Dr_Snooz
04-26-2011, 07:18 PM
I just ran across this article on the CVCC engine. It's pretty interesting.
http://books.google.com/books?id=bOU8TD_BxwMC&pg=PA79&lpg=PA79&dq=cvcc+air+fuel+ratio&source=bl&ots=qVuBq5_B-z&sig=lOc1hXp9PDgnc63lcDjMTmjEsUs&hl=en&ei=hIS3TaSAC-bOiAKd86Qi&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
I had always heard that its air/fuel ratio was very lean. Apparently, its overall air fuel ratio was the typical 15:1. It was just divided up a little more with a rich mixture near the spark plug and a leaner mixture down below. The engine was able to meet 1975 emissions requirements without a catalytic converter. The downside was that MPGs were pretty crummy. Power was good though.
Enjoy!
http://books.google.com/books?id=bOU8TD_BxwMC&pg=PA79&lpg=PA79&dq=cvcc+air+fuel+ratio&source=bl&ots=qVuBq5_B-z&sig=lOc1hXp9PDgnc63lcDjMTmjEsUs&hl=en&ei=hIS3TaSAC-bOiAKd86Qi&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
I had always heard that its air/fuel ratio was very lean. Apparently, its overall air fuel ratio was the typical 15:1. It was just divided up a little more with a rich mixture near the spark plug and a leaner mixture down below. The engine was able to meet 1975 emissions requirements without a catalytic converter. The downside was that MPGs were pretty crummy. Power was good though.
Enjoy!