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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 04-11-2013, 03:38 PM   #21 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
I may be having a brain fart but I don't understand this axle swap reasoning. The bigger the rotating mass, the bigger the gearsets and meshes> the more power it absorbs, increasing drivetrain losses. You want the smallest, lightest axle that is strong enough for the job.

__________________


  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Frank Lee For This Useful Post:
mikeyjd (04-11-2013)
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 04-11-2013, 03:42 PM   #22 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
mikeyjd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 838

Matchbox - '93 Ford Festiva L
Team Ford
Last 3: 70.16 mpg (US)

Salamander - '99 Chrysler Concorde LXI
Team Dodge
90 day: 30.3 mpg (US)

Urquhart - '97 Toyota Tacoma 4x4 V6 3.4L DLX
Pickups
90 day: 25.81 mpg (US)

Smudge - '98 Toyota Tacoma
90 day: 40.65 mpg (US)

Calebro - '15 Renault Trafic 1.25 dci
90 day: 39.39 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,380
Thanked 209 Times in 155 Posts
axle swaps important?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee View Post
I may be having a brain fart but I don't understand this axle swap reasoning. The bigger the rotating mass, the bigger the gearsets and meshes> the more power it absorbs, increasing drivetrain losses. You want the smallest, lightest axle that is strong enough for the job.
I think that the concern was addressed by rooster when he noted the huge weight increase of the 4bt (500+ lbs or so i think). I am wondering if that Kubota V2203-DI is big enough to do the trick because i'd love to go smaller/more fe if possible. any more opinions?
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 05:36 PM   #23 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
mikeyjd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 838

Matchbox - '93 Ford Festiva L
Team Ford
Last 3: 70.16 mpg (US)

Salamander - '99 Chrysler Concorde LXI
Team Dodge
90 day: 30.3 mpg (US)

Urquhart - '97 Toyota Tacoma 4x4 V6 3.4L DLX
Pickups
90 day: 25.81 mpg (US)

Smudge - '98 Toyota Tacoma
90 day: 40.65 mpg (US)

Calebro - '15 Renault Trafic 1.25 dci
90 day: 39.39 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,380
Thanked 209 Times in 155 Posts
A quick Question: Why don't the Dodge Dakota's with the 5spd manual 3.9liter get better fe?

Answer: Gasoline...

Last edited by mikeyjd; 04-11-2013 at 05:57 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 08:23 PM   #24 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
We are talking about a heavier engine up front needing a stronger axle out back?
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 10:20 PM   #25 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,209
Thanks: 225
Thanked 811 Times in 594 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr View Post
In many situations, either some knobby tyres or a differential lock could deal with. Other folks often work around the e-brake to get individual secondary levers for each rear wheel, which ends up acting nearly the same way as a limited-slip differential.
I don't think so. The problem with washboards is that the tires are effectively in the air much of the time, so no traction. Plus they speed up a bit, and when they come down are moving a bit faster than they should be, so they spin. With 4WD, the front and back axles aren't likely to be airborne simultaneously, which keeps everything under control.

Then there's the fact that I can just buy a 4WD truck and not spend time messing with mods that may or may not work. And I get a low range to boot. Put knobby tires on it and there goes my highway mpg...
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to jamesqf For This Useful Post:
Frank Lee (04-11-2013)
Old 04-12-2013, 02:58 AM   #26 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts


4x4 FTW!
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2013, 08:23 AM   #27 (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 737 Times in 557 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by bestclimb View Post
I fell for this line of thought before the 2wd rig I have is less than useless for half the year, the other half it is very limited. A 2wd truck works for you and that's great for most people though if they are going to use it off road 2wd is a severe penalty.

If you are going off road bring some recovery gear, jack shovel, hand winch and a snatch strap at least. With 2wd you get stuck in a spot that a 4wd will just walk through. Getting stuck has less to do with the vehicle and more to do with the driver misreading the vehicle's capabilities.
I think we should distinguish what is meant by "off road". I daily run quite a few miles on "unpaved" oil lease roads. 4WD is not an advantage long term. Higher up front costs, far higher maintenance costs, and the FE penalty (not to mention on-road safety penalty due to poorer braking and greater rollover propensity). The Forest Service roads in the Lower 48 have some similarities, but it would be the grades (up & down) that are the big difference that would make 4WD a more likely choice.

If the OP has some business reason (income-generating or offsetting) to run unpaved roads in and out of the hills or mountains I'd imagine he'd say so. And I'd agree that those "roads" and places where roads don't exist are the province of 4WD. In which case truck spec rules out 30-mpg (short of some world-truck Japanese diesel which are not sold here) for on-road economy.

Fuel economy means trade-offs. The lack of "convenience" means being slower.

It comes down to the payload. What are all the costs involved in the "convenience" of a pickup truck? It may be possible to have a small pickup that comes close to averaging 30-mpg . . but it sure won't be easy, either. Not on a small budget. Trailers have the advantage, thus far (until the OP more clearly defines needs over wants).

.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2013, 09:01 AM   #28 (permalink)
Super Lurker!
 
Slow_s10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Posts: 88

Rusty - '88 Chevrolet S10 base
90 day: 23.72 mpg (US)

Doc - '08 Honda Civic EX-L
90 day: 29.6 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4
Thanked 14 Times in 11 Posts
I know this has already been discussed to death but I just want to throw out there that you really need to identify why you want a 4wd truck. And not just that but break it down why do you need a truck? what do you intend to haul with it? Why do you need 4WD? where are you planning on taking it? Or are you just trying to hedge against what you might need it for someday?

The only reason I ask is because for 6 years my daily driver was a 2.2L 1998 S10 (not the one in my Avatar) and I averaged a solid 28mpg in it without even trying. With my best one tank average at 31... which again compared to what I know now I still wasn't even trying that hard, not to mention I had a full load in the truck including a passenger. But I have I hauled everything I ever needed to haul with it that truck, and I have driven it everywhere I have ever needed to go including on some (very) mild offroad trails and through some of the worst winter storms our area has ever seen.

Now don't get me wrong if you need something that can legitimately haul a serious load and do it far off the beaten path then by all means keep researching and find (or build) the ideal truck for yourself. But All I am saying is make sure that you stay realistic about what you need. When It comes to trucks you can pretty much have any three of these, Capacity, Capibility, Efficency, or Cost. But that last point is almost always going to suffer, you just need to nail down what your priority is.
__________________
-Kevin
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2013, 10:23 AM   #29 (permalink)
Corporate imperialist
 
oil pan 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico (USA)
Posts: 11,185

Sub - '84 Chevy Diesel Suburban C10
SUV
90 day: 19.5 mpg (US)

camaro - '85 Chevy Camaro Z28

Riot - '03 Kia Rio POS
Team Hyundai
90 day: 30.21 mpg (US)

Bug - '01 VW Beetle GLSturbo
90 day: 26.43 mpg (US)

Sub2500 - '86 GMC Suburban C2500
90 day: 11.95 mpg (US)

Snow flake - '11 Nissan Leaf SL
SUV
90 day: 141.63 mpg (US)
Thanks: 270
Thanked 3,528 Times in 2,802 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr View Post
knobby tyres.
Don't run mud or AT tires on the highway. If you are like most people and do 99% of your driving on paved roads then you do not need mud or AT tires.
If you occasionally need mud tires then I offer 2 alternatives:

1, Buy a set of deticated mud tires and put them on their own rims.
2, Get a set of snow chains and put them on highway tires for trail use.

I learned the tire chain trick about a month after I put the yoko AT-S tires on my suburban.
__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2013, 11:57 AM   #30 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
mikeyjd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 838

Matchbox - '93 Ford Festiva L
Team Ford
Last 3: 70.16 mpg (US)

Salamander - '99 Chrysler Concorde LXI
Team Dodge
90 day: 30.3 mpg (US)

Urquhart - '97 Toyota Tacoma 4x4 V6 3.4L DLX
Pickups
90 day: 25.81 mpg (US)

Smudge - '98 Toyota Tacoma
90 day: 40.65 mpg (US)

Calebro - '15 Renault Trafic 1.25 dci
90 day: 39.39 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,380
Thanked 209 Times in 155 Posts
OK. So here's where I am at in my research stage:

1. I probably don't "need" 4wd (although it would be convenient at times. chains will likely work fine)

2. I want a Diesel (I plan on a DIY wvo conversion down the road)

3. I probably don't need to tow anything over 5000 pounds ( a full smaller work/utility trailer or popup camper)

4. It only needs 2 seats (although I like bigger cabs for the luxury of it)


These findings are moving me toward a vw rabbit caddy with a beefed upped suspension
(double up the leaf springs was said to make it similar payload to a 1ton) and perhaps a locking differential. What do you guys think of the caddy idea? Potential shortfalls include?

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Tags
truck





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com