02-07-2013, 02:35 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 3
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
2wd Durango Thoughts?
So we bought a 2000 2wd Durango (not for the mpg, but we liked the ride and build quality, and we'll be needing more seats soon) but I think this could be a fun challenge, or just frustrating, So tell me what you think about this:
First, an air-dam made of 4" garden trimming
Second, Airtabs or some sort of vortex generators
Third, some sort of flare to keep air from hitting the front tires (they stick out a bit)
Fourth, a plastic body-pan thing underneath most of the vehicle
Fifth, Lowering (maybe 2 rear and 1 front?)
I'm wondering if anyone here has experience with these SUVs, because at first glance, they don't seem to be the least aerodynamically efficient vehicles, and yet the MPGs is terrible! So I wonder if I can hope for any gains at all with aero mods, or if I should just go with something more ambitious like:
Sixth: Engine swap (maybe a 3.3 or 3.9 cummins, with the right drivetrain)
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
|
|
|
Today
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
02-07-2013, 03:10 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,745
Thanks: 206
Thanked 420 Times in 302 Posts
|
You'll be lucky to see more than 18mpg. Your best mods will be aero.
__________________
|
|
|
02-07-2013, 04:11 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 596
Thanks: 133
Thanked 89 Times in 66 Posts
|
Is it a V8 or V6? I wouldn't bother too much with vortex generators (or do a search here for discussions on them). The air dam up front, and tire spats are a great place to start. For lowering, it likely will help, but if you're aiming just to save money, it probably won't be worth it, because the cost will take way too long to pay for itself in savings. However if you want to do it for looks or anything else, then it's all up to you.
Do you do a lot of city or highway driving? I would also recommend an ultragauge or scanguage, to get real time feedback of fuel economy.
__________________
|
|
|
02-07-2013, 04:14 PM
|
#4 (permalink)
|
Smeghead
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Central AK
Posts: 933
Thanks: 32
Thanked 146 Times in 97 Posts
|
I don't know what trim line you ended up with or what else you plan on doing with it, but a more efficient final ratio may be available.
EPA estimates your SUV to get 15 combined. If you increase by 50% Which, is doable by avoiding the brakes, slowing down a bit, and making sure your tires are inflated, you are still only getting 22mpg.
fuel economy readout is very key
If mileage is a concern there may be more suitable vehicles.
__________________
Learn from the mistakes of others, that way when you mess up you can do so in new and interesting ways.
One mile of road will take you one mile, one mile of runway can take you around the world.
|
|
|
02-07-2013, 04:16 PM
|
#5 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Knoxville TN
Posts: 16
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
If it is the 4.7l removing the clutch fan helped my Dakota as long as it has a electric fan for the AC.
__________________
|
|
|
02-07-2013, 04:54 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
|
Hypermiler
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,321
Thanks: 611
Thanked 433 Times in 283 Posts
|
What does this offer that a 20 mpg minivan doesn't?
__________________
11-mile commute: 100 mpg - - - Tank: 90.2 mpg / 1191 miles
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to PaleMelanesian For This Useful Post:
|
|
02-07-2013, 04:58 PM
|
#7 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,745
Thanks: 206
Thanked 420 Times in 302 Posts
|
The old durango was v8 standard, and if im not mistaken that year was either the 318/5.2 or the 360/5.9. You should be able to do a wai.
__________________
|
|
|
02-07-2013, 05:00 PM
|
#8 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Knoxville TN
Posts: 16
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
If it has the 318 or 360, good luck.
__________________
|
|
|
02-07-2013, 05:07 PM
|
#9 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: ff
Posts: 459
Thanks: 59
Thanked 38 Times in 30 Posts
|
To answer quickly first look in old threads as myself and 2 others have fought this battle already on a few fronts.
Second for the guy who said why not just get the mini van It has a whole style aspect unavailible to all but the new Honda van that I think is a strangely sexy car.???
Dont expect a miracle here as this is a gas sucking pig, well mine is at least.
But its soo fun to drive! FYI ive got the Dakota R/T
The 4 cyl sport truck guys ive spoken with clim mid 30 mpg.
mabe you could drop in one.
|
|
|
02-07-2013, 09:00 PM
|
#10 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Apprentice
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: winterpeg, manisnowba
Posts: 211
Thanks: 9
Thanked 18 Times in 18 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by d.clair.robinson
First, an air-dam made of 4" garden trimming
i'd to this first
Second, Airtabs or some sort of vortex generators
i wouldn't bother with these
Third, some sort of flare to keep air from hitting the front tires (they stick out a bit)
Fifth, Lowering (maybe 2 rear and 1 front?)
if you can skinnier tall tires
Fourth, a plastic body-pan thing underneath most of the vehicle
I'm wondering if anyone here has experience with these SUVs, because at first glance, they don't seem to be the least aerodynamically efficient vehicles, and yet the MPGs is terrible! So I wonder if I can hope for any gains at all with aero mods, or if I should just go with something more ambitious like:
Sixth: Engine swap (maybe a 3.3 or 3.9 cummins, with the right drivetrain)
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
|
which engine do you have?(4.7,5.2,5.9)
well at least you didn't get the 4x4 version my brother has. I have airtabs on my jeep; they cost me 40km per tank last summer when i put them on, though they do increase my coasting distance/speed; i think.
ps. if you have a luggage rack remove it
Last edited by baldlobo; 02-07-2013 at 09:06 PM..
|
|
|
|