Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-26-2019, 11:26 AM   #21 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 2,442

2004 CTD - '04 DODGE RAM 2500 SLT
Team Cummins
90 day: 19.36 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,422
Thanked 731 Times in 553 Posts
Brakes (on the early HPCR) is still MOPAR PREMIUM parts line. I’ve seen nothing better on any forum (RAYBESTOS rotors a possibility, but I never saw any follow up).

They’ll last well over 100k with ease.

Where one has MORE THAN 1-2 emergency braking situations annually, is a driver problem badly in need of correction. Not applicable. Same for trailering. Bad trailer brakes are just that (not a truck brake problem).

How well the brakes moderate speed given a decent payload (50% of rating) is the test. (Degree & Duration, again).

Big toe or a big boot, to effect slowing momentum?

As it’s a downshift that’s more at stake (getting out of OD into Direct) sensitivity will come to regular exercise given new truck spec brakes.

.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 12-31-2019, 10:43 AM   #22 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: PNW
Posts: 114
Thanks: 11
Thanked 26 Times in 21 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowmover View Post
1). Since the changes started for FE = Odometer Miles?

2). Engine Hours (looking for Average MPH over that span of miles as a change in Average MPH can account for all claimed MPG improvement).

3). Fuel cost (CPM; cents-per-mile; adjusted to a constant dollar figure per gallon).

Against:

A). Net income used to purchase supplies, gear, equipment for FE changes.

B). CPM adjusted accordingly (for, as a “fuel cost”, vehicle expense has increased)

It’s one thing to talk of improvements, but it’s only after their advantage has recouped cost that savings begin. (This would include those things removed)

Net income, is the thing. 12% reduction has meaning. In a 20,000-mile year at $3/gl it’s almost $500 in fuel (160-gals).


The real questions are:

I). What’s the CPM trend, in other words? Conjecture is that it hasn’t improved at all in spending-to-save (miles held constant).

II). Have e-fans (all changes) been put to the test? Towing greatest trailer frontal area and/or weight? Max axle loads with or without trailer? Otherwise need to add a note that truck has been de-rated to half-ton status regarding ability to do work.

Optimization of “empty” isn’t an FE goal for a pickup truck.

And I suggest you put the truck on a CAT Scale. My ‘04 2WD weighed more than 6800# when new. (CAT SCALE app. As the heaviest tire load per axle is the single accurate method of setting cold tire pressure it’s a necessary tool).

.
Yes fans have been put to the test, but not by me however...
https://www.cumminsforum.com/forum/3...eed-ideas.html

I dont tow and dont haul anything heavy. If I did, I'd adjust as needed. Truck is my only ride and my baby (since 2006). Its been lifted, dropped, go-fast modded, air-borne at one time and continues to serve. These days its only seeing mountain dirt roads and lots of hiway miles getting there (trail heads for trail work & hiking)

RE: optimization statement... it is for me :-) <- I did the math at a co-workers request, saving $1100/yr for 35K & up miles driven over when I started. Since some mods paid for others, its a huge gray area as to where it sits $ wise on expenses. And to be open, the $ is not a concern... the challenge of getting the most mpg out of it is where the fun is. The $ saved just buys me another beer in the end lol.

I weighed my truck years back with different heavier wheels and a heavier tonneau cover, came i right at 7k. The pink slip showed something like 6850 so I'm betting its probably now at 6900 or so #.


Went from 18-20 mpg year round to 21-23 mpg year round after all the changes. These days, I have to drive real stupid to get to approx 20.5's for mpg.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2019, 10:57 AM   #23 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: PNW
Posts: 114
Thanks: 11
Thanked 26 Times in 21 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowmover View Post
I recall that you’ve upgraded steering (now have ZERO play?), then it’s control over body motion that is the next step in reducing degree & duration of steering input. The minimum acceptable test is 3-seconds at 65-mph. On the count of three, are you on road or in ditch (crosswind tells truth)?

Optimize steering by:

1). HENDERSONS LINE-UP, for rear axle Panhard Rod (track bar).

2). ADDCO, for smallest rear anti-roll bar, plus up-sizing front bar smallest step (both required).

3). BILSTEIN 5100 a typical upgrade to stock shock absorbers, but better can be had. Controlling spring action vital to smooth (near-linear) steering response.

No bed wag, no body roll = less effort at all times, plus cleaner transitions per any application of what matters:

A). Steering
B). Brakes
C). Throttle

You’ve been focused on the least important of these attributes.

What can the truck do if we eliminate driver-introduced problems? A 2-300 mile loop with a 17-year old girl at wheel back to same pump otherwise on cruise control at 55 to 58-mph with ZERO acceleration, braking or lane-changing EXCEPT as law requires.

In other words, where is the baseline? (Which is lane-centered, steady-state. Cruise-control, no changes from this at all).

How many course corrections in 100-miles?
I’d bet it’s still SIGNIFICANTLY more than with the rack & pinion on mine.
Which would tell me there is still work to do.

But the test is needed. How one chooses to drive otherwise doesn’t matter. So long as the truck — left alone — is “better”. . . is what’s at stake.

Ever owned a rifle better than you? Same principle.

What can it do without hitting the 60-mph aero wall?
Any driver.
Simple rules

.
At the moment the only steering upgrade is the Red Head box. It does have an updated tracbar but thats not steering related

Suspension has Rancho RS9000's & sumo springs front & rear. Rear is setup to come in contact with the axle early so there is little movement back there. The front & rear is stock height, considering going to a softer oem spring pair that I have which would lower the front a tad bit more.

I practice some of what you preach... minimal lane changes, found that CC works best for minimal load changes.

The reduction in rotating mass allowed me to dial back fueling quite a bit. I'm cruising now at 60 mph, 1775 or so rpms doing 11~11.5k psi. Room for improvement there still.


Quote:
No bed wag, no body roll = less effort at all times, plus cleaner transitions per any application of what matters:

A). Steering
B). Brakes
C). Throttle
I disagree... steering is straight... can go greater than 10 seconds on flat roads before any correction is needed. Brakes, actually, yeah your right, there are spring clips I have in the amazon cart to pull the pads back, that needs attention. As it is coasting is pretty damn good in neutral (manual trans) Throttle... Addressed in the tune. Changed the fueling considerably including the throttle table.

What would be interesting to see is what you could pull out of a tank with an optimized truck. Yours is not even close to being optimized. 4 years ago when I first started using HPTuners I had basically the same tune I have now but was miserable. truck was a smokey mess and had no power. mpg was in the 18's with me trying to milk every mile.. Now with the updates & reduced rotating mass, it is significantly better and still have room to pull fuel back more. Zero daily driving issues, still plenty of throttle response to execute passes, hill climbs etc.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2019, 04:34 PM   #24 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: arkansas
Posts: 544

"Proper Shitbox" (SOLD) - '96 Honda Civic LX fully optioned no weight reduction
90 day: 41.9 mpg (US)

Plue Brius - '10 Toyota Prius II
90 day: 57.73 mpg (US)

The Smoke Bomb - '96 Ford Ranger
Thanks: 161
Thanked 93 Times in 74 Posts
If you can do without, those tow mirrors are horrible for aerodynamics. swap to smaller mirrors and sell yours for a dolla dolla bill to some 16 year old looking to squat his truck and put on diesel mirrors.
__________________
"I feel like the bad decisions come into play when you trade too much of your time for money paying for things you can't really afford."

2010 Prius
1996 Ranger
1987 Bass Tracker 70hp Yamaha
1970s 15' Water Rover 30hp Yamaha
2009 Suzuki GS500F
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2020, 09:35 AM   #25 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: PNW
Posts: 114
Thanks: 11
Thanked 26 Times in 21 Posts
Nope, need those tow mirrors and I have the stubby ones in a box.


making progress... fans are killing me so i fixed it, well not quite, i unplugged them. now it runs more consistent and closet to the target CT




yesterday while out all day i noted that timing is off in the cruise rpm region of 1750-1800. rattling when up at temp. a recent drop of RP in that area and the lack of consistent temps led to the timing being off. 1 quick fix & download and no more rattle. timing is still not optimized for it though but at least no more rattle.

...and, it is a pretty smoke free tune at this point
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to steve05ram360 For This Useful Post:
Ecky (01-02-2020)
Old 01-04-2020, 03:14 AM   #26 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 306

Jeep - '97 Jeep Cherokee Sport
90 day: 19.36 mpg (US)
Thanks: 104
Thanked 57 Times in 51 Posts
Where did you get those vents in your wheel wells?
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2020, 10:51 PM   #27 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: PNW
Posts: 114
Thanks: 11
Thanked 26 Times in 21 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taylor95 View Post
Where did you get those vents in your wheel wells?
home depot... $5 ea, needed 2
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2020, 02:53 PM   #28 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Briggsdale, Colorado
Posts: 296

Wildfire - '96 Ford Bronco XL
90 day: 14.88 mpg (US)

Blackford - '96 Ford Bronco XLT
90 day: 20.26 mpg (US)

Y2k - '00 Honda Insight
Gen-1 Insights
Team Honda
90 day: 73.98 mpg (US)

Redford V10 - '01 Ford F250 Lariat
90 day: 15.64 mpg (US)

FireFly - '00 Honda Insight DX
90 day: 69.43 mpg (US)

LittleRed - '00 Honda Insight
Thanks: 3
Thanked 31 Times in 14 Posts
My opinion:
Tires. Use highway treads and pump them up to max cold pressure or a little more.
Slow acceleration.
55 mph or less, preferably stay at the speed overdrive gear shifts to.
Don't use the A/C.
Don't use the heater til you reach operating temperature.
If you have a programmer, set it to the one that gives the highest timing advance.
Aero mods and such will just nickle and dime you to death.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2020, 10:24 AM   #29 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: PNW
Posts: 114
Thanks: 11
Thanked 26 Times in 21 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by 99metro View Post
My opinion:
Tires. Use highway treads and pump them up to max cold pressure or a little more.
Slow acceleration.
55 mph or less, preferably stay at the speed overdrive gear shifts to.
Don't use the A/C.
Don't use the heater til you reach operating temperature.
If you have a programmer, set it to the one that gives the highest timing advance.
Aero mods and such will just nickle and dime you to death.
I have Toyo Open Country AT2's, street tires wont cut it off road and I run them at 50~54 psi (54 up front).
Speeds are at 60~62 for best mpg
Whats A/C?
Takes 20 minutes to get to operating temp IF outside ambient temps are 45 or higher. And even then its not at my target temp of 200*f. I need to get a PWM controller on the water pump to fix this.
Tuning, I do my own using HP Tuners
Aero mods, did those back in 2018 (the bet from co-worker that I could not get 5 tanks to average 23+ mpg) so the nickle has already been spent. The dime would be spent to clean up the flow under the truck, only have the 2nd air dam I made under the front swaybar.

As it sits, I am lucky to hit 70*f IATs, this sucks for FE, I also dont heat soak the coolant except on longer trips, 40~50+ miles before I get there. Once I do get there it is pretty stable @ +/-5*f.

My best bet is to slow the water pump down to a minimum speed at CTs below ~160-180 then bring speed up based on CT. I also thought about blocking or diverting airflow to the motor behind the fans. Had a battery cable go bad which put one of my fans on overdrive speed (was on low setting) and dropped engine temps down to the 170*f range pretty quick. The other fan was slowed down as it was hooked to the other battery that was not getting charged. Alt charges passenger side batt, crossover cable connects the drivers side batt, that cable went bad. Fan on overdrive was on the passenger side batt.

Since I have already been close to 23 on winter fuel in cooler temps, I would suspect that once I get the cooling 100% under control, 23+ under all conditions should be attainable.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2020, 12:17 PM   #30 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 2,442

2004 CTD - '04 DODGE RAM 2500 SLT
Team Cummins
90 day: 19.36 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,422
Thanked 731 Times in 553 Posts
Mine was “optimized” before the dealers lot (ha!).

The biggest differences between your modded and my stock trucks:

1). IFS, plus rack & pinion steering as it’s 2WD vs 4.

2). Lower ride height plus weight within 40-lbs each corner (50/50 weight balance).

3). Suspension upgraded for handling (larger anti-roll bar front and altogether new at rear) (No tail-out. Yours does. Load the bed and see for yourself. Even with more power you couldn’t keep up with me if I decided to leave. Mine needs LESS EFFORT per design, first; improved handling, second; far better tires, third).

4). Highway-only tires (where yours always loses 2+).

What’s less desirable for MPG on mine is a bed-height topper for the 8’ bed.
And that I outweigh you by 1,000-lbs. (15%).

My dead-certain, just leave-it-on-cruise planning MPG is 24 (25 actual). Ranges to 27-mpg over same conditions.

If I drop it to 54-mph I break 30-mpg with ease (showing 33 which is 31.5).

I’ve spent nothing on the drivetrain past maintenance.

I’d recommend you drop down to 58/9-mph. Try a run after a fuel top-off (auto stop) and a Cat Scale weigh. Out 100-miles and back to same pump. Get 50-70 miles warmup done before fuel/weigh. It’s the right baseline number as aero has taken over at 60. Get wind resistance pushed aside as it’s never the same.

Over a 250k range, with $3 diesel, I’m $9,000 ahead in fuel savings versus someone 4-mpg less in annual average MPG than me (and who is himself above average). I’m on tire set number two, battery set number two, one brake pad change, original clutch, ball joints, tie rods, etc. $500 otherwise in repairs at 16-years.

It’s the overall savings. Not just fuel.

Depreciation is now $4k in 12-years based on current ads and condition.

Optimized?

I could walk away now and the vehicle cost was free past fuel + insurance, etc.

I know you’re aiming that word at EEC, but I only drive 5-6k miles annually. An improved FE profile won’t really matter. The truck has always bee n grossly overpowered for my needs; solo at 8k, towing at 18k. (I used to hitch up to trailers that — alone — weighed 22k when running hotshot in another man’s truck. Didn’t lack then either).

I haven’t ruled it out . . . but improving ONLY steady-state highway MPG means a trade-off elsewhere. I can do 21-mpg around town as it is

I believe a conveyor belt front air-dam and side-skirts will take care of that. And until that test is administered, there’s NO point to changing engine timing and fuel delivery.

Getting the driver out of the equation remains the most difficult task at EM forum. Inordinate belief in “skill when it’s really the vehicle. Inadequate testing.

Now, all that out of the way, I’m on the same page as you. For me the fun will be once I’m retired. Maybe before then. Because I want to get my TRAILERING average up to the 18-mpg others with Third Gen see while solo. 17 I’ve hit. Just not consistent my. It’s more the trailer at this point.

As the RV’ers eyes pop out already with my 15-mpg AVERAGE pulling a 35’ travel trailer, ha!
.


Last edited by slowmover; 01-09-2020 at 12:31 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com