not to mention the 3.8 does not provide enough power running on all 6 cylinders, torun off a cylinder or two and be prepared to not be able to maintain speed

 

X's 2 on that. I know its not a race car but they could of done alittle better than this 3.8.

 

My wifes car has a 3.2 with almost twice the power of the jeep. Just sad.

 

Really? What car/truck does that come in? I want a 410 horsepower, 480 ft/lbs of torque in that motor.
Or are you talking about power equals work divided by time, which can't be true unless that motor pulls a vehicle weighing twice as much as the Jeep over the same distance.

People, they went with a motor they had, that wouldn't break down every 1000 miles. If they had gone with a new motor (and when they do), the forum will be full of people bitching about the motor not working correctly. Don't like the power, there are lots of ways to supplement it. None of them are cheap, but a Hemi wouldn't be cheap from the factory either.

 

Valves haven't a thing to do with volumetric displacement. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Zero. Displacement is calculated by using only two things. Bore and stroke. That's all. Here is the formula:

Bore X Bore X Stroke X .785 X number of cylinders.

Example:

Chevy 350 (4.00" bore 3.48" stroke)

4.00" X 4.00" X 3.48" X .785 X 8 = 349.6704

4.00" X 4.00" = 16

16 X Stroke (3.48") = 55.68

55.68 X .785 = 43.7088

43.7088 X 8 = 349.6704

Valves are nowhere in the equation. Never have been. Never will be. The valves have no effect on volume whatsoever.

 

I think he was implying that opening the exhaust valves during (what would normally be) the compression cycle would reduce energy lost to compression (heating) of air in a cylinder during deactivation mode.

I still say just splice a switch into the injector harness and report back. Better yet, disconnect the injector connector.
After all, if the answer to improved MPG is as easy as using electrolysis to break down water, then burning the hydrogen, something as simple as turning off the injectors must work, too. Right? It's so obvious, Big Oil thinks we would overlook it.

 

redneck: yes i agree valves have nothing to do with physical displacement of an engine... however to let the valves operate as normal but cut off the fuel will resukt in MUCH lost energy due to compression.. and like i say these engines are not direct injection but merely runner-injected fuel so there is a chance that some fuel could cross from one injector to one of the "shut off" cylnders.. so thats why in a simple scenerio you would need to be able to operate the valves.. but you are "effectively" varying displacement if you kill the compression, fuel , and spark to 1 or more cylinders... the pistons merely become balance weights at that point in time. and you also have to have the computer programmed correctly to run the car... the engines that do this effectively if you were to look at them are much more complex than our de-tuned mini-van engines...

really i dont see what all the fuss is about.. I can easily achieve 21-23 Highway MPG with my 3.21 gears and going 65 MPH... if i want to get somewhere Fast I'll drive my 385 Stroker small block... 4.040" bore x 3.75" stroke, if I want good gas mileage id have bought a Hinda Fit... But I like to be able to go anywhere i feel like and do it with no doors and no top so i bought a JeeP.
-Christopher

 

Right. I didn't understand what the big deal was either. If the OP wanted an economy car, Toyota wouldda been glad to have sold him one.

 

i say let him cut the wires!!!!!!

 

I don’t know what all the fuss is about, my Jeep is so good on gas consumption now I have to stop every fifty miles or so and siphon a little out on the ground.