View Single Post
Old 11-14-2010, 07:17 PM   #17 (permalink)
ShadeTreeMech
Basjoos Wannabe
 
ShadeTreeMech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 870

The Van - '97 Mercury Villager gs
90 day: 19.8 mpg (US)

Lyle the Kindly Viking - '99 Volvo V70
90 day: 25.82 mpg (US)
Thanks: 174
Thanked 49 Times in 32 Posts
The reason I mentioned the PS was due to the possibility of an easy fitment. Depending on his skill, I would say a 3.9L Cummins would do fine, and get better mileage, or even one of the Mercedes 5 cylinder diesels used in the Dodge Sprinter. The Mercedes is a true winner, with a higher red line and common rail injection.

In defense of the PS, I have a friend with a 96 F-250 with crew cab, 4wd, auto, and long bed, as well as a lead foot, and he gets from 19-20 mpg. So it can be a good engine, although I admit it being a bit overkill in the displacement area.

When I was on a diesel forum, it was common knowledge that adding a turbo generally improved economy by helping to reduce unburnt fuel. Assuming the fuel screw isn't adjusted from the NA setting, economy can only go up.

And again, the question is what purpose will the van serve? That will help with the question of how much to spend on a refitment of drivetrain components. If it sees little use, I'd say fix the engine.
__________________
RIP Maxima 1997-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf View Post
I think you missed the point I was trying to make, which is that it's not rational to do either speed or fuel economy mods for economic reasons. You do it as a form of recreation, for the fun and for the challenge.
  Reply With Quote