My Ford Ranger - Project Log

[nathan01xl]

Originally Posted by Fastskiguy

Love to hear if dropping it helps....I've got an F150 that could be lower so I'm interested in what you find

it will help, question is how much. another 2" up front will bring my air dam that much close to the ground,reduce my total frontal area, and close up some fender well gap.

[d0sitmatr]

Originally Posted by nathan01xl

3.0l auto is not a good recipe for fuel mileage unfortunately. that engine may be bullet proof but it is neither powerful or efficient, particularly when mated with an automatic transmission. Do all you can with aero mods, an electric fan conversion, weight savings, and driving technique but i would bet your ceiling is around 30-35 mpgs.

your absolutely right about that, the best I was able to achieve was 28mpg on my 99 ranger with the 3.0l, and that was only once. my goal was 30mpg, but I finally decided to get a more family friendly vehicle and couldnt afford to do so without using the ranger as a trade.
I have a mock up of aero mods I was planning on putting on my truck somewhere on the forums, you might be able to find it by doing a search of my moniker here.

[radioranger]

just bought and iinstalled an ultra gauge it wont fit th eold ranger but the 98 escort loves it and def worth it .

[nathan01xl]

Originally Posted by radioranger

just bought and iinstalled an ultra gauge it wont fit th eold ranger but the 98 escort loves it and def worth it .

good buy, best mod i have made yet

[nathan01xl]

Originally Posted by d0sitmatr

your absolutely right about that, the best I was able to achieve was 28mpg on my 99 ranger with the 3.0l, and that was only once. my goal was 30mpg, but I finally decided to get a more family friendly vehicle and couldnt afford to do so without using the ranger as a trade.
I have a mock up of aero mods I was planning on putting on my truck somewhere on the forums, you might be able to find it by doing a search of my moniker here.

i dont really understand the purpose of the 3.0l, especially post 2001. it has basically the same power as the 2.3l duratec (150 hp to 143 hp) and marginally more torque (180 to 154) but considering the extra weight of the engine itself and that the 2.3l revs much better the power difference is negligible. On top of that the 3.0 gets about the same mileage as the 4.0 ranger does, about 10 mpgs worse than the 2.3l.

[nathan01xl]

had a bit of a mental breakthrough in regards to hypermiling on the drive home from work today. i told myself that if i was using the engine that i may as well be accelerating and if i didnt need to accelerate i would eoc. ended up getting 45 mpgs on the way home which is better even than my best trip with ethanol free gas. probably also due in part to it being much less windy today. the way i mentally arrived at that realization is that engines produce power more efficiency under load, each engine differently of course. i find that at about 75% load i can average close to 25 mpgs accelerating between 45(1600 rpm) and 65(2300 rpm) mph on flat ground. after the same mph change of glide i am able to nearly match he distance it took me to accelerate and average close to 50 mpgs. this is compared to maybe 40 mpg cruising at 55 mph average speed. this is all stuff that i had read and knew before but sometimes you just have to see things in practice to really understand why and how it works.

today i also got over the slight embarrassment of rolling under 20 mph for 1/8th mile into what is currently a green but will inevitably be a red light. everyone flies by and looks at you funny but after the red light i always end up right next to them again.

[slowmover]

Have you read Diesel Dave's thread on the 2,000-mile tank of fuel? In it there are posts in re the way he charts data (climate/terrain/temps, etc) as well as discussion of average speed versus engine hours, etc. I, too, have a UG (and like it) but there is room for the larger picture as well.

Note also engine coolant and oil heaters (trans and rear axle also?}. You guys with fixed commutes have some things very easy that make this electrical draw a measurable, efficient benefit.

NIce job, thread much enjoyed (but I'd put the wipers back on, you ain't saving enough [no one does] to offset the safety penalty).

.

[radioranger]

I try to accelerate and then very slightly back off the throttle , generating just enough power to keep the tranny and axles spinning, efffectively coasting down slowly, the result is better fe and a slight variance in the speed maybe 7 mph or so , then slowly accelerating back to target speed, should provide a rest for the engine between pulls and allow oil to keep in place,

[radioranger]

I wondered about just lowering the back of the truck a few inchs to get a better windsheild and hood andle as well as the roof, say the equivalent of a loaded truck in profile.

[user removed]

Very nice mileage in your Ranger. They seem to be fairly easy to get good mileage for a small truck. Last tank on my 97 was 33.51 MPG, but I never EOC. I like to gradually accelerate to about 5 over and then coast to 5 under my average speed when going 45-55 MPH, above that and it gets about the same mileage either way. Below than and you can cost a lot longer.

regards
Mech