Jump to content

Spain Holiday


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, JMH said:

Very nice... :-) 

Read somewhere SNCF/Spanish Railway authorities where going to reopen the line?

 

Hello it is open now and was last time here just now all being restored but to my not sympathetically!

Hello All

               Well this has been a different day

We are now just outside a little town called Cenicero for one night.

We were having a good cross country trip and it was getting hotter and hotter(38degs)

So we stopped at a nice small bar for Coffee and Sandwiches which were good.

An old Spanish man came in and was saying something about the car that we did not understand and we just thought he likes the car!

But when I went to start the car (have you guessed what I had done??)

Yes that is it we came through a tunnel earlier and I had put the lights but forgot to turn them off(Numpty No1)

So we went back into the bar and the Lady understood what had happened and phoned someone up (Maybe her husband) and within 10minutes he was there with jump leads and his old Volo.

I had given the lady some money for the phone call against her will!

I also gave the man 10 euros against his will and thanked him.

So as Willy Nelson said we were on the road again.

I am going to fit one of those simple buzzer circuits that stop you doing this!

Last photo view from room over the vineyard to the distant mountains and all is good in our world again

 

Roger and the Memsahib

DSC03700.JPG

DSC03701.JPG

DSC03703.JPG

DSC03705.JPG

DSC03706.JPG

DSC03710.JPG

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello All

               We filled with fuel today and used 27.11 galls and covered 1353 miles which is 49.9 MPG !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now do I do the Mobil economy run driving to break the 50MPG barrier???

Roger and the Memsahib

ps the decor of this roadhouse type place.

pps just us here!

pps they have a Classic Car meet here

DSC03711.JPG

DSC03713.JPG

DSC03714.JPG

DSC03715.JPG

DSC03716.JPG

DSC03717.JPG

DSC03718.JPG

DSC03719.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello All

               We are now at a site close to Reinosa in a row of boxes overlooking the lake (better than it sounds)

We have come through the vineyards and over the mountains past the wind turbines and it has been TO HOT AGAIN!!

The owner here says it much hotter than normal we saw 35 degs sign but think at times closer to 40 degs!

Tomorrow we are off to the coast just outside Saint Vincent and back to Blighty on Monday afternoon sailing from Santander back in Blighty Tuesday afternoon!

 

Roger and the Memsahib

 

Ps we have covered 1530 miles from home and used 30.63 galls = 49.951028 MPG!!!!

DSC03720.JPG

DSC03729.JPG

DSC03722.JPG

DSC03731.JPG

DSC03736.JPG

DSC03728.JPG

DSC03721.JPG

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, MilesA said:

Blimey Roger. Are you sure that’s not a drive in brothel!?

Miles

Hello Miles

                    You have got me thinking now as the Memsahib was missing for a couple hours and was a bit flushed on her return I was entertained by this very nice scantily clad young lady but I did not know what she wanted? (pity!)

Roger and the tired Memsahib

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello All

                 Last full day in Spain and back to Blighty on the 17.00 ferry tomorrow

We had a good drive up through the mountains and it was a lot cooler today so all 3 of us were happier!

We are now just outside San Vicente in a nice self catering 2 storey house.

We have covered 1650 miles from home and it is about 35 mile to Santander and 200 in Blighty

The first two photos are a view from last night’s room and breakfast room this morning

The last one view from today’s room

 

Roger and the Memsahib

DSC03743.JPG

DSC03745.JPG

DSC03747.JPG

DSC03748.JPG

DSC03749.JPG

DSC03750.JPG

DSC03756.JPG

DSC03758.JPG

DSC03759.JPG

DSC03760.JPG

DSC03761.JPG

DSC03763.JPG

DSC03768.JPG

DSC03769.JPG

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello All

             We are back in Blighty now we have covered 1896 on the speedo and 1909 on Gladys the Satnav and used 38.89 galls of petrol

So that is 49.08 MPG or 48.75 MPG

Spittys oil is 1 mark down on the dip stick and I had put in just over 1/2 litre and it has been very very hot (40 deg C)

The crossing was a bit rough and it took nearly 2 hours to get off the ship and out Plymouth then a steady run up the A38 and M5 at a steady 70/75 MPH !

Photos last digs and San Vincente and 4 mast sailing ship

Roger and the Memsahib

ps I hope you have enjoyed the report?

pps Its a pity I can not how many views it had!

DSC03773.JPG

DSC03775.JPG

DSC03777.JPG

DSC03783.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great holiday by the looks. You do find some interesting and scenic places.

Fine reporting and some great pics. Thank you for taking the time so we can enjoy your holiday too!

Bloody excellent mpg too…. If you could have just kept you hoof out a bit on the final leg you might have cracked 50?!

 

Might have to get you to map mine - I’m struggling to reliably crack 30 at present!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Nick Jones said:

Bloody excellent mpg too…. If you could have just kept you hoof out a bit on the final leg you might have cracked 50?!

Hello Nick

                  You are right but we just wanted to get home and Spitty seems to run a treat at 3000rpm (70mph)

Plus the really nice thing will still accelerate well even in overdrive! at one stage there was somebody buggering about so just put the foot down and within seconds we were doing 10mph over! and pulling like a train! (We passed mercs, jags,and other fancy things !) they were probaly driving for economy Ha Ha.

Spitty must come onto the cam well at 3000 rpm plus which was probably her undoing up the mountain passes in the high temperatures? 

Overdrive on 2nd was used quite a lot

I am wondering if I have got the second pressure sensor set right as when we got back down to lower levels she was running rich so I did a half way map guess! 

I wonder if you can see them in the tuning setup software to compare(must read the big manual again!)

Roger and the Memsahib

ps the bloody moles have had a field day in our lawn but I have the traps down now and have more in reserve!

DSC03664.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nick Jones said:

Mine has done in the past. I do have two pressure sensors though, one of which is on full time barometric monitoring duty.

Hello Nick 

                 I have 2 as well but I have the feeling I may have adjusted it from last time in the pyrenees as it was going a bit lean but had not been able to test it and may have adjusted it the wrong way(its a bit confusing to me how do you set yours?)

Roger

ps sounds like a good excuse to go back to test the settings!!!

pps We were looking at the Ferry bookings last night as they are offering discounts and I have a code off a TR man for extra discounts plus its only money and if either of us are to poorly to go I think the few hundered pounds will not matter?

DSC03322.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, rogerguzzi said:

its a bit confusing to me how do you set yours?

On my previous, plenum setup I just enabled it and let it get on with it.  I don’t think it was quite perfect but it worked well enough for the highest passes in the Alps.

On the current setup it’s one of the suspects in the random variability I’m encountering….. I really don’t understand it if I’m honest. Research has so far made matters worse with many claims that you have to increase fuelling as you go up to compensate for reduced exhaust back pressure. I struggle with that concept!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Nick

                Its not just me then?

I think I must have read the same article and that may be Spitty down fall?

When we toured the pyrenees before she went just a bit lean on the high passes

I will have a look at all the maps etc that I have but not sure they go back that far(or been deleted?)

Roger

ps we were just a week or two to early for all these flowers to be open next to the walls in Lugo

DSC03298.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Nick Jones said:

Research has so far made matters worse with many claims that you have to increase fuelling as you go up to compensate for reduced exhaust back pressure. I struggle with that concept!!

Eh! :wacko:

'Back pressure' may well go down but so does inlet pressure so that sounds like a complete load of guff to me.

Altitude effect on inlet pressure can be significant whereas the effect compared to combustion pressure exhausting out of the cyclinder is trivial.

All the sensible discussion I have seen is that fuelling, whether carb or injection goes down with altitude on account of the reduced cylinder charging.

Carbs probably have a degree of self-management as the fuel feed rate effectively relies on the difference in pressure between the float chamber (venting to ambient) and pressure (or velocity - same thing Mr Bernoulli) at the jet.

Injection on the other hand is only looking at the MAP sensor in isolation unless there is a second refence input from an ambient pressure sensor as the fuel supply is pump driven and effectively altitude independent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Nick Jones said:

And yet, at least one of the sources is fairly reputable (in MS circles at least)

Out of curiosity I have been reading some of the MS discussion on the topic. And I see what you mean.

Having no experience of MS a lot of the programming conversation goes over my head BUT I suspect everyone is actually talking about the same thing - although confusing exhaust 'backpressure' with general ambient pressure reduction that affects the whole system - and the issue actually lies in how the correction algorithm(s) are working and/or interracting with the sensors.

I am quite prepared to be shown to be wrong (when I get to this level of finessing with the Spitfire there will be plenty for me to get wrong) but my gut reaction is "ye cannae change the laws of physics Cap'n".

Piston engine aircraft obviously have to deal with this issue and a couple of interesting articles here although they discuss carburettors rather than injection the requirement inside the cylinder is the same. Just the method of achieving that that changes (hence my suspicions on algorithms and sensors).

http://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31874

https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/59328/why-do-carburetors-tend-to-produce-richer-mixture-at-higher-altitude

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As this is getting useful I'm probably need to break it out into it's own child thread..... however, right now, that's a job for Ron.

So....

http://www.megamanual.com/mt28.htm#sb

I actually finally found this (I've been looking for for weeks).  Unfortunately I don't have the concentration to decode it at the moment so will have to revisit when my brain is working again (if ever...)

Meanwhile, my previous firmware from 2009 ish just has the two point correction, and looks like this

Baro 289.jpg

As stated, I just enabled it and it's worked well enough to get me to 2,800m without obvious problems, though to be fair I had no AFR display for any of my high altitude forays, except the last in 2019 when the wideband was acting up anyway.

Now I have MS2 Extra 3.4.4 firmware it looks like this

Baro 344.jpg

Which appears to be doing nothing..... and is in distinct contrast to yours Roger.  I've not had  to deal with an altitude variation of more than about 230m so far.

It also occurs me that this discussion about exhaust back pressure may be on the basis that the ECU is correcting for the inlet on the basis of the ideal gas law, but is not correcting for the exhaust side, hence the facility to adjust and the reason why most seem to report the curve that get that seems to work going the opposite way to what might be expected.....

Edit: I also found this

http://www.megamanual.com/mt28.htm#rc
which contains this
barocor = baro correction from 2-point table + baro correction from new 6-point delta correction table

Which I think is confirming what I suggested above - so your correct curve corrections are probably a bit big Roger.....  It also confirms that I effectively have what I had before so I need to look elsewhere.....  Humpf.....

To be considered further.  I need my missing 5 mpg (plus another 5 at least!)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...