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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 07-12-2016, 04:27 PM   #1 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Ideas to increase F350 MPG (DIY Cyl Deact?)

Hello All!

I have a 96 Ford F350 4x4, 7.5l (460), Manual with MAF.

I have another vehicle for daily commuting and non-hauling needs. But when I go to haul with the truck most of the time I am nowhere near maxing out the hauling power and I would like to get some more MPG with little loads and when going to pick them up.

I got this truck because I will soon be moving out to my cabin and hauling my own water which will effectively use the power of the engine, and when Im hauling a near maximum towing load I dont mind low MPG. However often times when hauling a light load or going to pick something up and I am empty I would like to see if anyone has any suggetions to increase MPG.

I am currently tuning up and refreshing all the components of this old truck. I also am driving using as many hypermiling techniques as I feel comfortable with. Many suggestions such as aero covers, or weight reduction, etc are not possible as this is a work truck. I would just like to see even 15mpg when empty haha.

The only thought I have had and please let me know what you think is a DIY cylinder deactivation. Now I see many threads on that, but I have a different idea than other threads I have read and intereted in your input. First it would be a purely electrical bypass setup as I do not want to mess with engine internals and sadly there is no bolt on kit to purchase for this engine. Im thinking adding resistors and bypass contacts to all of the fuel injectors as well as the (2) o2 sensors and having a small control panel in the cab. So I envision a switch that is power mode and economy mode. Power mode is exactly what it is right now stock. Economy mode will engage the o2 sensors resistors to fool them into reading a perfect a/f ratio (this i think is needed since I will not be closing off cylinders and the extra air from them will give the sensors a false lean reading and dump in extra fuel to compensate negating what im trying to accomplish). At the same time I will engage half the fuel injectors resistors (exact cylinder numbers to be determined) so half of the engine will not be getting fuel. Now I also envision some sort of relay or timer that will switch between half the injectors and the other half every cycle or every minute in an attempt to keep the wear and temps even.

Firstly I am interested in opinions on the concept only for the time being. The exact relay or programming logic to sucessfully switch between injectors can be determined later on as well as which cylinders to deactivate at one time.

Also I understand there will be pumping losses with this setup. As I stated im not interested in fabricating my own hardware to completely shutoff the valves to a cylinder.

So what do you think?.. Is it at all a sound proposal? Will the pumping losses to be too great and not worth any of this effort in improving MPG? Also I understand by cutting half my injectors I will not be getting 2x my MPG, but in your opinion what increase could I expect? 10%, 20%, 50%? If the increase is not enough then I am not much interested in pursueing this option.

Thank you all very much!!!

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 07-12-2016, 08:58 PM   #2 (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
1. Cylinder deactivation REQUIRES valve deactivation. Without it you can expect minus numbers for mpg improvement.

2. 460 Fords get the same mpg fully loaded or completely empty.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2016, 12:03 AM   #3 (permalink)
Corporate imperialist
 
oil pan 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico (USA)
Posts: 11,266

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: 273
Thanked 3,569 Times in 2,833 Posts
For cylinder deactivation to really be worth it you need to be able to collapse the lifters and close both valves in the cylinder. With the valves opening and closing trying to move that air in and exhaust out it feels like the engine is misfiring badly.

What I did to double fuel milage on my carbureted suburban is:
Tune the engine for lean burn during cruise, lean at or near WOT is bad, you need to run rich during higher power situations.
Adjust the timing properly, does it have EGR?
Use EOC.
In the winter I took the fan off my engine to speed up warm up times and I am going to switch over to electric fans. In AZ, during the summer in the city an electric fan may not be a good option for you.
I also made a switchable warmed thermostatic and cold air intake, the thermostatic side is too small for WOT use.
With fuel injection you should just be able to use a traditional warm air intake.
You can change to a numerically lower rear end too.
__________________
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.

Last edited by oil pan 4; 07-13-2016 at 01:29 AM.. Reason: R
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2016, 12:44 AM   #4 (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
It's 4x4.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2016, 01:29 AM   #5 (permalink)
Corporate imperialist
 
oil pan 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico (USA)
Posts: 11,266

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: 273
Thanked 3,569 Times in 2,833 Posts
I have always said that 4x4 is more expensive.
__________________
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 07-13-2016, 01:40 AM   #6 (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
Cuz he'd have to change the front axle too.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2016, 11:56 PM   #7 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Guatemala City
Posts: 27
Thanks: 6
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Change tires to a smoother road tread, something that you can put higher pressure into. If you increase the tire circumference you effectively do the same thing as a rear end reduction (except that most larger tires weigh more). Pull the mirrors in when you know you will be on the highway. Partial grill cover perhaps. Remove any aero-no-nos like cab shades and bug deflectors. If you have construction skills I would say build a 3 foot folding partial fishtail (top teardrop) attached to your cab roof and covering your bed partially when you can. It could fold down against the back window, or perhaps fold up over a load. You could also build partial side shouds but I am not sure if any of this would make much difference...be fun to experiment though.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2016, 09:31 AM   #8 (permalink)
Rat Racer
 
Fat Charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Route 16
Posts: 4,150

Al the Third, year four - '13 Honda Fit Base
Team Honda
90 day: 42.9 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,784
Thanked 1,922 Times in 1,246 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by oil pan 4 View Post
Use EOC.
Lots more work, nothing to show for it. Even light P&G is an exercise in futility with these pigs. Smoothness and throttle precision are your main tools here.

The only good news is that it's a 96, so an SG or UG should work- unless HDs were somehow allowed to slide for a year or so from OBDII. With instrumentation, all the standard benefits apply- FE isn't simply abysmal, you can see exactly how abysmal it is and make slight tweaks with foot placement and gear selection.

That's not entirely correct- the other bit of good news is that it's a manual.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog44 View Post
Transmission type Efficiency
Manual neutral engine off.100% @MPG <----- Fun Fact.
Manual 1:1 gear ratio .......98%
CVT belt ............................88%
Automatic .........................86%

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2016, 11:55 AM   #9 (permalink)
Engine-Off-Coast
 
Natalya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 564

Red 2000 Insight (2017 through 2019) - '00 Honda Insight 5MT
90 day: 64.72 mpg (US)

Red 2000 Lithium Insight (2020) - '00 Honda Insight LTO
90 day: 71.76 mpg (US)
Thanks: 224
Thanked 309 Times in 177 Posts
There is aero you can do that won't affect the bay. Smoothing out the underbelly with coroplast panels or making moon covers for your wheels should help a tiny bit.

A kill switch for EOC... I can't see why this wouldn't be helpful, especially on down-hills. Do the injectors cut off when coasting in gear?
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2016, 05:36 PM   #10 (permalink)
Semi-serious ecomodder
 
ChillyBear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 52
Thanks: 11
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Clean the dpfe and egr valve, it's an old ford, that's like half of your mpg if equipped.

Edit, I read further. Its a 460, if it has egr, clean it twice. Helps for economy mode/lean on cruise/ mpg highway mode whatever it's called. I'm guessing it's "heavy duty" if it has an economy mode after 1996.

Side note, I've noticed old escorts like having 10-20% ethanol, no clue on the 460's but they are so sooty, that even if there is no mpg gain like an escort, the carbon removal is good on occasion. Different bores/strokes obviously, but I like all fords with D-shaped heads.


Last edited by ChillyBear; 08-01-2016 at 05:43 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread






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