LPG EJ conversion - pros cons?

[subanator]

In passing a shopping mall promotion for LPG gas conversions, the bloke gives the spiel and I say its probably a waste of time, no kits available for a Forester. The reply is there are kits now made for the Euro market and may be available here too soon. These are the liquid injection type kits.

Now all I could see for a tank to fit would be the wheel well donut type tank, limited range by size. this means the spare tyre sits on top as they do in the conversion. Rear wheel hangers see a bit scarce for a Forester and would be pricey. Next thing is the added weight, so stiffer rear springs to go in too.

Whats the reliablity issues with EJ 2.5 engines on gas, are the valve seats capable of lasting on gas, or will they burn and require the engine to come out, heads off and added work to valves and seats in time to come? I am being realistic here guys, could be big dollars and pain, is the gain worth it? The pay back in cheap fuel has to be worth all the extras apart from the Govt rebate.

Interested if anyone has gone onto LPG and your thoughts.

[78sti]

All Pros. do it now!

I have converted my h6 outback and it has almost paid for itslef off already (4 months)
Total cost after rebate was $950
Car runs on gas perfectly and on petrol same as before. The only difference is a slight power loss at the top of the rev range.

They can convert pretty much anything these days, you dont need a model specific kit! The only difference with the kits is they have a better custom made filler. (they modified a commodore one for the outback)

Sequential systems are not worth the money. Remember that if you want power all you have to to is hit the switch to run on petrol.

The tank is a donut tank and usually takes between 50-58l of gas. and the h6 gets about 400-450k per tank. Its about 25% worse economy than petrol but that still works out about 40-50% cheaper running costs than petrol.

The other bonus is that now I get close to 1000k range with both tanks full - no need for that long range fuel tank I have been thinking about. You just have to plan out your trips carefully as you cant get gas everywhere.

[Phizinza]

Tanks are light weight really, and the gas barely weights anything.

78sti, is yours liquid injection or standard vapor injection? I've heard the liquid stuff gives about the same in power and economy as petrol if not better.

[subarutility]

I think that when the LPG is pumped and stored in your tank it is liquid from, so may weigh the same as petrol.

[Storm]

All Pros. do it now!

Hmmmm, I think a little bit of research is in order before such a blanket statement is made.

Car runs on gas perfectly and on petrol same as before. The only difference is a slight power loss at the top of the rev range.

In a good quality kit there should be no discernible difference at all.

They can convert pretty much anything these days, you dont need a model specific kit! The only difference with the kits is they have a better custom made filler. (they modified a commodore one for the outback)

Be very sure about this. It is illegal to fit an non-complianced kit to any vehicle made after 1999. You cannot mix and match LPG components for cars made after this year.

Sequential systems are not worth the money. Remember that if you want power all you have to to is hit the switch to run on petrol.

Whether or not they are worth the money, remembering this is your personal belief, you need to understand one basic fact. If your car is made after a certain date in 1999 you are stuck with what kits are certified for your car and the majority of the new kits are sequential injection. Your thinking of hitting a switch for petrol to gain more power has me stumped. Injected LPG makes the same and in quite a few instances more power than EFI petrol.

The tank is a donut tank and usually takes between 50-58l of gas. and the h6 gets about 400-450k per tank. Its about 25% worse economy than petrol but that still works out about 40-50% cheaper running costs than petrol.

There is a large range of tanks and from what I know regarding Manchester Tanks there are two Donut tanks the larger one wont fit in most cars. If you are getting 25% worse economy, and are driving the exact same way on both LPG and Petrol, there is something incredibly wrong with your system.

The other bonus is that now I get close to 1000k range with both tanks full - no need for that long range fuel tank I have been thinking about. You just have to plan out your trips carefully as you cant get gas everywhere.

Go the the LPGAutogas website and locate LPG filling stations with it. You will find that where there is a Woolworths/Caltex or a Coles/Shell there will be LPG. Mobil, United, Matilda, all have LPG at many of their stations as well.

[tex]

First id just like to point out that they are still rolling in the fuel excises on LPG and will be getting considerably dearer over the next five years or so!
I had a lightweight stainless steel tank in my calais and have assisted in installing quite a few kits. They are essentially all made of the same componants just different sizes for differnt vehicles for example I had a gas converter for a small truck so we could rejet the throttle body on the dyno and would never be starved of fuel. The last kit I helped out with had exactly the same componants as all the rest but had some special airbox clips to make up for a vehicle design fault. but they are in general still very universal! But if you get the choice the impco kits are worth the money if you plan on keeping the car for a while!
I realy would stress shopping around on this one as from my experience with LPG everyone knows everything to do with LPG but the majority are full of s##t including myself. I was told that stainless tanks were illegal by one bloke but I found out later he just wanted to sell me a new one, And apparently at the time you couldn't install a tank where the petrol tank used to be but you were allowed to on a ute or light truck (I still don't know if this was the case or not). But I wouldn't be holding my breath for the injected system as it doesnt work the same as petrol unless they were getting confused with a diesel conversion or something.

[78sti]

This is copied from RACQ website.

What effect does LPG have on economy and power?
Because LPG does not contain the same amount of energy as petrol, both fuel consumption and power will suffer. However, later model vehicles are generally less affected.

Up to 30% increase in fuel consumption may be expected but this is offset by the lower cost per litre of LPG.


So in saying that if you had no difference in economy there is something incredibly wrong with your PETROL system

Also I believe the date for the certified kit requirements is 1 st of January 2004, But I know there is a kit for 2007 foresters.

The lpg tank does add considerable weight to the rear of car (most installers recommend adding raised height springs to compensate for the extra weight)

But make your own mind up as the coments I made are only my opinion.

Cheers Troy

[78sti]

A little more on fuel economy.

this is directly related to the energy contained in the fuel

listed below is the best fuel for economy to the worst
energy by volume in MJ/L

diesel 37.3 MJ/L
Petrol 34.2 MJ/L
E10 Petrol 33.72 MJ/L
LPG Butane 27.7 MJ/L
LPG Propane 25.3 MJ/L
Ethanol 24.0 MJ/L

Generally the lower energy fuels have higher octane ratings, this is why e10 ethanol has a higher octane rating than standard petrol.

[Storm]

This is copied from RACQ website.

What effect does LPG have on economy and power?
Because LPG does not contain the same amount of energy as petrol, both fuel consumption and power will suffer. However, later model vehicles are generally less affected.

Most of your post is with regards to the old technology systems. Even with them there are thing that can be done to reduce this issue.

Up to 30% increase in fuel consumption may be expected but this is offset by the lower cost per litre of LPG.

So in saying that if you had no difference in economy there is something incredibly wrong with your PETROL system

My petrol system is more efficient with a 5.7 litre VT Commodore engine using a Kalmaker EFI system than most other cars of equivalent size and weight. When I can get 25mpg with a 3tonne vehicle on petrol I'm doing pretty good.

With regards to LPG fuel consumption even the old technology Impco setups didn't have a 25% difference. Seriously, a standard EFI Holden/Ford/Toyota will not have that large a difference with a well setup LPG system. Any installer who is worth his weight in salt will tell the customer about modifications to the ignition system that will increase the economy of the LPG system. May I recommend you talk to your installer about a Dual-Curve system for your ignition.

Also I believe the date for the certified kit requirements is 1 st of January 2004, But I know there is a kit for 2007 foresters.

NSW requirements are 1999, Australia wide is 2004. The issue is NSW had to agree to National standards. The same thing happened with Ford 6 Cylinders in the early 1980s, NSW enforced different pollution standards on the XE range but were forced to changed it when National Standards pulled them into line.

The lpg tank does add considerable weight to the rear of car (most installers recommend adding raised height springs to compensate for the extra weight)

I haven't read any post that argues with you about the weight of LPG tanks. I will say most installers don't recommend adding raised height springs simply because a fully loaded car with 5 or more passengers and their luggage doesn't require raised height springs.

But make your own mind up as the coments I made are only my opinion.

Cheers Troy

Troy, I am a mechanic by trade, I fit LPG systems. I respect your opinion as I would hope you would respect mine when I point out reality with regards to things I am heavily involved in.

[78sti]

In a perfect world with both fuels running at 100% efficiency the lpg would use 23.4% more due to the fact that is has less energy per litre (refer to my last post for exact numbers).

I checked the holden web site and their factoy fitted lpg system returns 14.4litres/100k and petrol is 11.1 litres/100k, that is 27% difference! which is what I would expect.

If your systems are returning the same efficiency the petrol must be running rich or the gas very lean. This makes sence on older motors that are not very efficient and gas burns hotter than petrol increasing efficiency.

This is copied from autogas site-

The fuel economy of Autogas-powered vehicles depends on a range of factors but on average, vehicles running on Autogas use approximately 30 percent more fuel than petrol-powered equivalents. Remember, however, that this is more than offset by the much lower cost of Autogas, which is typically half the price or less than unleaded petrol.

[Phizinza]

In a perfect world with both fuels running at 100% efficiency the lpg would use 23.4% more due to the fact that is has less energy per litre (refer to my last post for exact numbers).

That's assuming the petrol and lpg burn with the same efficiency. The lpg already being gas would burn better then the atomized petrol I would assume.

I have read in many places and from people that the liquid gas injection on a properly tuned engine will put out the same power with slightly better economy. But I have no first hand experience so I'll go quietly now.

[Storm]

I checked the holden web site and their factoy fitted lpg system returns 14.4litres/100k and petrol is 11.1 litres/100k, that is 27% difference! which is what I would expect.

This is Lab test figures which manufacturers have to publish. It is probably the IM240 test but having said that it may be a newer one. The IM 240 test is called that because it is a test that is run for 240 seconds is supposed to emulate city driving and the fuel consumption and other figures are averaged out.

If your systems are returning the same efficiency the petrol must be running rich or the gas very lean. This makes sence on older motors that are not very efficient and gas burns hotter than petrol increasing efficiency.

My Petrol system is set up to cruise at 14.7 AFR, my LPG sytem is setup to run at slightly less than 15.5 hovers around 15.35 which is slightly lower than stoichometric. My engine (motors are electric and don't use fuel) is a 1999 5.7 Litre HSV 220i that was supposed to go into a HSV Senator. It is in a 1989 FJ75 Toyota Troopcarrier which weighs 3 tonne when loaded for camping.

Check out Parnell and do a Google search on his system. There is documented evidence showing new systems put together properly are more efficient than EFI petrol.

I'll let you in on a little secret. Engine efficiency is directly related to ignition timing. The more advance an engine can take the more efficient it can run, this is of course dictated by factors such as compression, engine condition, detonation threshold, and burn speed of the fuel (Petrol burns at 1.01 m/s while LPG burns at 0.86 m/s).The more efficient an engine runs the less fuel it uses. Many Subaru people set the EA81 timing higher than factory specs purely for fuel efficiency benefits.

An engine running on LPG can take more timing advance at lower revs purely because of its higher Octane rating and slower burn speed. At higher revs say above 3000-3500 LPG's burn rate speeds up with increasing air velocity making it require less advance than an equivalent Petrol engine. It is not uncommon for some LPG engines to run up to 15-20 degrees more advance at cruise speeds than the equivalent Petrol engine (this is modern EFI engines). My V8 runs a conservative 10 degrees more at 100km/h cruise in 5th gear. This is where the savings are with LPG. So my advice to you is that you ask your LPG fitter about a dual curve ignition module for your car (if it is Electronic ignition) or you get a dual tune on your cars ECU (this is assuming your car is EFI). You will be pleasantly surprised with the savings you can get.

Anyway believe what you want, I know what I know because I work with it.

[78sti]

This is copied from the parnell LPG site to work out fuel running costs on lpg-
refer to `F LPG consumption = (petrol x 1.27)' yes thats 27%

I could not find anything on this site saying that their systems can be more efficient on LPG. If you could post link that would be great.



THE FACTS OF LP GAS
Pricing - Autogas pricing is a complicated and detailed issue; given the high world demand for Safe, Environmentally friendly, an Economical fuel source there is little wonder. Autogas (The green fuel) is traded on world markets and is consequently based on world parity pricing or the Saudi Price Index. Autogas is subject to other factors that will directly impact on its price, some of these are mentioned below:

Exchange Rates
World Demand
Freight Costs
Price Differentials - Autogas enjoys significant price savings when comparing to the price of Unleaded and Leaded Petrol. The differential between Autogas and ULP is the determining factor to how quickly you pay off your conversion, NOT the cost of Autogas .


Make your LP Gas Savings Calculations

A
Distance traveled per year in klm

B
Petrol consumption in L/100kms

C
Annual petrol consumption = (AxB/100)

D
Petrol price in dollars per litre

E
Annual petrol cost = (CxD)

F
LPG consumption = (petrol x 1.27)

G
Annual LPG consumption = (AxF/100)

H
LPG Price in dollars per litre

I
Annual LPG cost (GxH)

J
Annual savings = E-I

K
Weekly savings = J/52

[Storm]

Check out Parnell and do a Google search on his system. There is documented evidence showing new systems put together properly are more efficient than EFI petrol.

I could not find anything on this site saying that their systems can be more efficient on LPG. If you could post link that would be great.

How much effort did you put in to Googling?

Here is an extract from an AutoSpeed article. The full article can be found here. Note that it says much of what you are saying but in testing a car it agrees with me.

Power, Fuel Consumption and Emissions

So if aftermarket LPG has progressed to this extent, is there are any bad news? John Parnell was frank.

“Typically there’s a 3 per cent drop in power,” he said. “But I don’t know if many of our customers are really concerned by that. I always tell them that driveability remains exactly the same as on petrol.”

More serious is the rise in fuel consumption. John Parnell says that typically fuel consumption on LPG rises by 15 – 20 percent.

“That’s more than our competitors will tell you but it’s what I have seen on the emissions test cycle,” he said.

To be legally able to be fitted, the LPG system must provide the same or better tail-pipe emissions as the standard car achieves on petrol. These tests are, in the case of Parnell LP Gas Systems, ‘hot’ tests done on the IM240 cycle – 240 seconds of a rolling dyno test replicating mostly urban conditions.

John Parnell provided us with the test results of a VZ Holden Commodore V6 fitted with the sequential electronic injection LPG system.

As can be seen, all measured emissions either decreased or stayed the same. Interestingly, in this case the measured fuel consumption on gas was actually better than on petrol – 12.5 litres/100 on petrol and 11.7 litres/100 on gas, a decrease of 6 per cent and (as expected) a very close mach for the drop in CO2.

The IM240 test is run for 240 seconds, that's 4 minutes. Hardly a real world test to show real world conditions. I don't know about you but I would believe someones Driving Log Book that is filled in with meticulous detail than I would a government test that is run for 4 minutes and then averaged out. Anyway, it is neither here nor there, we are going to have to agree to disagree.

[cshaobu427964]

i always saw a guy selling runescape money .but dont know if my account will be banned when i bought?