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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 02-05-2011, 11:46 PM   #11 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Rick323's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Northeast Pa
Posts: 62

Rust bucket - '05 Toyota Tacoma 4x4 TRD
90 day: 19.75 mpg (US)

Red Raven - '16 Ram 2500 Tradesman
90 day: 18.18 mpg (US)

Black Cruze - '18 chevrolet cruze ls
90 day: 43.09 mpg (US)
Thanks: 8
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Just my $0.02. If your engine (5.0 L) redlines around 5500rpm then I would say, low range rpm is 0-2000(2200), mid range 2000-3200(3500), high range 3500 up. I'd say your rpms fall in the low range.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 02-06-2011, 03:00 AM   #12 (permalink)
Junkyard Engineer
 
Jim-Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New Port Richey, Florida
Posts: 167

Super-Metro! - '92 Geo Metro Base

$250 Pizza Delivery Car - '91 Geo Metro Base
Team Metro
90 day: 43.75 mpg (US)

Fronty the wonder truck - '98 Nissan Frontier XE
Thanks: 7
Thanked 19 Times in 12 Posts
Work on low end torque for better fuel economy. You didn't specify which engine you have, but I will assume it is a Windsor 302. They make a fair amount of torque stock (well...for an engine with a short stroke and short rods...), but you should be able to get a cam that will enhance it. Also, if you want headers, go for tri Y headers as they tend to increase low end torque at the expense of high RPM horsepower. Now, as far as your transmission is concerned, I will assume you have an AOD-E. I would reprogram the transmission's computer to not kick down until it has far more throttle input. You could also consider switching to the GT40P heads off of a 5.0 Explorer as they are more efficient and I believe they have a better combustion chamber shape than the E-7 style heads you likely have stock. I would also add that adding torque will make the truck better in every way that a truck needs to be better. It won't make it fast but it will feel quicker off the line. Still, I would try to limit your use of the truck to utility duties as much as possible as it is not really ever going to be all that fuel efficient. The engine is too large, the frontal area is terrible and the cd is not much better than that of a barn door. You can mitigate that somewhat by lowering it substantially (say, 8 inches) and adding an air dam and a removable partial grill block. If you do the grill block though, consider a larger radiator from a 1 ton truck with a 460 or a diesel. That chassis was made for a long time so finding one shouldn't be too hard. The reasoning is that with the grille partially blocked, the extra surface area will make the most of what little isn't blocked and still allow it to cool.
__________________
No green technology will ever make a substantive environmental impact until it is economically viable for most people to use it. This must be from a reduction in net cost of the new technology, not an increase in the cost of the old technology through taxation



(Note: the car sees 100% city driving and is EPA rated at 37 mpg city)
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2011, 04:40 AM   #13 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 257

Winsight - '06 Honda Insight
Gen-1 Insights
90 day: 72.19 mpg (US)
Thanks: 236
Thanked 82 Times in 58 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Execut1ve View Post
so long tube headers are more what I want?
Long tubes and more importantly, small diameter primaries. It's explained well here. Header Basics - How Headers Contribute to Horsepower - Car Craft Magazine
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2011, 04:52 AM   #14 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 119

Laura the Lancer - '81 Mitsibishi lancer LX
Thanks: 0
Thanked 28 Times in 8 Posts
look at your taco (the rev gauge) dived it into 3 even amounts. theirs your low, med, high end rev. my race engine revs to 10,000rpm (not bad for a pushrod engine aye) but yours redlines at 5,000. i suggest you get that cam so you will have more pulling power and won't have to change gears as much (best bang for buck mod)
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2011, 07:33 AM   #15 (permalink)
EcoLurker
 
Execut1ve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Springfield, OH
Posts: 116

truck - '94 Ford F150 XLT
90 day: 13.15 mpg (US)

civic - '00 Honda Civic EX
90 day: 36.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
it is the windsor. you're thinking of the 351, which came in windsor and cleveland. the 302 only came windsor (excluding the new 5.0L on the 2011's, which is a completely different engine with similar displacement). Incidentally my tranny is the 4R70W which I think is a variant of the AOD-E. It's true that the tranny seems reluctant to finally go into OD (and it seems to have trouble with that shift anyway, shudders some)
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2011, 12:26 PM   #16 (permalink)
Master Ecomadman
 
arcosine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 1,146

sc1 - '98 saturn sc1
Team Saturn
90 day: 43.17 mpg (US)

Airplane Bike - '11 home built Carp line Tour

rans - '97 rans tailwind

tractor - '66 International Cub cadet 129

2002 Space Odyssey - '02 Honda Odyssey EX-L
90 day: 28.25 mpg (US)

red bug - '00 VW beetle TDI

big tractor - '66 ford 3400

red vw - '00 VW new beetle TDI
90 day: 58.42 mpg (US)

RV - '88 Winnebago LeSharo
90 day: 16.67 mpg (US)
Thanks: 20
Thanked 328 Times in 223 Posts
Low rpm is better for gas mileage and engine friction losses increase with the square of the RPM.
__________________
- Tony

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2011, 02:24 PM   #17 (permalink)
Making Ecomods a G thing
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 655

Angie - '08 Infiniti G35 X
90 day: 22.03 mpg (US)
Thanks: 35
Thanked 74 Times in 57 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by pounsfos View Post
or you could buy a smaller car bacause ive never seen the point of owning a big car like you americans but thats just me (not taking a swing at ya, just putting my 2c in)
My reasoning for having a larger vehicle is this: I can carry my stuff when i need to, carry my family when i need to, and have fun when i want to, all in 1 vehicle. as of now i'm only getting around 6% above EPA, but my jeep has long legs and gets it's best mileage at highway speeds not driving to and from work.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2011, 06:48 PM   #18 (permalink)
EcoLurker
 
Execut1ve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Springfield, OH
Posts: 116

truck - '94 Ford F150 XLT
90 day: 13.15 mpg (US)

civic - '00 Honda Civic EX
90 day: 36.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Execut1ve View Post
If I could afford a vehicle I would buy one. my other car is a civic
thought I'd add that the truck was a gift, can't argue with that price tag!
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2011, 07:07 PM   #19 (permalink)
EcoLurker
 
Execut1ve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Springfield, OH
Posts: 116

truck - '94 Ford F150 XLT
90 day: 13.15 mpg (US)

civic - '00 Honda Civic EX
90 day: 36.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
just looked it up, for the '94 302 the peak power of 185 hp occurs at 3800 rpm and peak torque of 270 ft/lbs occurs at 2400 rpm. the engine weighs about 440 lbs. It is said that the best fuel econ occurs at 80% of max torque rpm, which would be 1920 rpm.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2011, 10:26 PM   #20 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 119

Laura the Lancer - '81 Mitsibishi lancer LX
Thanks: 0
Thanked 28 Times in 8 Posts
get that cam in their and she'll handle your gearing fine.

before i put my cam in my old car i had to downshift a gear to get up a hill on my route.

with the new cam in i never had to

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com