote:

> On 4-Mar-2005, "PT_Sean" > wrote:
>
> > That flash was to cause the a/c to disengage when the accelerator was
> > mashed.
> >
> > There would be no way to show a definite 10% increase in mileage unless
> > you
> > drove the same roads, same way, same conditions before and after the flash
> >
> > and had the whole thing monitored.
>
> Since 95% of its use was to drive to and from work, it was driven on the
> same roads, by the same driver (thus likely the same way), in pretty much
> the same conditions. All I know for sure is, for the way I used the car -
> before the flash change I averaged 20 mpg, after flash avg was 22. The only
> other change I know occurred was the fuel line recall - but I don't recall
> it being a leak, it was a more obscure situation.

On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 23:18:00 -0500, "PT_Sean"
> wrote:

>That flash was to cause the a/c to disengage when the accelerator was
>mashed.

Hmm, no W.O.T. switch anymore?

wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 23:18:00 -0500, "PT_Sean"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>That flash was to cause the a/c to disengage when the accelerator was
>>mashed.
>
>
> Hmm, no W.O.T. switch anymore?

Almost nothing is done with "dumb" discrete device control anymore. All
sensors feed into a computer of some sorts, and more sophisticated
decisions can be programmed in to effect the desired control outputs.

No doubt one of the sensors feeding into the computer and which
determines to some degree if the compressor gets cut off is the throttle
position sensor, which serves other purposes as well. If the info. is
correct, they did not include WOT compressor turn off in the original
firmware algorithms.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')