New Member
 

Hi all, I'm new here. I've always had a mind for "ecomodding", but my horsepower dreams usually seem to be an overpowering factor for anything "eco" to happen...

Anyhow, I'll be lurking around the forums to learn some stuff. I hope to be getting an additional vehicle soon that will be my hypermiling machine. Being a truck guy, it'll probably be a Ranger with a 4 cylinder and a manual trans. Not much of a truck, but I think I'd prefer it over a car.

I drive a 1988 F-350 4x4 XLT Lariat. Specs are as follows; 1973 468c.i. (7.7l) engine, C6 3 speed auto trans, 4.56 gears, 5" lift, 37" tires. The engine has some mods and was just rebuilt about a month ago; 0.040 overbore, "RV" style cam, ported heads, high-rise intake, long tube headers, 2.5" exhaust with only Flowmaster 50 mufflers. I average about 9 MPG, up to about 11.5 MPG on the highway.

Welcome, truckfan!

Lots of crossover here between "traditional" gearheads and people interested in tinkering to improve efficiency.

I wonder, though... if you're keeping your big truck in reserve for work duty, why not go for a project platform that has a lot more potential than an additional truck? I'm sure you've seen guys around here who are getting fantastic results from their Rangers -- far above average, for a truck, that is. But you could eclipse a Ranger's numbers (for a lot less effort/resources) with a car-based platform.

cheers-
Darin

Even the F350 can already provide a decent platform for ecomodding, altough a 3-speed transmission and a big-block may not be the most effective ways to deal with that challenge.

Anyway, the first thing anyone could consider while attempting to hypermile with an old-school V8 might be trying to make it operate on the Miller-cycle, which might be not so difficult to attempt with lots of options for aftermarket superchargers and cams...

Yep, kind of interesting. I've already started to notice a bit of it reading around the forums.

I definitely think you're right. A car platform has a lot more potential as far as fuel mileage. The issue is that I need carrying capacity several days a week, and a Ranger fits that need. I don't necessarily need a big weight capacity, but the cargo room is crucial. That's why an I4 Ranger would be okay even though the V6 ones (3.0 and 4.0) have more power. I need to be able to tow about 1300 lbs max and carry up to about 600 lbs in the bed. I've heard of a lot of reports of 30+ mpg empty on the highway with stock I4 rangers, and I think I could mod it to squeeze a few more MPG out. Maybe even swap in a small diesel and break into the 40-50+ MPG range on the highway.

I appreciate the reply.
- Collin

Well then, Ranger it is! There are more than a couple of projects in the forum. Lots of examples of mods to pursue. Don't forget the driving side of the equation... enormous opportunity for gains there as well ( for most people).

I've pretty much already built it like I want it. There's not tons of MPG potential for it without a lot of $$$ which would negate itself. She puts down a ton of power, and is the most powerful thing I've driven. Probably the fastest accelerating too, when I had 33" tires on it earlier this year I could do 30 MPG rolling burnouts, haha. Puts down a lot of torque.

Your right, the 3 speed auto puts a hurting on mileage. Pretty much effects 55+ MPH highway MPGs since it doesn't have overdrive. I'd like to have a 5 speed in it for fun and for overdrive, but they were kind of rare for 460s and are hard to find in any kind of shape.

Some folks running stationary/industrial engines into Rangers and other compact trucks have been getting mileage around 40MPG quite easily. Eventually, the only problem would be to register the vehicle legally after a Diesel conversion with a non-automotive engine, but you can also consider some Mercedes-Benz engine such as the OM601.

Yep, the driver is the biggest MPG factor, haha. I'm pretty good at driving efficiently. My F-350 pretty much gets under 11.5 no matter how I drive it, so I don't worry about that too much.

Some best trips in other vehicles:
28.7 MPG for a 102 mile trip in a 2003 Suburban 4x4, 5.3l, 3.73 gears (Highway at about 55-60 MPH)
23.6 MPG for a 98 mile trip in a 2008 F-250 4x4 6.4l Diesel, 4.10 gears (60-65 MPH highway)
44.1 MPG for a 121 mile trip in a 2013 Accord Sport 2.4l, manual 6-speed, (60-80 mph highway)

My original though was a 4BT, haha. That might add a little oomph to a Ranger!

The 4BT is one of my favorite engines, but it requires major suspension, running gear and brake upgrades in a Ranger.

Yes, it would. If I get one and the I4 ever wears out, I would definitely consider a 4bt and supporting mods though. Such a great little diesel.

I met a guy once who had put one in his Explorer and was averaging 32 MPG highway. And the explorer is quite a bit more vehicle than a Ranger.

Hopefully I'll be able to use this community and The Ranger Station forums to create a nice build.

Now that I can post pictures, here's my F-350:

http://ecomodder.com/forum/member-tr...-side-view.jpg
http://ecomodder.com/forum/member-tr...next-tesla.jpg

Compared to that euuhhh ... monstrosity ... the Ranger will be a massive improvement in efficiency and MPG.

There's a few Rangers in the EM garage
EcoModder Fleet list - EcoModder.com

Yeah should be. Thanks for the list! I do like my "monstrosity" though. It'll still see about half of my road time.

Yes, I myself have converted dozens of engines to Miller-cycle, as I'm sure Rooster has. It's a snap! :thumbup:

Ha! Quite the contrast with the "No Gas" Tesla.

Thought you all would like it, haha

Actually I still didn't do such mod, but I am considering to do it into a Volkswagen air-cooled engine. But I have already seen a few "Millerized" engines in leisure boats.

I've read some about the Miller cycle, but what really makes it more efficient? If you have to use a supercharger to get the same power out of the same engine then it seems that it would be less efficient per cubic inch or cc.

All you have to do is find a cam that says Miller on it and slap it in, right?

Just regrinding the cams and increasing the static compression ratio wouldn't make it operate in the Miller cycle, would only make it operate like a Prius engine, emulating the Atkinson effect. The supercharger is also required for the Miller cycle in order to overcome the discompression provided for the longer intake valve timing.


Since the engine operating in the Miller cycle would still have less of the so-called "pumping losses", because its effect makes the power stroke longer than the compression stroke, the engine is, in fact, more efficient.

Oh, I see. So we add supercharging and a different cam and we have a Miller engine. Who hasn't done that?

Only Mazda and Nissan have done it for automobile engines, but in the 40s and 50s it was more common in marine and stationary engines. I must admit I'd rather get a Diesel swap instead of keeping a V8, but it's still an option...

I thought it was a simple weekend project? :confused:

Does it look really so complex?

Have you done it? No.

Have I done it? No.

Has anyone here done it? I doubt it.

Would it be a significant R&D effort to make it work? I think so.

Do you glibly suggest the home mechanic take on projects you yourself wouldn't, haven't, or can't do? All the time.

Not so much R&D needed. Street-racers have been regrinding cams for years...

Sounds like a diesel swap would be much easier and you'd come out with much better MPGs, more torque, and an engine that will last longer.

Diesel engines are always the best option for a truck, but it would be quite obvious if I were the one advocating for that :D

After looking at what a modern 4-cyl turbodiesel is capable in a medium-duty truck I could consider a 4HK1 from the NPR or a J05E from the Hino 195 among the best options, but considering availability and emissions classes seems like the 6BT Cummins is the easier to register legally. I would recommend a Powerstroke only for an enemy.