Ford Power Stroke Nation banner

Call For A Project

4K views 36 replies 17 participants last post by  Dave Whitmer 
#1 ·
Let's face it guys, the people are hurting. This fuel price thing is making some pickup guys panic. Some are trying to sell/trade in their pickups and are taking a $12,000 to $18,000 beating to get a little car they really don't want.

Government ain't gonna save you. The EPA is overjoyed that you are dumping your pickup for a Yaris. That financial screwing you are taking is (in their view) your penance for owning a big truck in the first place.

Vendors cannot be happy about watching their customer base evaporate.

What is needed is a project truck that can show the average pickup guy a substantial improvement. Not my exotic one-in-ten thousand configuration, but what most everyone else has - a 4x4 with an automatic, probably a dually. Forget a 7.3, the truck should be a 6.4.

What will be needed is for a collaboration of various specialists - tuners, transmission guys,injector guys, bed cover makers, etc

Anybody else got ideas?
 
#2 ·
Hmmm, like a vender PSN truck? Try to build it for max MPG, able to be a DD & also be a solid towing setup. I think it's do-able, people are reporting around 18mpg with the DPF cut off.
 
#3 ·
How did they do that, those trucks are off highway only without that ole DPF aren't they?:poke:
 
#5 ·
Why does it have to be a 6.4? Its getting dumped in a couple of years for the new 6.7 anyways. Anything with a DPF will he very tough to get decent mileage out of anyway. Anyways, how about a system that shuts off half the cylinders at highway speed like some GM and Mopar vehicles. Would something like that even work on a diesel?
 
#6 ·
how is a project vechile going to save some guys $20,000 loan. is not like there arent products out there that support MPG. i just hate when i hear im spendng all my money on fuel. then you shouldnt have bought a diesel in the first place. i dont wanna hear "guys buy diesel for toys" if its a toys dont complain about fuel prices.
 
#7 ·
So you want to take the 6.4 from 11 mpg to 18 mpg? When the same efforts have shown that you can take a 7.3 from 20 to 27 mpg?

Not many 6.4's on the road now, nor will there be when they trash it.
Same goes for 6.0's.
Dare I say there are millions of 7.3's still running, since they've been on the road for over 14 years now?

There's a reason I still drive a diesel. It's becaue I can, and do, burn 'Free' fuel like veggie oil or WMO. Can't do that with any gas car I know of, regardless of it's mpg...

It'd be neat to do a study of actually how many of each type of diesel is titled for road operation. 7.3's, 6.0, 6.4, 12v, 24v, Duramax's.
Then target the one that has the most on the road today.

Or just use your truck, Dave, as a perfect example. Why not? It doesn't matter how 'one off' it is. And take what you've done and apply it to a D-max, 24v, 6.0, etc to show 'common' results.
:shrug:
 
#8 ·
This idea needs to be a effort that includes all of the Ford Diesel starting with the 94 7.3, next the 7.3 Super Duty, 6.0 Super Duty and the new 6.4 Common rail.

That means that there will be 4 different types of test vehicles maybe even 8if we do them with standard transmission also. I agree that they should probably be Auto 4 x 4's but not dualy's. Dually's get used to hard as a rule to demonstrate consistant mileage figures.

Probably the biggest thing to consider would be how could you control the inividuals that are doing the testing. I think that there are as many ideas as to how to test as there are people to want to test.:confused::blah::blah:

We need some rules and procedures to follow. :doh:
 
#9 ·
I understand what your going at but the thing is not everyone can have a new truck Ie 6.4, and most of us that cant have make due with what we have.. I still see more 7.3 on the road and still going strong, only issue is that most if not all companies have left us in the dust (7.3), being they have to keep on the market on new stuff.. Im working on mine right now, Ive been keeping things cheap and keeping the motor reliable instead of going for the track times, Ive just lowerd the dually and will be working on other things soon, basically Im following Daves truck.. Theres nothing wrong with working with a dually, it just means you have to work harder, but thats the duallies moto "working harder"
 
#13 ·
Maybe I was thinking too small for a single project.

We have a couple of issues: How to test. What to test.

One issue not brought up so far: Cost limits.

I have a lot of thoughts on the How? Issue.

Getting bragging rights for MPG improvement must be done before and after. If the whole thing gets to be multiple trucks what we are into is a couple of road trips. One before mods, one after.

The road trip would have to be long enough to encompass many different types of terrain – flat land, hills, mountains, suburbs, and city. Surface streets, rural roads and the Interstates. Whatever conditions encountered along the way. Long enough that variations in filling techniques are averaged out.

I’m not calling anybody a politician here, but we are all competitive rascals and none of us would give a rip for a competitor that did not try to operate right at the edge of the rules. Let’s face it. If we wanted really huge MPG, we would just idle along in top gear, but to do that would lose credibility with the average pickup driver. What would be needed is a bunch of volunteer witness riders. Their job would be to note how often the driver got too slow. The speed standard is simple: the posted limit on the open roads and along with traffic in town.

What to test? Good question. Yes there are scads of 7.3s out there and (FWIW), I do think they are the best of the Powerstrokes, but they ain’t making any more of them. We could open the thing to Chevvies and Dodges but we are starting to get an operation bigger than the old Mobil Economy Runs of the 1960s.

Money limits are a must. MPG is subject to the Iron Rule of Performance: “Speed (or in this case MPG) is just a matter of money. How fast (or economically) do you want to go?” Any wealthy knucklehead can spend a lot of money and get good performance. Since MPG is an economy parameter of performance there must be some sort of limit. My suggestion: Make the money limit that of what a set of big meats and big wheels, a lift, and regearing plus a chip would cost. This board has rafts of guys with big wheels/tires, lift kits and chips, so the MPG project should be constrained to whatever that rig would cost.

Other than agreed limits on money spent, run whatcha brung. Other than staying within reasonably close to the posted limit and staying on the agreed route, drive any way you like.
 
#14 ·
so here is my entrant... Ford Ranger with a cummins 4BT with a T56 behind it... of course nascar style dropped and with flares and chopped top with a Fast back that goes down to the bumper (which is 8 inches from the ground, and i'm talking about the top...). Light weight wheels and tires.
 
#15 ·
Ideally, you would need a test bed vehicle that would get driven by a couple different people, and a SPONSOR.

Some of this is going to be cheap..
some of it isn't.

Depends on how much interest you can generate in the concept..
maybe a Federal Grant? (talk to the Dude with the Riddler Jacket on in those infomercials?)
 
#16 ·
I am just back from Asia, and every pickup over there have either a 2.5 or 3.0 liter Common Rail engine with a 5 speed, 6 speed or automatic. Seems like maybe we are a bit behind the engine curve. I have had thoughts about importing complete units with wiring harness and all. These set-ups are on the opposite noise spectrum of the Cumming 3.9, plus so smooth you hardly know it is there. Every make, Toyota, Ford, Chev, Nissan and Mazda had some sort of Common rail engine.

JonFord :ford:
 
#18 ·
INFOCUSHAULER:

I’ve often thought the combination of a Cummins 4BT3.9 and a T-56 (particularly one with the 0.5:1 top gear) was a wonderful combo for getting good fuel economy in a variety of vehicles: Ranger, S-10, Dakota, F-150, Silverado, late model Caprice, and even a Hummer H2 or H3.

In last month’s “Diesel Power” a kid had mated a Cummins four-banger and a Ranger but blew it with an automatic.

But since this is the PowerStrokeNation, maybe we ought to stick to PowerStrokes although the conversion guys could get their teeth into this.



Yeah, JLDickmon, some parts of it may not be cheap. That’s why I suggested an upper cost limit.

What does a pair of 35s, 22 inch wheels, a conversion to 4.10 gears, a 8” lift, a bumper, a chip, and big oil go for these days? Am I talking about $8,000 for the lot? Trucks with that combination are fairly common in the Nation, so why not limit the MPGProject to about what that common set of mods would cost. You never get something for nothing.



JLDickmon commented:

“Ideally, you would need a test bed vehicle that would get driven by a couple different people, and a SPONSOR.”

Dave says:

You are on my wave length. Maybe multiple sponsors if you wanna be more ambitious.



JonFord posted:

“Seems like maybe we are a bit behind the engine curve.”

Dave says:

The US has Tier II and now the Land of Fruits and Nuts (California) has an outright ban on automotive diesels.



JonFord posted:

“I have had thoughts about importing complete units with wiring harness and all.”

Dave says:

Good luck. “Grey market” auto parts importing is not easy. Cocaine smuggling is probably easier.
 
#19 ·
Here is my suggestion, not meant to stifle anybodies creativity, but just something to describe the project.

Start with a bone stock 4x4 Super Cab or Crew Cab single rear wheel long bed pickup with a automatic transmission. It probably has 3.73 gears. These are very common truck configurations within the PowerStroke Nation. OBS might be better as they start out with single-shot injectors although a later model tranny may be better. Pay your money and take your chances.

For now, say the money limit is $8,000 over and above the cost of the truck. Maybe the Nation can agree on a different number, but for now…

My initial thoughts for mods:

Gear Vendor Overdrive: $4,000 installed. Gives you the equivalent of 2.68:1 gears on demand. Good for 3 MPG.

Transmission Mods: $1,500 installed. Needed to tolerate the stress of prolonged low RPM (1,450 RPM @ 70 MPH) driving and to allow extensive on-demand coasting.

Soft flat tonneau. $500. Cleans up the aerodynamics a lot but is very flexible for bed loads. Good for 1.5 MPG unless you drive exclusively in the city.

Stock wheels with Mooneye covers. $100
BFG LongTrail Tires 245-75 aired up to sidewall max rating $1,200 BFG Long Trails are the lowest rolling resistance tires I know of in this size range.
Re-align front end to zero camber and toe-in. $100

DZL_JIM’s shorty air dam $50

Pyrometer and AIC. $300 Helps adjust the nut behind the wheel.

Adjusting driving style. Free and priceless.

There you go, boys. $7,750 total. My guess is this truck will show a 5-6 MPG improvement over bone stock but is still perfectly usable for hauling (you may have to roll up the tonneau for the four-wheeler) and towing (shut off the GV on steep hills) operations. You still have the four-wheel drive when you want it. The truck has not been lowered. It will look fairly stock to the casual observer. The Mooneyes are a giveaway, but nothing else really shows. A 5 MPG improvement puts most trucks as described into the 20 MPG range.

My cost estimates may be off but I doubt if by too much.
 
#20 ·
Just a thought on the tonneau cover, but I've been kicking around an idea for building one shaped like yours (sort of) but with a steel or aluminum frame and a snap-on soft-cover. Wouldn't be that hard to do I don't think. And it could just use the holes in the bed-rails to keep things lined up with some clamps to hold it down.
 
#21 ·
Actually I like the idea of using a OBS better for couple reasons, #1 little lighter then a SD #2 single shots & #3 alot of em had 3.55 gears to begin with. Although for a double over drive have 4.10s for around town & towing with an auto might not be a bad idea.
 
#22 ·
There's a big difference between fuel economy numbers and horse power numbers versus what you will spend for them.

People will throw down $8,000 to make 350 horses at the rear wheels, but how many are going to throw down $8,000 for a 3 or 4 mpg improvement, particularly if they don't drive their truck that many miles each year.

I think the proper way to determine how much to spend is to figure out a decent average number of miles some one will drive in say, 2 years. Then estimate the costs of fuel for that many miles in that truck's stock configuration. That gives us a baseline cost for how much it takes to run that truck for two years, sorta like a base horse power number. Let's say for ease of use, the average person will drive 40,000 miles in two years and get 16mpg, and diesel fuel costs $4.00 a gallon. This gives us an operating cost of:

40,000 miles / 16 miles per gallon * $4.00 per gallon = $10,000

Now figure out what MPG you want to be running after doing any mods. Let's assume we want to get 20mpg, again to make the math easy.

40,000 miles / 20 miles per gallon * $4.00 per gallon = $8,000

That's a difference of only $2,000, so that's your budget. If you can gain a 4 mpg improvement for $2,000 or less, you've saved money after operating your truck for two years. If you spent $8,000 to gain a 4 mpg advantage in this situation, you'd have to keep and operate the truck for 8 years or 160,000 miles before you started actually saving money.

If you spend $8k for 4 or 5 mpg, people are just going to laugh at you.

Just my $0.02.
 
#24 ·
I think the math is kinda skewed but the idea is valid..

You'd have to have a mileage target in mind, calculate 1 year fuel savings, and then base your budget on that.

Just like any other scientific experiment..
your hypothesis is:
if I throw $1,500 at this truck, it will get 5mpg more fuel economy.
if I throw an additional $1,500 at it, it will be good for another 3mpg, making a total of 8 mpg improvement over stock.
 
#23 ·
DZL_JIM’s shorty air dam $50
More like $20 for 2, but peanuts for the project...

Alan, you make a very good point. But I think Dave's approach would net more than a 3 or 4 mpg gain.

It's a tough project since so many people have so many different driving styles.
Seems like it's 'Easier' to get better mileage mods for highway driving.
But what can we do for better mileage around town? I'm thinking most of us waste most of our fuel here. Just guessing.

Tires have a big effect on mpg, but for those of us that need an aggressive tire (snow plowing for example) I can't justify 2 sets of $1200 tires just to save a little fuel.
 
#25 ·
Alan Hicks posted:
“There's a big difference between fuel economy numbers and horse power numbers versus what you will spend for them.”

Dave says:
Maybe so, but if you look at ebay, trucktrader, and Craig’s List there are any number of guys who are flat panicking and taking a $15,000 beating to get out of their truck and into a Japanese beercan. And for what? If you are not willing to learn to “hypermile” the best of them will give you maybe 35 MPG combined.

For the beer can:
40,000 miles / 35 MPG x $3.75/gal = $4,285
Cost of new car plus excess depreciation on truck = $35,000+

For the unmodified truck
40,000 miles / 16 miles per gallon * $4.68 per gallon = $11,700
Cost = 0

For the project truck
40,000 miles / 21 miles per gallon * $4.68 per gallon = $8,914
Project cost = $8,000

If you take this as a strictly economic exercise it is cheaper to do nothing and pay for the fuel. Trading in for a beer can is economic madness.

I do agree in that I’ve seen guys drop 10 large on engine mods and aren’t within hailing distance of 400 HP. They’ll never win the Indy 500 or even a local drag race but they do it. Likewise a set of big tires, fancy wheels, and a lift job easily exceeds $8,000 and they won’t get a second glance at the local show’n shine.

Like the other performance mods or cosmetic mods, its about crowing rights. If you are willing to just do nothing and supinely take the beating that fuel prices are giving you (the “unmodified truck” option above) you really forfeit any right to cry about fuel prices.

Further, a few project trucks would tell the manufacturers that there is a market for more economical trucks. I can show people what can be done, but if just one guy does it he can be dismissed as a crackpot. If numerous people do it the manufacturers go “Hmmmm” and see a market. GM was alert enough to market a high MPG version of the Cobalt and its selling right off the truck.

Finally, it is ultimately about your attitude. In my view there are three kinds of people. Some people make things happen. Some watch things happen. Some people wonder what happened. If you want to be of the second or third category, that it your choice. I’m gonna make something happen.
 
#27 ·
Further, a few project trucks would tell the manufacturers that there is a market for more economical trucks.
I know several people with new(er) GM trucks, gas, 2wd that are in the 22 - 24 mpg range.
I also know of guys with comparable Dodges (gas, 2wd) that aren't anywhere near that, and some F-150 guys somewhat there (18 - 20). This is normal, mixed driving. Don't try to tow or haul with these trucks as you're looking at slugs with single digit mpg...

High Fuel Economy isn't with the diesel. It's with the diesel while it's being worked.
So another 'problem' with your project might be that some people think it's pointless since there are full size trucks getting low 20's off the dealer lot now, for just driving to work duty. As I said, the Diesel shines when loaded/working so your testing might have to include mpg increase when being worked. IF you want top make a point with the Diesel trucks...
Dunno, just another thought...
Or maybe you're just thinking to make the Diesel trucks shine much more than the gassers...
 
#26 ·
I'm still trying to work on getting a set of 3.55s axles from a buddy of mine so we could swap. My 31" tires don't seem to be loosing much tread & work good in all conditions so I'm not going to replace em anytime soon. I hook up to a trailer every now & then & I can use the PSD if it's a bigger trailer. I think that I can gain a few mpg going from 4.10s to 3.55s but still have enough power for haulin stuff. Might actually work better with the 3.55s for most of the driving I do. Hate going 65mph & running arouns 2000rpm, just over geared for what I'm doing with it.
 
#29 · (Edited)
I am thinking $8000 is really high
figure big oil, intake, exhaust, chip/tuner, gauges

roughly $3500???

intake and exhaust can improve MPG
go to single shots (rebuilt used or really frugal use DZL Jim's kits and do it yourself)
I am going one step further I will get me some blanks and have my old employer EDM 8 .006 orifices in them to see if a finer atomization can do two things
1. Increase efficiency
2. Increase power
Chip/tuner

The only problem i have is that I am not going to put it on a chassis dyno everytime i change something to document the change
 
#30 ·
I've always seemed to think that a 3cyl Kobota or JD diesel with a 6 speed manual tranny, and a 2 speed rear end, IN a vehicle around 3k pounds would achieve High milage #'s. Most people just like diesel's not ness the BIG trucks.

Just thiink about the Duramax that was in the 65impala. approx 5k pounds and a claimed 50mpg. So... I think that there is plenty of room for achievement.

So.. I think if you took a full size truck, eliminated alot of weight, thru lighter aluminum or synthetic panels. (hell they make fiberglas cabs for older trucks, and even 1 piece front ends that are extremely light, and pretty reasonably priced)

Then of coarse is gearing, What about a 2 speed rear end like OTR trucks? Get the highway cruising rpm to say.. 1100-1300 @ 70mph. with just the rear end change, poss around 1k with proper gearing, but still be able to select the lower rear for around town/towing uses.


## Any ""ALTERNATIVE"" fuel sources that are planed to be used are truely worthless at this time. There really is no need or economic value for using them. Take ethanol for instance. Papers by researchers were published years ago saying it was not economicaly plausable as a use for fuel. Yay!! the gov did not head warnings and "required it" to be in all fuel. The next time you got to the grocery or buy some live stock feed you can thank them. This is lack of corn since its beeing used for ethanol. BEER! is suffering because people stopped growing hopps and started growing the new $CASH$ crops wich are corn and soy, since its required in fuel, IT will be sold and not so cheaply at that. The true source of the change in fuel structuring will rely on proper technology and mechanical inventions.

-Chris
 
#31 ·
Intake & exhaust didn't do squat for my MPG. Intake & exhaust are gas engine thinking.

I'm testing single shots but the jury is still out.
 
#33 ·
Chrisreedtn:
Conversions are certainly valid projects. I particularly like the idea of a Cummins 4BT3.9 and a T-56 in either a Ford F-150 or a Chevy half-ton. Set the pump to about 145 HP and give her a squirt of propane for emergency acceleration. I also like the idea of a late-model GM 6.5 in a Caprice also with a T-56. This should be nearly a bolt-in project.

But since this is powerstrokenation, I thought it would be more appropriate to call for a project using the PowerStroke engine and the SuperDuty truck in comes in. I don’t think decent performance need be limited to a guy who has a one-in-ten thousand configuration. I think there has to be somebody smart enough to get good MPG from the automatics/4x4 arrangement most guys own.


Lee asked:
“So just what has Chevy done to get mileage?”

Dave says:
If you mean Chevy trucks with Duramax engines, to my knowledge…nothing.

Chevy trucks do tend to be a bit lighter than Fords but my observation is that Chevy 4x4s with Allison automatics and Duramax engines are egregious fuel hogs that should indulge in a project like what I have called for the PowerStroke as well.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top