Talk Morgan Forums Community Vehicle Talk (non-Morgan) Freevalve engine technology

It's a lovely irony that Morgan owners embrace such modern technology, given the ethos of a seat of the pants driving car..!

I don't think being a Luddite comes into it, really. It's about whether or not the experience is diluted or enhanced by such technology. Mrs SBM bought herself a new Audi A1 last year. The first service is dictated by the cars usage, and the 'brain' calculates the optimum mileage/time from the learned journey use to with it's put, meaning that is was just over a year and 17,000 miles when the light came on.

I was aghast at the fact that this was a new engine with the original oil, being from the generation that thought 500 miles was enough to take the high spots down and get flushed out with the oil.

New technologies, better machining and better tolerances all add up in the end, I guess. Does this make the car better or worse for an owner? In this case, far better. It's a key in & go time after time after time. Couldn't do that in my MGB from the '70s..

My new bike has more electronics than I can shake a stick at, with at least three riding 'modes', electronic suspension adjustment and much more. I am still a bit wary, but it simply works. Riding in the wet in 'rain' mode softens every control that when I get dry tarmac it feels poorly. Change mode & Wham! I get another 20bhp instantly.

I think the proof of the pudding is trial by time. If it's reliable, unobtrusive and doesn't lessen the overall package, it's probably a good thing.

Maybe..

EI is reliable enough for me every day, but that slight fear of a failure on a long tour troubles me. Piston engined aircraft solved ignition problems with a twin magneto - if one failed the other provided backup reliability.
Surely it must be possible to duplicate the EI so that one that fails is backed up - to be replaced at leisure at a service interval?

Even with all these innovations for induction and fuel control we still rely on poppet valves and piston, rod and cranks.

Yes but the driver for these remain hiding in the background.

Get the annual service costs lower so making the cars more attractive to volume fleet sales.
Bring the (b____hit) MPG figures as low as possible. Even if you have to cheat. This lowers tax insurance and makes your car more attractive for business use as well.
Increase the complexity and make it all a single device so that replacement can only be done using approved parts through main dealers to provide a revenue for the shiny auditoriums of prettiness. Let's face it they don't make money on selling the car any more ! But you can do it in 30 mins so their turnover is great.

Was there anything else. Oh yes. Save the planet. We need to add that to everything right

The injectors for fuel used to be mechanical but all (?) are now electronically controlled.
I am no expert (and there are those on here who are!) I understand it simplistically as the ECU works out the fuel demand from its mapping based on throttle opening/load/temperature etc , and sends the information as a pulse to a solenoid valve which opens the injector for the calculated amount of time to allow the correct amount of fuel from the high pressure rail into the cylinder.

Apart from the relative weights of the components (valves v injectors) I don't view this as being much different.

You forgot the feedback loop from the sonda lambda sensor. The fuel map has to be pretty close but it can not compensate for all possible conditions. The pre-cat sensor "reads" the exhaust gas and the ECU increases or reduces the fuel accordingly. If the mixture is too rich it reduces until the system is a fraction too lean and then it increases again. If you look at a log file you will see the readout zigzags up and down. Modern fuel injection was made possible by the invention of the sonda lambda sensor.

The post cat sensor is not necessary for the running of the engine but is required by legislation to control the functioning of the cat. If its reading indicates an problem with the catalytic system the MIL (engine warning light) is turned on.

A double EI system would also need extra sensors? Input from a wide variety is used by the ECU to manage the engine . How many of us have had issues from sensor failures?
Some Plus8's had crank position sensors fail due to design errors causing them to move and be hit by the flywheel until a fix was introduced.
MAF sensors fail.
My GEMS system will cut the engine if it senses oil pressure too Low. I have had the second sensor that feeds to the dash gauge fail but it is separate to that used by the ecu so no issues, just back of the mind jitters.
So, any sensor should have a second back-up?
Maybe those that have a fail history but all sensors read by the ecu?
Not very practical.

My thoughts also

More to the point, the electronic components tend to have a shorter manufacturing life than mechanical. Once they become unobtainable and new generations of similar components become substantially different in form / function then repairing all this electronic "gubbins" becomes very difficult, if not impossible, never mind whether creating a revised version is economically viable.
As someone who owns a fair amount of older radio technology (no I don't mean valve kit - much of that is still easy to repair) but semiconductor equipment, sooner rather than later it will end up as scrap as it will not be repairable. A carb &c. is still rebuildable...

Hear Hear.
Plus the fact that a car is a hostile environment for electronics.How long would your TV last in the shed I wonder.