Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-07-2008, 07:57 PM   #183
2 Rivet Member
 
Currently Looking...
Red Deer , Alberta
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by ROBERTSUNRUS View Post
Hi, in relation to gas engines only, the best fuel economy would be at the highest vacuum reading and in the highest gear in relation to speed.
What I'm saying is that the best fuel economy is with the lowest vacuum. I think if you actually hooked a vacuum gauge up to your vehicle as you drove you would see that the highest gear ALWAYS gives you the lowest vacuum. Remember that like all good experiments you must only vary the one parameter you are testing for. So same speed, same grade, same temperature and wind directions. Just set cruise control and start shifting. Try it at different speeds.

I humbly ask that the line in bold above be established as fact until somebody states that they have personally performed this test and recieved contrary results. It would be much appreciated if somebody actually does this test so they we can move forward from this point and this can be established as fact based on more than just my integrity, which I'll admit is quite weak from your perspective.
__________________

__________________
canadianguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 09:32 PM   #184
Rivet Master
 
JimGolden's Avatar
 
Vintage Kin Owner
1977 31' Excella 500
Berkeley Springs , West Virginia
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,619
Images: 7
Cummins Powered Power Wagon on the way

I did not read this entire thread. Too long...

I had a Ford Excursion with the Triton V-10. Complete piece of junk. It blew up and Henry wouldn't cover it. No more FoMoCo for me, ever.

I have a Dodge Ram 2500 4x4 long bed quad cab and Cummins. All I do is change oil and drive. No problems at all. Ever.

I also subscribe to "Diesel Power" magazine. Dodge is indeed bringing out a diesel version of the Power Wagon. The review on it was awesome. A real piece of machinery!

The Hemi with the cylinder DeAct is an excellent engine. More power to you with it. (I plan to get a Challenger with that engine) But don't discount the Cummins. It is the only real diesel in a pickup truck out there. It is a true "Medium Duty" engine. I know many people who have owned them. They all say the same thing. Change the oil, put in fuel, and turn the key. That's it. That has been my experience for the past four years.

I pull a 34' Avion that weighs 9600lbs and I can accelerate up any hill I've ever encountered, including the great Smokies. I recently went up a hill in PA that was nearly 15% with a 15mph hairpin turn. I went from 15mph to 60mph in a half mile. The Cummins is a great mill. Period.

OK, off my soapbox

But seriously, you look in Diesel Power at the trucks that run 10 second quarter miles, and there are ten Cummins to any other brand. There's a reason for that. They are stout.

Back to our regularly scheduled programming...
__________________

__________________
- Jim
JimGolden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 09:43 PM   #185
Rivet Master
 
JimGolden's Avatar
 
Vintage Kin Owner
1977 31' Excella 500
Berkeley Springs , West Virginia
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,619
Images: 7
Air to Fuel Ratio

OK, I read a few more posts...

Here's the deal: Best economy results when your air to fuel ratio is approximately 14.7 to 1

Best horsepower results when your air to fuel ratio is approximately
12.0 to 1.

As you can see, you need to run a bit rich for best power. You lean it out for best economy.

With a carb, you're stuck running a bit rich. With EFI, the computer should take care of this for you.

In general, an engine is a pump. And whether you have a V8 or a turobocharged 4-cylinder, it takes a certain amount of fuel to produce a certain amount of horsepower. There won't be a huge difference. A V8 has a little more internal friction than a 4-banger, but it's not that much.

That's why a modern Chrysler 300 with cylinder Deact can get 28mpg, yet still give you 350hp when you tromp on the loud pedal.

My wife's old Crown Victoria (soon to be replaced by MoPar) will routinely deliver 26-27 mpg on the highway when cruising at 80 mph simply due to the fact that it only requires X horsepower to go that fast, whether it be from a 4 or an 8. Aerodynamics and weight mean more than the number of cylinders... Power required = fuel burn regardless of configuration.
__________________
- Jim
JimGolden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 10:24 PM   #186
Liquid Cooled
 
RedSHED's Avatar
 
2014 16' Sport
Columbus , Indiana
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 485
Images: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by canadianguy View Post
What I'm saying is that the best fuel economy is with the lowest vacuum. I think if you actually hooked a vacuum gauge up to your vehicle as you drove you would see that the highest gear ALWAYS gives you the lowest vacuum. ...
Not every engine has vacuum at the intake manifold.
'specially the turbo'd engines

For the rest of them... wouldn't you want more vacuum? Or are we saying the same thing. My old Willy's had vacuum powered wipers & defroster which would go like the Dickens at a stop light, but would just about shut off if you tromped the power. In general, the trick is to drive using the least amount of power necessary to get the speed you want.


Actual formulas are pretty involved, I'd guess, although I haven't really done more than just think about it. Have read in a trade journal that 100-200 RPM either side of the peak torque spot is a good place to shoot for, both in steady state and during acceleration. That seems reasonable to me. Of course that number can be hard to pin down.
__________________
RedSHED is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 10:50 PM   #187
2 Rivet Member
 
Currently Looking...
Red Deer , Alberta
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSHED View Post
Not every engine has vacuum at the intake manifold.
'specially the turbo'd engines
I'd like to keep the analysis to naturally aspirated spark ignited gasoline fueled reciprocating four stroke engines. This is proving complicated enough.

I originally brought up the pumping loss thinking that people would recognize right away what it is. I gave the example of how automakers are taking this seriously, I've made some predictions that people can test, such as that a diesel engine inherently has no engine braking, and that vacuum goes down when you shift up. This is proving to be a rather ominous task, getting people to put together what they know, and what they don't know, in the correct way to draw the correct conclusions.

I'll present another way to test the pumping loss: If you have a standard transmission, when your in some gear at high rpm simply release the throttle. That's the pistons trying to suck down on the intake stroke against the vacuum in the manifold. Please read a few posts back.

As far as people asking for equations: The pumping loss is basically [vacuum]*[displacement]*[rpm]
It's actually a little bigger because the vacuum on the pistons is a little higher because of the resistance of the valves. This is exactly the same as the exhaust pumping loss, replace vacuum with exhaust manifold pressure.

I recieved a private message from a forum member that was of a technical nature. I asked that he post it here for all to discuss, but he refused saying that I am being political. I assure you that what I am telling you is fact, and that it's very difficult to have a debate politely when fact is on your side.
__________________
canadianguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 11:58 PM   #188
Rivet Master
 
ROBERTSUNRUS's Avatar

 
2005 25' Safari
Salem , Oregon
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,266
Images: 18
Blog Entries: 51
Hi, some cars several years back had what they called an "Economy Gauge" It was just a vacuum gauge with green, yellow, and red on the face. Green being the highest vacuum reading and the best economy. Once again the best economy would be at the highest vacuum acheived in any given gear. Also, our supercharged Thunderbird had a Vacuum/Pressure gauge that showed vacuum until you gave it heavy throttle, of course, and then read pressure from the blower. As for your "Prediction" it is already a known fact that Diesels don't have any engine braking; That's why they made Jake Brakes.
__________________
Bob

2005 Safari 25-B
"Le Petit Chateau Argent"
[ Small Silver Castle ]
2000 Navigator / 2014 F-150 Eco-Boost / Equal-i-zer / P-3
YAMAHA 2400 / AIR #12144
ROBERTSUNRUS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 12:12 AM   #189
Rivet Master
 
ROBERTSUNRUS's Avatar

 
2005 25' Safari
Salem , Oregon
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,266
Images: 18
Blog Entries: 51
Economy at peak torque?

Hi, it sounds good, but peak torque is not the best place for economy. At freeway speeds most gas engines are running at about 1800 to 2200 RPM. When does your engine get it's peak torque? My Navigator gets it's peak torque at a very low 2750 RPM, but most gas engines get their peak torque well above 4,000 RPM; That would put you at well over 100 MPH or more. Does that make sense that your best gas mileage would be at that speed? I don't think so!
__________________
Bob

2005 Safari 25-B
"Le Petit Chateau Argent"
[ Small Silver Castle ]
2000 Navigator / 2014 F-150 Eco-Boost / Equal-i-zer / P-3
YAMAHA 2400 / AIR #12144
ROBERTSUNRUS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 01:00 AM   #190
_
 
. , .
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 8,812
the last 35 or so posts in this thread have been very weird.

and so far from the original premise that it is LOST from the exchange.

replaced with mixed examples and undefined terms and nonsense facts...

it all has me wondering if the posters aren't sniffing their fuel caps a tad too often...

phrases like best economy, max efficiency, vacuum (vs rate of change in vacuum), peak power, and so on...

actually have REAL definitions, but why go there right!

then there is the famous "all things being equal" phrase, which of course they never are in the many examples provided...

examples that disprove nothing, but also don't prove anything either.

those posts really deserve their own thread...

something like "mixed engine ramblings and other crock pot cooking secrets"...

now FINALLY robertsunrus makes an accurate statement in the sea of other stuff, .

so i'll provide these links again that actually DO have good stuff on this topic and amplify his point...

http://www.airforums.com/forums/586140-post100.html

what's the topic again?

never mind here are some facts to add to this collective...

-while mpg goes down as speed (and surface resistance) increases the curve isn't LINEAR...

-vehicles have a theoretical c/d but the effective drag changes with speed and conditions...

-and the LOWEST fuel economy doesn't come at high speeds, it happens at zero resistance while at idle.

all things being equal, of course.

-when fuel (g or d) is combusted with oxygen not all of the potential/stored hydrocarbon energy (or 02) is converted to heat energy...

-there are ways to IMPROVE this conversion or full extraction of energy, which do improve engine efficiency

-also, not all of the heat from combustion is converted to mechanical energy...

-and there are ways to IMPROVE this conversion too that IMPROVE engine efficiency...

-but regardless of these changes, the gallon of gasoline or diesel will last LONGEST when the engine is turned off

now i could provide an example to support these contentions using...oh,

-a rotary engine with only 1.3 liter of displacement, in a small aircraft that is climbing, but not changing speeds,

-versus a steam powered tractor dragging a plow at 7 mph, down a hill...

-vs a team of oxen pulling a barge over a HILL on the erie canal with 4.10 gearing ...

which runs really CLOSE BY j/c where the a/s factory is located....

and where they used to build mohos with carburated 454s that had a little 'vacuum gauge' on the dash...

the driver could use this gauge to fiddle with fuel economy...

or to watch the vacuum controlled automatic door steps go UP and DOWN...

but i won't.

cheers
2air'






cheers
2air'
__________________
all of the true things that i am about to tell you are shameless lies. l.b.j.

we are here on earth to fart around. don't let anybody tell you any different. k.v.
2airishuman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 10:01 AM   #191
Rivet Master
 
fastrob's Avatar
 
1976 25' Tradewind
. , AZ to Maine
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 545
Good Choice Timemachine!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by TIMEMACHINE View Post
I have to thank kevbo and bob for this thread.

After nearly 20,000 miles of towing our Safari 25 FB/SE around our beautiful country with our 2005 Ford PSD FX4 Crew Cab long bed, we said goodbye to the diesel and bought a 2008 Dodge Power Wagon with a Hemi gasser.

Why you ask, who would be stupid enough to go from an ultimate tow machine to a gasser?

.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ...............................................
I am ready for the flaming.
I deleted the meat of the origional post quote to reply to the point of the thread. Timemachine did the smart thing. He got rid of a lemon and bought something he hopes is better. I hope he gets many years of good service from the new rig.
From my point of view his logic sounds great!
Diesel has it's place in long distance, I heard over 25,000 miles per year, and heavy loads, you define a heavy load for yourself. USA Today had an article of a study that indicated that diesel was more efficient than hybrids or gas for energy efficiency. It would not matter what you had if it was a lemon.
A tank of stabilized diesel should last longer in storage than gas. When the poo hits the fan, like it is now, I want to be ready for a supply interruption.
We have both gas and diesel vehicles and a big tank of fuel oil in an energy emergency.
By all means get rid of lemons, make lemonade.
__________________
"Talk is cheap, Airstreams are expensive," Wally Byam.
fastrob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 10:50 AM   #192
Incorrigible
 
Ike T's Avatar
 
1976 Argosy 24
-- , Georgia
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 559
Quote:
Originally Posted by canadianguy View Post
I assure you that what I am telling you is fact, and that it's very difficult to have a debate politely when fact is on your side.
Having facts on your side is meaningless if your audience cannot interpret the facts. Your seeming unwillingness to offer more details to your position naturally leads others to be less than enthusiastic in a conversation.

I could say "because 2x = 4, x = 2" all day long, but at some point I would have to explain it in greater detail other than "That's a fact" (Geez, I hope it really is a fact!).

You may be better served by saying what you mean and providing some detailed explanation rather than providing us open-ended questions that so we can figure it all out. People are thinking about your posts, but not from the same reference that you present your information. Some of us just don't quite put it together like you do, and our best efforts to understand fall a little short.

I also agree it's time for a different thread to have a meaningful discussion about some interesting information. Believe me.. I am all for understanding how to improve efficiency from our current 8 to 10 mpg in tow (we don't tow with the usual vehicles). If I could get to 12 mpg in tow, I'd feel at least 20% smarter.
__________________
Tim

1976 24' Argosy
1973 International Harvester Travelette 1210 4x4 'Bernard' 164" WB
1997 Georgie Boy 30' SuperDuty v10
Ike T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 10:56 AM   #193
USN/LAPD Retired
 
Safari-Rick's Avatar
 
2005 25' Safari
North Las Vegas , United States
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 850
Briefly, I have the 2007 Dodge 6.7L Diesel. In Los Angeles traffic I'm getting 17.5 mpg. Just finished a trip down to San Diego, CA. It has a few small hills on the way and back. I got 15.8 mpg.

Just saying......
__________________
2007 Dodge Ram Quadcab 6.7L Diesel w/jakebrake

"Better to have more then you need, then need more then you have because you don't have enough!"
AIR #: 8129
Safari-Rick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 12:53 PM   #194
Sky
Classic 30
 
Sky's Avatar
 
Sum Wear , Ohio
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 569
Images: 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2airishuman View Post
the last 35 or so posts in this thread have been very weird.

blah blah blah
Weird! WEIRD! Who you calling weird??
Attached Images
 
__________________
"Only dull people are brilliant at breakfast" - Oscar Wilde

2500HD DMax............30' Classic
__________________
Sky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 08:06 PM   #195
2 Rivet Member
 
Currently Looking...
Red Deer , Alberta
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by ROBERTSUNRUS View Post
Hi, some cars several years back had what they called an "Economy Gauge" It was just a vacuum gauge with green, yellow, and red on the face. Green being the highest vacuum reading and the best economy.
These gauges really measure the load on the engine, and yes, the load affects the fuel economy. It takes more fuel to make 100HP than it does to make 50HP. I'm talking about the engine using the least fuel to produce a given horsepower. I've seen these gauges as well, and while the overall fuel consumption is going up because the power you are producing is going up, the specific fuel consumption in gallons of fuel per horsepower-hour is going down.

I am not talking about the fuel economy of vehicle as a whole. You're driving conditions determine how much power you need at the rear wheels. I am saying that the most efficient way to make that power is to gear the engine such that it is at full throttle.

So if eliminating the pumping loss doesn't improve fuel economy, then what is it that improves the fuel economy of these multidisplacement engines? I'm glad we have a lot of experts here, this should be answered quickly, and I can learn something new.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ROBERTSUNRUS View Post
As for your "Prediction" it is already a known fact that Diesels don't have any engine braking; That's why they made Jake Brakes.
Do you now understand why though? I'd like to point out that I never actually new that diesels lacking engine braking. The only difference between a diesel engine and a gasoline engine in braking mode is the intake pumping loss.
__________________
canadianguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 08:21 PM   #196
2 Rivet Member
 
Currently Looking...
Red Deer , Alberta
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ike T View Post
I also agree it's time for a different thread to have a meaningful discussion about some interesting information. Believe me.. I am all for understanding how to improve efficiency from our current 8 to 10 mpg in tow (we don't tow with the usual vehicles). If I could get to 12 mpg in tow, I'd feel at least 20% smarter.
If somebody starts the thread, I'll participate. Otherwise, I agree, it's best to leave it to rest if people aren't interested.
__________________

__________________
canadianguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New GM Diesel V8 JimGolden Tow Vehicles 49 12-24-2007 07:36 PM
Need a New diesel?? PeterH-Airstreamer Off Topic Forum 17 01-23-2007 09:29 AM
Should I have dumped my fresh water? wacnstac Fresh Water Systems 9 05-30-2006 09:28 AM
Diesel drfredwb Tow Vehicles 43 07-26-2005 08:54 PM


Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.