The use of mismatched Fuel pumps can cause a major drop in fuel efficiency. For instance, a comparative test experiment conducted by an independent testing organization in 2023 on 12 independent Fuel pumps revealed that due to a fuel pressure output deviation of more than ±0.8 Bar (the factory setting is 3.5±0.2 Bar), the range of variation in the air-fuel ratio of the vehicle was increased to ±1.2 (the default setting is ±0.3), leading directly to an increase in fuel consumption between 1.5 to 2.3 liters per 100 kilometers. For example, let us consider the Ford EcoBoost 1.5T engine. Upon the fitting of the non-standard Fuel Pump, to compensate for the insufficient fuel supply, the ECU enhanced the injection pulse width by 15%, increased the diameter of fuel atomization particles by 28%, reduced the thermal efficiency from 38% to 33%, and increased the mean annual fuel price by approximately 1,800 yuan.
The fuel pump vs. engine compatibility variations can create a wedge in the fuel supply curve precision. Internal tests of Volkswagen Group in 2021 showed that when the high-flow racing Fuel Pump was mismatched to the EA211 engine, despite the highest flow rate reaching 12 liters per minute (while the original factory demand was 8.5 liters per minute), the fuel pressure dropped sharply by 17% in the low-speed region, and the carbon deposit rate in the combustion chamber increased by 42%. The power output degrades by 8% at 15,000 kilometers. Fitting a mechanical Fuel pump (to be used in conjunction with an electronic variable displacement pump) into a Toyota hybrid model by error delays the response of the system’s fuel pressure regulation by 0.3 seconds, resulting in incessant switching of the THS-II hybrid logic. The energy efficiency is lost by 36.6% as the fuel consumption increases from 4.1 liters per 100 kilometers to 5.6 liters in urban conditions.
Energy efficiency loss is further compounded by defects in the process and poor-quality materials. A 2022 study by China’s Society of Automotive Engineers of China (SAE-China) mentioned that the likelihood of deformation of the spurious Fuel Pump using zinc alloy impellers in high temperature (90℃) is 9 times greater compared to genuine stainless steel impellers, resulting in a periodic oscillation of ±20% of fuel flow, equivalent to combustion energy loss of 127 kilojoules per liter of gasoline. J.D.’s survey report. Power in the United States shows that among the car owners who replaced the low-price Fuel pumps, 63% had a fuel gauge error of more than ±8% (normal value ±3%) within three months, and the effective volume utilization rate of the fuel tank decreased by 15%, and the hidden fuel cost increased by an average of 540 yuan per year.
Industry cases have verified the importance of precise matching. In 2020, when the Tesla Model S owner self-adjusted the high-power Fuel pump, due to the incompatibility between the pressure sensor and the BMS protocol, the system overestimated the driving range and triggered the battery overcharge protection. The actual energy efficiency dropped from 605 Wh/km to 742 Wh/km, and the efficiency fell by 22.6%. When, after the BMW B48 engine was recalled and a compliant Fuel pump was replaced, the test fuel consumption at the NEDC cycle bounced back from 6.8 liters per 100 kilometers to 6.1 liters with a fuel economy improvement of 11.5%. According to Frost & Sullivan’s estimation, the global Fuel waste due to incorrect fuel pump selection will be 4.7 billion liters in 2025. Through extensive adoption of the intelligent pressure closed-loop control system, inefficient fuel injection can be reduced by 21%, which translates to the reduction of 3.4 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually.
