Lews database

[Keef]

OK, Houston we may have a problem.

I've been slowly working my way through the first couple of categories in the biomotors database and have started noticing a few 'anomalies'.
When you get the data in table format you start to see things very differently to when you are searching for one specific car so I've been working just on Alfa Romeo and Audi to see if my slightly perfectionist head can pull it into something I would be happy with. Unfortunately, just in these two categories I've come across a fair few mistakes and even a couple of double entries.

Here's an entry for the Audi A3 which if taken on face value looks fine:

AUDI 40500096 A3-2,0 TDI PD/2003-/BMM/4cyl./1996ccm/74kW/140PS/BHP/4000min-1/BOSCH/UI/2-Tank-ST2020 2-Tank-Kit 643.44

Except that, according to my research, the BMM engine has a capacity of 1968cc not 1996cc and its output is 103kw not 74kw although the 140PS/BHP is correct! It also seems to have a DPF fitted which I thought gave problems with bio let alone a twin tank veg setup?

The problem is that without checking every aspect of every entry (NO, I'm not going to!), we have no idea how much of this is accurate and how much is not but if the first two categories are indicative of the remainder, we could be publishing a not very accurate table. Biomotors are using this info to sell their products which they fit and have control over so have very little risk of being liable for damage caused to an engine by inaccurate information but as we are using the same information to advise "yes you can" or "no you can't" run your car on veg oil, would we be liable in any way if someone broke their car due to inaccurate information

I'll hang fire for a while and wait for your opinions as to whether we would be better to:
a] Publish 'as is' warts and all
b] Correct what we can and publish
c] Don't publish this data at all
d] Try and come up with an original table ourselves
e] Any other suggestions??

People of the Wiki, I humbly await you reponses.  (that was just for Julian)

[Tony]

Publish warts and all with a disclaimer regarding the accuracy.

Some information is better than no information - the wiki doesn't proclaim to be perfect, and anyone is welcome to chip-in and change things.

In your Audi case, 2003- - is it likely that the DPF version came along in 2009 or thereabouts?  2003- is a bit open-ended.

[Keef]

In your Audi case, 2003- - is it likely that the DPF version came along in 2009 or thereabouts?  2003- is a bit open-ended.

Now that I've checked that out, it further proves my point, The BMM engine wasn't even used until 2006 so to have it listed for 2003 is a bit of a bum steer.

The data is still useful if you are looking to buy a car and need to pre-check which years and variants come with which pump etc but I'd be a bit cheesed off if for example, I'd fitted a twintank system into my 2006 BMM engined Audi A3 only to find that the DPF wouldn't let me run it.

Also they list all Lucas pumps as a no no but we know of lots of examples of successful twintank installations with Lucas pumps and Transit 2.5Di need twin tank but many people including myself have done tens of thousands of veg miles in 2.5Di Transits single tank.

I think we need to think very carefully how we 'market' this data if we publish it and  it may be as well to create a set of rules concerning Bosch/Lucas, TDI IDI, common rail etc to accompany it maybe?

[Tony]

Hmm... that's not so good - I wonder how much is inaccurate - I suppose we have no way to tell.

I know the information about my (relatively unusual) vehicle is accurate - I guess all we can do is corroborate with owners.

[Julian]

Oh ... when I thanked Dominic for granting permission, I asked how current the info was and how frequently it was up-dated and to date haven't received a reply.

If it's wildly inaccurate, I think we should consider it's inclusion in the wiki carefully.  There's no question of any responsibility for the accuracy as I think we have sufficient disclaimers in place already, but just from a credibility point of view I think we should keep info as accurate as possible.

I'm not an expert on modern engines or running veg, but is there merit in extracting basic info from the data such as the year, make, model, IP make and model and veg system type and just offer a more basic version, perhaps with riders saying check for things like DPF etc?

Which ever way we decide to go, Keith if you want a hand manipulating the data I'm happy to help (unless you keep sending me bloody smilies!)

[Keef]

I'm not an expert on modern engines or running veg, but is there merit in extracting basic info from the data such as the year, make, model, IP make and model and veg system type and just offer a more basic version, perhaps with riders saying check for things like DPF etc?

I agree, in fact I've only included the info I thought was necessary to identify specific versions of a car anyway.

I've uploaded a copy of 'the story so far' and as you can see from the Alfa Romeo page (which is pretty much sorted), I've lost a fair bit of the original info.

I'll worry about converting it to HTML tables once I've trawled through all of the makes and removed as much junk and corrected as many mistakes as I am able.

ps.  Does anyone know what RP denoted in the pump type section? I'm sure I'll slap my forehead when I find out!!

[Julian]

That's an ace bit of editing, so much clearer to read and locate car types ... great work.  Did you do it manually?  If so it must have taken hours.

Would loosing the KW and BHP columns save any time, it looks like it's still possible to identify a specific engine type from the other information.


I think RP stands for radial-piston and CR is obviously common rail.

[Tony]

I'm pretty sure RP = Rotary Pump

[Julian]

That would make more sense, but I Googled it and came up with pages like this

http://www.bosch.co.za/content/language1/html/4830.htm

I suppose it's actually both!

[Keef]

Did you do it manually?  If so it must have taken hours.

Would loosing the KW and BHP columns save any time, it looks like it's still possible to identify a specific engine type from the other information.

It's a kind of semi-automatic process using lots of 'text to column' rules but the longest part is going through it and removing the howlers and repeat info.

The final will probably just have the BHP column but the work in progress version has the BHP as a calculation from the KW column which I found to be the easiest way of editing that section.

I might fire off a u2u to HC to see what he thinks of the RP acronym.

It's slow going at the moment because my laptop power socket has fallen to bits and none of my children will lend me a laptop so the only computer I have access to is at work with lots of barred sites (inc hotmail), no images, no vids etc.

[Julian]

Keith ... (the printy one), I just had an exchange of email with Fred1 and he pointed out this thread ... http://www.vegetableoildiesel.co.uk/forum/viewthread.php?tid=17116&page=1  the section near the bottom.

I had a quick skim through the Elsbett data and the newest car I saw was 2005 - 2006.  Is this consistent with the data you are using from BM?  If you haven't got too far with the BM data, do you recon it's worth contacting Elsbett to see if they have anything more up-to -date?

[Keef]

Yes, 2005 is the newest I've seen in the BM data at a quick glance. It wouldn't hurt to ask Elsbett or Ruud from VOD if they have anything more upto date but I doubt that anything made after 2005 would be able to run on veg oil anyway.

Any time I've put in so far is easily offset by the knowlege I've gained in manipulating the data so even if I started again from scratch, it would be a much faster proccess next time around.

I've taken a step back as I'm still a bit purplexed over how we deal with vehicles which we know will run differently to what the data says (eg. Lucas pumps and Transit 2.5di) and probably others that I'm unaware of. I'm also a bit cautious of implying to a newcomer that because a vehicle is suitable for a single tank kit, you can run it on vegetable oil with minior or no mods. We have to bear in mind that this data is based entirely on the use of sometimes quite elaborate Elsbett kits and not on our normal 'few minor mods' approach. This qoute from Ruud brought it home to me: "There are more cars possible now with a one tank system. New special nozzles and needles, special glow plugs and sometimes a change of the cars software."
Not exactly our normal 'FPHE and 5% rug' approach!

[Julian]

Good point about the single tanking with specialised equipment.  Wish I knew more about modern cars and veg to be able to help.

How about a rider near the top of the page, along with the BM credit saying something similar to ...

This data is reproduced with kind permission of Biomotors Ltd.  Some vehicles listed as single tank conversions may require additional, specialist equipment to run in this configuration, for example those with Lucas, xxx or xxx injection pumps.  For these vehicles, it is recommended that specialist advise be sought or a twin tank conversion fitted.

Does that make any sense?

[Tony]

Yes.  It would be a shame to not use the data, I think we should publish it as a point of reference but with caveats/disclaimer that it's just guidance.  Where possible if we can link to a wiki page with more detail on the vehicle then that would be good too.