1995 2.2 MPG Build - Performance Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
1995 2.2 MPG Build
Sunday, August 22, 2010 11:05 PM
Honestly, I don't know much about the 2.2. I know it's an OHV, pushrod engine, with a 3 speed auto (sadly it's not a manual transmission, that would make it a bit more fun). From what I've read in the newbie section there are two (?) different variations between the S10 and the Cavy line. Changes occurred during the 1996 and onward years between the Cavy 2.2.
Anyway, let's get on with it shall we? This'll be my daily driver to conserve gas for my weekend/summer driver. Besides swapping in the manual transmission, as I'm looking to put the least amount of aftermarket support into the engine/trans./body as possible, I'm going with the free mods and the usual upgrades to increase MPG.
First and foremost, the steps to be taken will be in the maintenance section. Remember though, I'm looking for MPG, not horsepower/torque numbers. 40+ is attainable, 300 WHP with this engine and trans., financially, is not.
Besides maintenance which includes tie rods, full tune up (spark plugs, wires, fuel filter, air filter), serpentine belt, tire rotation, brakes all around, and an oil change, there's not too much. Which I'm not surprised by. I've worked on these cars before, though not the 2.2 in specific, more along the lines of the ECO (which I give props to a as a great N/A engine), but not so much the 2.2 OHV.
The plan is to reach high 30s MPG or low 40s MPG. To do this I'm going the normal upgrade path of I/H/E. Freeing up the restrictions is usually the path to go in reaching attainable numbers. The intake, as budget is concerned, will have to be custom fabricated from spare intercooler piping, extra AEM air filter, and a few silicon couplers. It will, hopefully, be a true CAI or an SRI with an air filter heat shield and some header wrap/house ducting wrap for the intake pipe itself. I may go ahead and port and polish the throttle body along with 'sharpening' the throttle plate itself allowing for smoother airflow.
The ignition will consist of NGK iridiums gapped a tad larger at .062 and run-of-the-mill wires. Fuel filter will be OE from RockAuto. Oil will consist of Valvoline 5W-30 half synthetic for the time being until I know how the bottom end is. No bearing shavings as of yet, but with 164k on the clock there's no telling how good the bottom end is without taking the oil pan off and finding the tolerances of the gaps between the bearings and the crank; not something I have time for or really want to do on my one day off a week. If the internals prove alright without any knocking, full synthetic AMSOil will be going in at a weight of 5W-30. I may risk an AMSOil 5W-20 for the winter.
Weight is always one of the big things in running MPG as it is with 1/4 mile times, so let's shed some pounds on this car. I'll begin by removing the rear seats, trunk components (minus the spare and the OE jack). Good thing this is a coupe as usually they run lighter than saloons which I'm hoping is the case with the Cavy.
Fuel will be run with standard 87 octane seeing as there's really no way to adjust spark, whether advanced or retard and the possibility of a straight OBD2 ECU. SeaFoam will be run through the engine after the intake manifold has been taken off and cleaned thoroughly.
Tire pressure'll be run to 34 pounds constant at cold temperature; 4 PSi above factory recommendations. Compensating for the wider tires that are on the car (205 versus 195?). Lack of weight will certainly help off-set the increase in tire pressure, especially in the rear.
Given there're no huge options on the car (no power anything except steering, no A/C), I don't have much to worry about in terms of removing pulleys and finding smaller belts unless I don't want power steering, which is nice to have as a DD.
Cooling system will be dealt with via Water Wetter added and possibly a lower temperature thermostat. The OE is what, 195*? I'm looking to add a 180*, though I'm not sure how it would perform with the possible OBD1/2 hybrid or full OBD2 ECU. I'm not worried about it throwing a code, just the matter of time of swapping out the thermostat again.
Have I bored you yet?

Any input is much appreciated. I know there are free mods for every car, quick fixes, etc., but since I know DSMs more than I do the Cavy, any help is much appreciated.

Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Monday, August 23, 2010 8:19 AM
Here we go...
0) Major change for the 2.2L was in '98. '96 was just an ECU change.
1/2) Change your timing chain and tensioner.
1) Just a 5-speed swap can get you to 40mpg with very conservative driving.
2) It's your daily, and you seem to be trying to save $$$, so why waste your $$$ on synthetic?
3) For MPG, you want a WAI, not a CAI. DO NOT use 3" piping (you didn't specify).
4) Similarly, for MPG, DO NOT use a colder thermostat. If you're going to use water wetter, try to find a higher t-stat even.
5) You can tune with Megasquirt just as easily as on a DSM. Since you have a '95, you shouldn't even need to worry about emissions issues.
6) Zero-deck the block if you ever take it out.
7) Iridiums are just more $$ that is better spent elsewhere. Grab some MSD coils if you really want to run a wider gap.
8) Skinny tires would be better, wider is worse...
9) 4-2-1 header if you do mostly city driving, 4-1 if you do mostly highway. Get a high-flow cat, and keep your piping 2-1/4" or smaller




fortune cookie say: better a delay than a disaster
Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Monday, August 23, 2010 9:09 AM
The gods have spoken


"In Oldskool we trust"
Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Monday, August 23, 2010 11:02 AM
lol, this should be a sticky.
Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Monday, August 23, 2010 2:04 PM
getting rid of the auto is the biggest thing. most else was covered above. if you are looking for overall cost effectiveness source as many parts used as possible. these cars are dime a dozen, so finding stuff isn't too hard.



Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Monday, August 23, 2010 4:45 PM
well actually...

the 1.8 OHV in 1981 started the whole thing, changes to it in 1982 changed the displacement to 2.0 and ran until 1990 when the block was stroked to 2.2 litre in 1991. the motor changed again in 1994 adding 10 more hp. this is NOT the full list... the LN2 had many many changes over the years



Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Monday, August 23, 2010 6:36 PM
Awesome, thanks guys.
I'd love to have a manual trans. in the car, but I'd much rather save for a TRE for the DSM. Even so, it sure as hell would help with the MPG and save money in the long run.
I'm going with the Iridiums for the plain, simple fact that they do work. Sure, they're $7 bucks a plug, or more, but they'll far outlast the regular copper and even platinum cores.
Though it's the cheap MPG DD, fully synthetic oil is much better for an engine; wear properties, friction, lubrication, and oil life longevity.
Any particular part number for the coils, or just universals?
So I'll be looking at a WAI, heat shield it, with about 2.5" piping? For the throttle body, how's the response/mileage after a quick port and polish? I figure I could get that done when I remove the intake to clean it out...maybe some extrude honing too if I'm so inclined.
Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Monday, August 23, 2010 6:57 PM
I think you could honestly see your best mpg in your tuning. Running the car as lean as possible without melting something or detonating.


- Your not-so-local, untrained, uncertified, backyard mechanic. But my @!#$ runs
Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Monday, August 23, 2010 7:20 PM
Install a vacuum gauge and try to keep the car in a good vacuum.


Epicness is coming. Are you ready?


Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Monday, August 23, 2010 7:30 PM
I wish I could pull into the high 30s on the highway with my car. I recently got just under 30 on the highway...now that was no muffler with the piping chopped off just after the cat.
Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Tuesday, August 24, 2010 8:43 AM
My best tank I ever got with my 2.2/3 was 26mpg. All highway, all cruise at about 65 mph.

Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Tuesday, August 24, 2010 8:54 AM
Notec gives a lot of good advice.

Something to keep in mind if you're looking for MPG: porting anything, or increasing your exhaust pipe size, isn't going to help with the lower RPM power, which is where you want to focus if you're looking for MPG. You want more power lower in your RPM range, so you can cruise more without having to get on it as much. I'm not convinced any header will help you that much, as they are going to have relatively large primaries. I would get a high flow muffler with stock diameter in and out, and a high flow cat. Remove some of the restriction, without increasing flow volume. Same for the WAI. A 2.25" - 2.5" pipe for that is probably your best bet.

Although a manual transmission would be your best bet, for cost/simplicity reasons, swapping to a 4-speed auto would be my recommendation there.






Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Tuesday, August 24, 2010 3:15 PM
Adin Briggs wrote:Any particular part number for the coils, or just universals?
So I'll be looking at a WAI, heat shield it, with about 2.5" piping? For the throttle body, how's the response/mileage after a quick port and polish? I figure I could get that done when I remove the intake to clean it out...maybe some extrude honing too if I'm so inclined.
Coils are somewhat specific. You shouldn't have trouble finding the part# with minimal effort.
Don't shield the intake. Warmer arm helps lean things out. 2.5" piping should be good, but I wouldn't go bigger. As Quik says below, don't port anything. Polishing is good though (but not intake side of head).
Schaffer wrote:I wish I could pull into the high 30s on the highway with my car. I recently got just under 30 on the highway...now that was no muffler with the piping chopped off just after the cat.
Put your muffler back on. Removing it kills the 2.2L
Nick wrote:My best tank I ever got with my 2.2/3 was 26mpg. All highway, all cruise at about 65 mph.
3-speed FTL. I feel your pain
Quiklilcav wrote:I'm not convinced any header will help you that much, as they are going to have relatively large primaries. I would get a high flow muffler with stock diameter in and out, and a high flow cat. Remove some of the restriction, without increasing flow volume. Same for the WAI. A 2.25" - 2.5" pipe for that is probably your best bet.
A proper 4-2-1 header could significantly help scavenging, while not raising the powerband. Also, the stock piping is compression-bent, so going to a 2" mandrel-bent exhasut to match the high-flow cat/muffler could be of significant benefit.




fortune cookie say: better a delay than a disaster
Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Tuesday, August 24, 2010 3:39 PM
Not that it will help out a ton. But LED's on any sort of lighting that you can. Keep the draw down on the electronics to keep the alternator from working as hard.

Another tip would be say when you go to somewhere like Wal-Mart. Tip 1 is to take the first spot you see, obviously and suck up the walk. Another is to pull in somewhere that you can pull across so you don't have to back out, wasting extra gas by making a backing maneuver.

Quote:

Tire pressure'll be run to 34 pounds constant at cold temperature; 4 PSi above factory recommendations. Compensating for the wider tires that are on the car (205 versus 195?). Lack of weight will certainly help off-set the increase in tire pressure, especially in the rear.


Wider tires not such a good idea. Wider tire means more rolling resistance, and probably more drag too. Keep the stock size, look into something with low rolling resistance. I believe that Consumer Reports does an article on these. Might even be something in the way of hubcaps that you can get that will help reduce drag on the wheels too. Popular trick for me a the track when tire pressures come in is to put a lot more air in the rears than is necessary. Obviously you don't want so much that you blow the tire, and i'm not sure what kind of effect it would have on tire wear for extended periods of time on the rear of the car. But might be an idea.





i find it amusing that SHOoff has nothing better to do but follow me around & be an unhelpful dick in even cross-forum. - Jon Mick
Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:51 AM
I know about the tires, they just happen to be larger than what's factory recommended. For some reason the previous owner tossed on a wider set. Not a clue what that's all about seeing as there's snow on the ground here 7-8 months out of the year; wide tires in snow sucks. Reconsidering the low 34 PSi in the rear, may jump it up to 40 or so. There's not a whole lot of weight back there so I don't believe I'll see too much tire wear. Of course I'll keep an eye on it just to make sure.
Are there any alternator upgrades at all from the second gens or from a 3100/3400/3800?
Running mandrel all the way back from the header, with the same size piping, is of course the best idea for the exhaust. Haven't taken a look underneath the car, but I'm going under the assumption that there's an O2 sensor in the cat? Otherwise I may just get it removed (no emissions laws in Minnesota) and have a test pipe welded in...or just get a bung welded to the test pipe for the O2 sensor if there is indeed one in the cat.
As far as tuning will go I'll nab up a wideband O2, vac gauge, WO2 gauge, and toss in my SAFC (the knob-style, not even a good ol' Neo) and see about some tuning. Get everything as lean as possible during cruise; 15.5-16. Just at the breaking point.
Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Wednesday, August 25, 2010 9:27 AM
There is talk about going to Quickstart (Sorry, no link!) for a AD-244, which seems to be a direct bolt-in of the CS-130 alternator. Call them & tell 'em what you're up to & you'll be guided the right way.

My best average was in my '94 S-truck w/auto: 24.5 w/hollowed cat (Damn thing plugged-up & I hadda get it home!) clockin' 76 on the highway. Of course, it goes without saying that S-trucks weigh alot more than J-cars! The laugh was it only dropped to 23.5 after the cat was replaced.

Look into fabbing a FAI (Fresh-Air Intake). This will help alot when on the highway. Helped my '85 dime w/TBI 2.5L-auto get 25mpg/avg doing 75-80 going to Kentucky for the Buick Nats.


Go beyond the "bolt-on".
Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Wednesday, August 25, 2010 11:04 AM
Look at teh 2002 cavalier in my profile. That car got a best 42mpg straight highway, and averaged 35-36 over summer in mixed driving.

I know it's a later generation of the engine, but it doesn't take much to bump the economy on the car



Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Thursday, August 26, 2010 5:40 AM
Interesting. Tell us... What were the advantages had (In theory) with eliminating the resonator? And going with that model muffler? (The header's advantage is so obvious!)


Go beyond the "bolt-on".
Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Thursday, August 26, 2010 8:28 AM
Nickelin Dimer wrote:Interesting. Tell us... What were the advantages had (In theory) with eliminating the resonator? And going with that model muffler? (The header's advantage is so obvious!)
Are you asking me? The exhaust system in the reg was on the car when i bought it. I did suspemsion and exterior mods - the car always got that mileage when it was warm. In the winter it dropped to the low thirties like clockwork.



Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Thursday, August 26, 2010 8:31 AM
Nickelin Dimer wrote:Interesting. Tell us... What were the advantages had (In theory) with eliminating the resonator? And going with that model muffler? (The header's advantage is so obvious!)
resonator = flow restriction




fortune cookie say: better a delay than a disaster
Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Thursday, August 26, 2010 10:59 AM
OHV notec wrote:
Nickelin Dimer wrote:Interesting. Tell us... What were the advantages had (In theory) with eliminating the resonator? And going with that model muffler? (The header's advantage is so obvious!)
resonator = flow restriction


?

Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Thursday, August 26, 2010 2:49 PM
Dave De Stefano wrote:
OHV notec wrote:
Nickelin Dimer wrote:Interesting. Tell us... What were the advantages had (In theory) with eliminating the resonator? And going with that model muffler? (The header's advantage is so obvious!)
resonator = flow restriction
?
Increased surface texture engorges the frictional boundary layer, creating resistance to flow...




fortune cookie say: better a delay than a disaster
Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Thursday, August 26, 2010 8:57 PM
OHV notec wrote:
Dave De Stefano wrote:
OHV notec wrote:
Nickelin Dimer wrote:Interesting. Tell us... What were the advantages had (In theory) with eliminating the resonator? And going with that model muffler? (The header's advantage is so obvious!)
resonator = flow restriction
?
Increased surface texture engorges the frictional boundary layer, creating resistance to flow...


isnt it really minute though?
Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Thursday, August 26, 2010 9:12 PM
Nickelin Dimer wrote:There is talk about going to Quickstart (Sorry, no link!) for a AD-244, which seems to be a direct bolt-in of the CS-130 alternator. Call them & tell 'em what you're up to & you'll be guided the right way.

My best average was in my '94 S-truck w/auto: 24.5 w/hollowed cat (Damn thing plugged-up & I hadda get it home!) clockin' 76 on the highway. Of course, it goes without saying that S-trucks weigh alot more than J-cars! The laugh was it only dropped to 23.5 after the cat was replaced.

Look into fabbing a FAI (Fresh-Air Intake). This will help alot when on the highway. Helped my '85 dime w/TBI 2.5L-auto get 25mpg/avg doing 75-80 going to Kentucky for the Buick Nats.


I did the alt swap. If the 2.2 belt routing is the same as the 2200 you will need to get a smaller 5 groove pulley. I believe the proper size will be about a 2 inch pulley but I havent gotten ahold of one to try. the reason being is that as far as I could find, the 2200 w/AC runs the longest 5 groove belt available. Now if you are deleting A/C then you might be able to get away with buying a slightly longer belt than stock. Around an inch shorter.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Thursday, August 26, 2010 9:14 PM


Re: 1995 2.2 MPG Build
Friday, August 27, 2010 7:59 AM
Dave De Stefano wrote:
OHV notec wrote:
Dave De Stefano wrote:
OHV notec wrote:
Nickelin Dimer wrote:Interesting. Tell us... What were the advantages had (In theory) with eliminating the resonator? And going with that model muffler? (The header's advantage is so obvious!)
resonator = flow restriction
?
Increased surface texture engorges the frictional boundary layer, creating resistance to flow...
isnt it really minute though?
Every little bit helps. And seeing as this guy is talking about going to synthetic oil for frictional benefits...




fortune cookie say: better a delay than a disaster
Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search