3rd Gen Engine and Drivetrain -> 2003-2007 5.9 liter Engine and drivetrain discussion only. PLEASE, NO HIGH PERFORMANCE DISCUSSION!

Better Fuel Mileage ??

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 09:44 AM
  #16  
cdhd2001's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
From: Texas
Originally Posted by Foxborough
Before you start buying things for mileage you may want to figure out how much you will really save. For example if I had to drive 80 miles per day I would drive it 70 mph and most likely get 17 mpg. That would take me 1.14 hours round trip and consume 23.53 gallons per week say gas is $3.5 per gallon, I would spend $82.35 per week. Now if I drove 55 mph and got 19 mpg I would save $8.68 per week and going slower would spend almost 2 hours in the truck per week. For me it would not be worth it but may be important for you. Assuming you would drive 50 weeks per year you would end up saving about $434 a year going slower. Probably some add on stuff may give you 1-2 mpg better, just figure when it will pay for itself in fuel. Just my $0.02
Good reasoning. This is the reason I asked for real world experience with add-ons.

I drive 80 miles a day commuting plus weekend errands. Average about 1800 miles per month. About 35% city driving, 65% highway with cruise at 65 mph. Average 17.0 mpg. I spend about $400 per month on fuel. Truck engine/trans/chassis is completely stock except for the K&N air filter.

The one observation I will make about the air filter is the amount smoke when the truck is run 1/2 to full throttle. Lots of black smoke with a paper air filter and almost none with the K&N filter. Black smoke equals wasted fuel. So...
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 10:40 AM
  #17  
Foxborough's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 808
Likes: 1
From: Rockford, Illinois
Looks like you have it under control. I do not have any information on fuel saving accessories other than a larger exhaust but that's expensive and would be more noisy. I have read where some guys were buying the front axle lockout but that runs $2000 or so. They claim to get 2 mpg better but it will take 80k miles to break even with the fuel savings. Good luck on your quest, 80 miles a day driving, yuck .
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 12:20 PM
  #18  
SolarExpress's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 224
Likes: 3
From: Alvin
Originally Posted by Foxborough
Before you start buying things for mileage you may want to figure out how much you will really save. For example if I had to drive 80 miles per day I would drive it 70 mph and most likely get 17 mpg. That would take me 1.14 hours round trip and consume 23.53 gallons per week say gas is $3.5 per gallon, I would spend $82.35 per week. Now if I drove 55 mph and got 19 mpg I would save $8.68 per week and going slower would spend almost 2 hours in the truck per week. For me it would not be worth it but may be important for you. Assuming you would drive 50 weeks per year you would end up saving about $434 a year going slower. Probably some add on stuff may give you 1-2 mpg better, just figure when it will pay for itself in fuel. Just my $0.02
Reducing your speed by 15mph is not going to add 52 minutes to your drive.
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 12:41 PM
  #19  
Jason Foster's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
From: Iowa unfortunately
I wonder if adding somewhat larger diameter tires would help. Nothing extreme as that would increase rolling resistance. This would lower the rpm some but would the larger tires, increased wind resistance lower fuel mileage or cancel each other out?
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 01:11 PM
  #20  
cdhd2001's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
From: Texas
Originally Posted by Jason Foster
I wonder if adding somewhat larger diameter tires would help. Nothing extreme as that would increase rolling resistance. This would lower the rpm some but would the larger tires, increased wind resistance lower fuel mileage or cancel each other out?
I tried that on my Dmax. I went from the stock 245/75 r16 to 265/75 r16. Ended up losing 2 mpg, hand calculated and adjusting for tire size.
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 01:14 PM
  #21  
Jason Foster's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
From: Iowa unfortunately
OUCH. That's why mine is still stock. That and I have two sets of tires and rims. One set for winter; The other for, well, the other seasons. I like my money more than a fancy truck that I'll just have to sell some day anyway.
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 01:21 PM
  #22  
cdhd2001's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
From: Texas
Originally Posted by Capt'n Ron
It was busted on Mythbusters that tail gait down would increase fuel economy!
I am not sure that I agree completely with the results. Their test truck was a F150 Supercab SHORT BED. I have owned and driven several short bed and long bed trucks. The wind behavior in that last 1.5-2.0 feet of bed space is completely different. Example: I currently have a long bed and short bed truck with rubber bed mats. The bed mat in the short bed never moves no matter how fast you drive or weather conditions. But, the long bed over 50 mph the bed mat will get picked by the wind and rolled to the midway point of the bed. The only way to stop this phenonmem (sp?) is to put something heavy in the bed or screw the mat down.

My current thought is that Myth Busters was correct when they tested the short bed. But I expect to see different results if they ever test the long bed.

I am going to run tail gate down for two weeks (approx. 800-900 miles) and post whatever results I get.
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 01:28 PM
  #23  
Jason Foster's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
From: Iowa unfortunately
I tried running with the tailgate down and got worse fuel mileage. Tonneau covers work well in my experience.
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 01:35 PM
  #24  
pluguglyinhere's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
From: Clvie
"the combo psm, cool hose,afe proguard 7 filter and tag " what is a psm, and what is a tag
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 03:33 PM
  #25  
JP-4.5's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,002
Likes: 0
From: Mass.
PSM is a cold air kit to add to the stock air box.
http://www.psmdiesel.com/air_04.5.php


TAG is a Turbo Air Guide and is supposed to smooth out the air going into the turbo. I have ordered the PSM to try on my truck as the articles in TDR sounded very credible in the testing they did. It just made sense. I have no experience or comments regarding the TAG devices.
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 06:04 PM
  #26  
lackskill's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by SolarExpress
Reducing your speed by 15mph is not going to add 52 minutes to your drive.
It's more like 93 minutes/wk if my math is correct.

400 mi/wk @ 70mph = ~343 minutes/wk driving
400 mi/wk @ 55mph = ~436 minutes/wk driving
436 - 343 = 93
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 07:05 PM
  #27  
salesrep's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
From: Pontiac Illinois
tire pressure, syn fluids,fuel treatments,cai. soft on the skinny.
Some have suggested removing the bug shield as well. i think i will give that a shot.
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 07:15 PM
  #28  
mmm...diesel's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
From: Tucson, AZ
Originally Posted by Jason Foster
I just drive everywhere at 55 mph. I must not be the only one interested in fuel mileage in my area because people draft me all the time. Right on my bumper.
Thats funny right there, if I drive 55 on a two lane highway everyone drafts me, just long enough for the next car to pass...
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 08:29 PM
  #29  
TreeFarm's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
From: The South
Originally Posted by cdhd2001

My current thought is that Myth Busters was correct when they tested the short bed. But I expect to see different results if they ever test the long bed.
Mythbusters is infotainment. I like the show, but sometimes their conclusions aren't too scientific. The tailgate segment is a good example. The only way to really test that theory is in a wind tunnel, not with Grant or whatshisname driving down the 101, and the conclusions would only apply to the particular vehicle under test. There is no way the Mythbusters could control all the variables properly with an individual driving down the highway dodging traffic.

I am calling that test busted.
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 08:40 PM
  #30  
Jason Foster's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
From: Iowa unfortunately
Grant is one of the Ghost Hunters there tree farm. Only way to know...two tanks of fuel, paper and pencil. Also, make sure that the outside temperature is constant during this test and the road is absolutely level and there is no head or tail wind and you drive exactly the same, not passing anyone, and don't forget the egg under the accelerator and, and...... Yeah. Wind tunnel would be easier.
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:05 AM.