Gas smell after very short run?

Wassamattah beam??? Them turd feedin' boids peckin' away at you again?

JT

Dumbed down doesn't begin to cover it - your explanation is about as dumb as they come. Where in the world did you get that stupid idea about the injectors wetting the inside of the intake? You can't be that grossly ignorant of basic fuel system operation. You must know injectors produce a fine mist, and that if the injectors don't do that they have to be cleaned or replaced. How could you not know that the manifold is a wind tunnel at that point, which makes it impossible for the manifold to collect gasoline? Have you *ever* flow and pattern tested a fuel injector? No, you obviously haven't - you wouldn't parade your ignorance if you had ever seen it with your own eyes. That is to say nothing of the ludicrous concept that the gasoline vapors would pour past the closed throttle plate and through the air filter and intake plumbing to create the "strong smell" the OP reported.

I'm sure you will favor us with the equations for your "physics" for all that - you are bragging you understand all that. You can even "dumb it down" by leaving out the partial pressures of the more volatile components of the winter blend being used and assume it is all octane. It isn't even all that hard - by estimating the cross-section of the intake manifold branches and using the known displacement and idle RPMs you can calculate the peak and average air velocities past the injectors. With your superior knowledge of physics I'm sure you can calculate the average particle size of the injector output for the rated rail pressure and the fluid flow equations for the dispersal in the intake, including the lateral displacement of the plume in the previously calculated air stream. You can also calculate the diffusion past the obstacles I mentioned (you can assume a 500 millibar drop across the throttle plate at idle - it will be close enough for this purpose and will allow you to estimate the effective throttle opening at idle) to arrive at the vapor outflow rate at the mouth of the intake. Otherwise stop with your bogus claim of "physics." If you nail the equations I won't even take exception at your petty insults. Otherwise we will know you are a loudmouth know-nothing... as if we really doubted it now.

Put up or shut up.

Mike

Nah. I've already wasted too much time on you. You're delusional, or stupid. I can't tell which.

oh brother - where do we start with you michael? how about we start with the fact that gasoline is liquid. it takes time and energy to evaporate. add air to the mix, and the evaporation rate changes. and if it's sprayed onto cold metal, which it is until the engine warms up, a significant portion /remains/ liquid. that's why injection runs rich on cold engines. if it didn't, there'd be no need to do that!

nope.

oh dear, wrong again.

- you wouldn't parade your ignorance if you had ever seen it with

red herring if you don't understand basics like evaporation.

er, intake mass flow is not "diffusion".

translate pressure drop into evaporation at ambient. show the cooling effect if you want to show off.

so why run rich on cold start mike?

Stop waffling and show us the math. You claim the atmosphere is condensing, which is contrary to the entire point of electronic fuel injection (if it is condensing, the indefinite lag makes control of the mixture impossible). In your fantasy world a carburetor would work every bit as well; just shove gasoline down its throat and the engine runs when cold. You call it "physics", so I want to see it. It's your screwball theory - defend it or stop spouting nonsense. So far, everything you have asserted has only illuminated your ignorance of automotive basics. If your vision of "spraying the gasoline onto cold metal" were accurate the engine would already be flooded, as anybody who has dealt with a flooded engine knows.

You seem to have no idea what "rich" means in this context. The problem is one of producing a combustible mixture at the plug in spite of the lower vapor pressures at lower temperatures. To do that the mixture is shifted toward the rich end, but there is not a lot of margin for movement; if the mixture goes above 13.1:1 (from the nominal 14.7:1 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoichiometry) it won't burn - the engine is flooded. From "The Physics Factbook" at hypertextbook.com/facts/2003/ShaniChristopher.shtml "The mixture cannot burn when it contains more than 7.6% gasoline because it is too rich to burn." Ideal 6.8%, maximum 7.6%, or no more than an extra 12% or the engine floods - that is what "rich" means in a gasoline engine.

I'm still waiting for the physics you claim, professor, not hand waving arguments. You are still off on that garbage about the injectors "spraying onto cold metal" - which is strange, since you claim to have flow and pattern tested injectors; you would not think such a stupid thing if you even understood the significance of the pattern. You have not offered even an explanation how the injector output, even if it were a stream, would end up on the intake wall instead of being summarily sucked into the cylinders as it must be for EFI to operate.

Mike

From the last two paragraphs on that page, "Defining the geometric alignment of fuel sprays... will allow the selection of fuel injectors which will control or minimize manifold wall fuel condensation in the area of the intake duct and the intake valves." "Compared with carburetor engines and single-point injection systems, manifold-wall fuel condensation in multipoint injection systems is reduced significantly." I heard that somewhere before... oh, right! I pointed that out to you and you arrogantly waved it off, preferring to insult me instead. It appears the best you can do is discredit your own contentions. You have also failed to address the problems of getting vapors past the throttle, the air filter and the intake plumbing, and into the ambient air in sufficient concentration to produce the "strong smell" that started this whole thread..

You insisted you had "physics" and you are still waving your hands around. Can you or can you not present the physics you insist is the basis of your argument?

Mike

No, he cannot. He's just talking out of his ass, and doesn't know what he's saying.

now let's see:

1. i explain the wetting situation, but the drama queen goes nuclear with "if tomorrow the OP reports a fire that destroys his Fit and possibly his home".

1. i cite a text book corroborating precisely what i explained, but based on the above, it's apparently too hard to understand.

and yet i am the one with the problem! ridiculous.

Yes.

You are.

So in answer to my question, after four opportunities you can *not* present the "physics" you have been babbling about. You are a fraud.

You aren't keeping up with the subject at all. Your points were disproven by the source you cited as detailed in the last post (did you even read the page you posted?) You haven't tried to explain how the remnant of vapor in the manifold is supposed to get out, or quantify the amount in the manifold, or answer *any* relevant question posed. You ridiculed the evaluation of a professional, just because you didn't like what he had to say. Your myth is busted but you still think you must save face rather than admit an error like normal people do.

You are indeed the one with the problems - you are unable to keep up with even this simple subject, instead rambling and blustering with every post, just as you did this time. You use bullying taunts (as you just did again) to try to deflect examination of your errors - an even uglier problem that does not speak well of your present mental capacity. Those are really huge problems you have. I hope you are just drunk when you post, because it is really sad to think of you having those deficiencies when sober. Take care of yourself.

Mike

There is a difference between the smell of RAW gasoline and partly burned exhaust fumes that go through a cold converter that doesn't clean them up. I think the OP was smelling the latter.

I think some of you have been on a wild goose chase for quite awhile.

There is a difference between the smell of RAW gasoline and partly burned exhaust fumes that go through a cold converter that doesn't clean them up. I think the OP was smelling the latter.

I think some of you have been on a wild goose chase for quite awhile.

=================================================

That's a possibility. We have been going on a rather subjective observation that it was a strong gasoline smell, but if it was just the cold engine exhaust he was smelling you are spot on.

Mike

it's in the book cite i gave you!!! if you don't see or understand that, it's not my fault!

no, i ridicule the "interpreted" version you give - the one you filtered through your lack of understanding.

wow. utter lack of comprehension!

whatever you say. don't bother with an engineering career though mike - you're out of your depth.

what a weak-ass climb-down!

Too late - I was a senior communications field engineer for a Fortune 100 company from about 1990 to about 2005. Now a senior IS field tech for the same company; more challenging, more troubleshooting, pays better, get stranded in some of the most beautiful places in Northern Arizona. Among other duties, I determine where microwave system troubles originate and go there with what I expect to need to correct the problem - which can include damage from lightning strikes - and I have to make it happen better than 9 times out of 10. I describe the job as "taking Computer Age skills to the end of Bronze Age roads in any weather at any time of day or night." I have been a troubleshooter professionally since August 10, 1970, after I got my FCC First Class Radiotelephone license at age 17, and as an amateur since I was 14 years old. I have done essentially all the maintenance on the cars in my family since moving to Arizona in 1974, taking most of them beyond the 20 year mark. (BTW, I have never in my life had a grade lower than an A on any physics test.) Your qualifications?

Do you have something intelligent to say? Write like a man or go away.

something intelligent like "if tomorrow the OP reports a fire that destroys his Fit and possibly his home"? that kind of a man?