| |
Subject |
Author |
Date Posted |
Forum
|
 |
RE: Setting up B&W Companion Hitch
Just for some perspective on the hitch coming out, we have a 36' box trailer at work that is being pulled by a 2011 3500 dually with a B&W Turnover ball gooseneck. We had been using the truck without the trailer so the ball was out. When the driver was putting the ball back in he pulled the lever out and lock it in the open position, and after setting the ball into place something happened to distract him. The lever never got released, so the pin was never in the ball.
He ended up pulling that trailer around for half the day without any problems. Only after going through a intersection fast and the trailer lifting up (but the ball not coming out of the hole) did he realize what happened. He pulled over and released the pin to engage the ball. Other than possibly needing to change his under shorts there were no ill effects.
The companion is a lot harder to get in and out than the ball, so long story short if the hitch becomes a little loose because of the mat compressing there is no way it will come out!
Funny you should send that story.
On our last trip, I forgot to release the handle on MY turn-over ball with our 5th wheel attached (using my gooseneck adapter).
When I realized, I pulled over several miles down the road, and sure enough, it was not locked.
I released the pin into the ball and breathed a sigh of relief.
No hint that anything was loose, and the 1800 pounds held it down fine.
|
bobinyelm
|
04/06/12 08:45pm |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Setting up B&W Companion Hitch
I have Line-X. It is a great coating but it is not cheap-I plan on keeping my truck for many years.
No argument, but I am sure that the franchise charges for the use of the product and name, plus the applier charges for their overhead, time and expertise applying the stuff, so the materials themselves may not be THAT superior to other 2-Part catalyzed urethane coatings.
If one is willing to do the prep and the spraying, maybe something approaching Line-X quality is possible for a third the price after the other elements are stripped away.
|
bobinyelm
|
04/06/12 03:36pm |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Setting up B&W Companion Hitch
I can't imagine if the hitch got a tad loose that you wouldn't hear it rattle or bang on stops and starts LONG before the entire thing ripped loose from the bed and the 5th wheel went careening down the road.
I'm all for safety as well, but checking the torque frequently should preclude carnage.
As for nothing between the hitch and the bed, if you have a Ford, B&W says you actually SHOULD have rubber padding between the hitch and the bed, and provides the materials free as a retrofit kit.
|
bobinyelm
|
04/06/12 03:22pm |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Setting up B&W Companion Hitch
I started researching spray-in bedliners, and there's one that uses a 2-part catalyzed mix like Line-X that is supposed to be VERY good (much better than the roll-on air-cure types):
http://www.tptools.com/p/2600,233_U-Pol-Raptor-Truck-Bed-Liner-Kit.html
Where to buy:
http://www.amazon.com/U-POL-0820V-GUN-Black-Truck-Liner/dp/B003TQIIPG/ref=pd_rhf_cr_p_t_1
Application Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKDpYIT6VkA
(Here's one applying Hurculiner with a brush and roller-the spray Raptor seems like a better deal, especially that it chemically cures like Line-X):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUYjVFvqSbE&feature=related
If I have to get rid of the drop-in liner, Raptor is 1/3rd the price of Linex-X (and comes w/ a gun) and if it's 1/3rd as good even, that's all I need since I don't beat my bed up.
Bob
PS Anyone use the stuff here?
|
bobinyelm
|
04/06/12 11:33am |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Setting up B&W Companion Hitch
Thanks for the suggestions and the photo.
Looks like you have your brackets tilted forward to put the king pin as close over-the-ball as possible, which is my intent.
I'll try it w/ the liner/mat in place, and if I feel much movement, I will remove the liner.
I'd prefer a spray-in-liner, but it never seems like there's enough $ to do everything I want to do.
|
bobinyelm
|
04/06/12 10:25am |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Setting up B&W Companion Hitch
I've been using a Gooseneck adapter w/ the turn-over ball, which puts the king pin directly over the ball (the ball is almost 5" in front of the axle), and the bumper clears the 5er by about 6" on turns, and the nose door clears the bed when opened by about 2" (meaning that one has to be aligned perfectly to open it at all).
Even at its most forward position using the different mounting holes for the brackets, the king pin will be BEHIND the ball, and barely over the axle, so I should GAIN bumper clearance no matter what I do w/ the brackets.
I guess I will adjust them for their MOST forward position and see how everything goes.
The reason I am trying the Companion is because on less-than-smooth roads (and transitions like between roads and bridge lips, and changes of pavement surfaces), I get considerable "chucking" where the 5er kind of "shakes" the dually, which I am hoping will cease w/ a proper 5er hitch.
I only have about 4000mi towing a 5er compared to 100k miles towing conventional trailers, and I am hoping that this "chucking" was only a consequence of using the gooseneck adapter (which in all other regards I LOVED). I am sure a cushioned 5er hitch would eliminate chucking completely, but am reluctant to spend thousands for such a hitch.
I admit to having spent such sums for PullRites and a Hensley Arrow for conventional trailers, but there at least I could justify the expenditures in the name of eliminating trailer sway, which unlike chucking, can cause accidents.
Glad to know bed liners and rubber mats haven't done anything evil. I'll try the Companion over them before going to the trouble of removing the liner (which I DO like for utility when not towing). I was concerned that the movement of the Companion as the liner compressed/decompressed might allow enough movement of the hitch to where you'd feel "shaking" as the 5er flexed the liner a bit.
If I feel such shaking, I guess I'll just remove the liner and try again.
Having never experienced how a 5er SHOULD feel w/ a "proper" hitch, I am just trying to anticipate what to expect.
Bob
|
bobinyelm
|
04/06/12 08:00am |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
Setting up B&W Companion Hitch
I just picked up a used-once Companion hitch for my '03 Dually Quad-Cab Dodge, and was wondering, aside from the height to keep my 5er level w/ the ground and 6" min above my bed rails, what the IDEAL fore/aft position for the king pin is.
There are 3 positions available for the brackets (tilted forward or aft to move the pivot point).
My B&W Turn-over ball is fixed a few inches forward of the rear axle, and since I have a long bed, there is no clearance problem, so the position that provides the best balance ride, and handling would be the one I'd choose.
I'm just not sure whether adjusting the pivot forward of the ball, or behind it, would provide the best ride and handling (or the easiest handling when backing up*).
The 5er is a light (7000# dry weight) 25ft Wildcat single slide unit, so is not a challenge pin or overall weight for the truck.
Also, B&W says that a drop-in bedliner requires removal, or a full cutout so the Companion rails contact the steel bed is necessary, yet I've heard that mounting on a bedliner, or a bedliner with a heavy rubber mat (as I use) is fine as long as the mounting is properly torqued down to 40ft-lbs prior to tightening the "U" bolts to the hitch frame. Anyone tried towing w/ a bedliner, and/or heavy rubber mat in place?
Suggestions?
Thanks,
Bob
*With a long WB truck, and a short king-pin-to-trailer wheelbase, backing has to be done carefully as beyond a very moderate angle, it's easy to run out of steering to where one cannot straighten the rig, and jack-knifing in reverse is all-too-easy,
|
bobinyelm
|
04/05/12 10:41pm |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Is it possible to get TOO GOOD fuel economy?
Fuel lubricity is only a factor if your injection fuel pump is fuel lubricated. The older Cummins with the VP-44, and I think the VE pump is, and the newer CP-3 isn't I believe. I don't know about Ford or Chevy. And yes it's nice that a cheap two stroke oil additive is as good or better than a lot of the fuel additives. In that study they only went with 1/2 oz to a gallon too. Most of the older Dodge owners that run it are running 1 oz to a gallon of fuel.
Do the injectors themselves benefit from more lubrication, or is adding oil a waste of time w/ the CRDs?
|
bobinyelm
|
11/30/11 08:32am |
Tow Vehicles
|
|
RE: Is it possible to get TOO GOOD fuel economy?
Most folks do not have the discipline to drive conservative consistently. In a single tank of fuel, just one aggressive passing episode will bring the mpgs way down. My wife has a 4cyl gas engine in her car and the instantaneous fuel economy is very telling. slight hills or just a little too much go pedal and the mileage is down.
What would be a fun test is to switch trucks with someone that has a similar truck (does not have to be the same) and see what kind of mileage you get with their truck and them with yours...
HA!
If you asked my wife, I think she'd tell you the last time she saw me pass anyone was probably in 1987, or maybe 1988.
I hear you, though. I bought my nephew's 2001 Volvo S60 T5 last year. He and his wife owned it since new and averaged just under 22mpg since buying it.
I managed to average 27 locally, and just a tad under 30 on long trips in the 9mo I owned it (comfortable seats, but I just never liked the car very much, and found a nice C320 wagon instead). They lived in a more urban area than I do, but discipline and consistency was not how they drove, while I get a kick out of trying to drive as smoothly as I can, which helps the mileage a lot.
I'm taking the truck towing my little bitty Casita travel trailer to AZ and back to visit my kids(about 2500mi total). I'll see how I do on that trip.
|
bobinyelm
|
11/28/11 09:00pm |
Tow Vehicles
|
|
RE: Is it possible to get TOO GOOD fuel economy?
I'd use a different re-builder next time. Good luck.
With luck, this one will outlast ME.
|
bobinyelm
|
11/25/11 06:56pm |
Tow Vehicles
|
|
RE: Is it possible to get TOO GOOD fuel economy?
OP, best I remember you question was about running too lean and hating to screw it up by spending $2000 for new injectors.
No you cannot run too lean (injectors were flow tested) so save your money on larger injectors and I would even sell the $1000 spares.
I DO NOT DOUBT your mileage (you have a very smart right foot) although I would compare the miles driven with what a GPS says.
The new injectors are in my closet as we speak.
For now I'll just hold them.
I have only $1k in a set of six (OEM Part#), which I think I can almost always get back.
The $2k was for HiPo injectors, which make more HP/Torque, but truthfully, I have more power than I am used to just w/ the stock engine, and I prefer economy to power. I figure that's why I have 6 gears to choose from. I am retired, and am not in a rush. The 20minutes I lose on the road today is forgotten about tomorrow, but the extra $20 I spend on fuel today by going fast is gone for good. :)
The GPS agrees perfectly w/ the speedo and odometer, BTW.
60mph GPS = 60mph speedo, and 1mi takes exactly 60 sec at 60mph (checked MANY times w/ my stopwatch chronograph while I drive).
Like I said, as an airline pilot, I was naturally obsessive about checking and re-checking everything, then checking it again. All my careless pilot friends died very early on.
Even some of my most skilled friends have died (the last one flying Senator Ted Stevens last year (He was a retired Chief Instructor, and Chief Pilot at Alaska Airlines on 737s before retiring and continuing to fly often): http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38637072/ns/us_news-life/t/former-sen-ted-stevens-dies-alaska-plane-crash/ )
You just cannot BE too careful.
There IS no "perfect" in life.
I am not infallible, but I DO try to cover all bases, which is why I was checking out here what the shop said.
|
bobinyelm
|
11/25/11 11:23am |
Tow Vehicles
|
|
RE: Is it possible to get TOO GOOD fuel economy?
With all do respect you don't even know how a diesel engine operates. Your Benz put out more power when the pump was turned up. You may have not noticed but it did. If you put it on the track or dyno it would have showed up in the numbers. There is a reason trucks or tractors N/A or turbo in competition put out black smoke. And it's not for show.:B
I never said I was a diesel expert. If I were, I wouldn't have been asking the question here, because I would know it already. Perhaps the Benz WAS putting out more power, but beyond a certain throttle position, the black smoke was FAR more noticeable than the extra power being produced. I don't have any dyno results-only my seat-of-the-pants impressions as I was honest about.
Again, the more heat (smoke, fuel) you put out the more power you will make up to the point of hydro'ing the engine or burning something up or breaking something. With a non turbo engine you will burn pistons long before you drowned out the engine with fuel. A turbo will buy you some more time but that is about it before you make ash trays.
In short, because the diesel does not have an air door the ONLY thing controlling the RPM of the engine is the amount of fuel entering the engine. You can't hurt your engine.
My basic assertion was correct then, that engine output is proportional to fuel introduced, and I appreciate that "You can't hurt your engine." That was, after all, my question.
Here are some mileage reports from some people.
5.9 mileage.
Here is a 6.7 report.
I read every one of the 9 pages of owner reports in that link "5.9 mileage." All except TWO in your link were for the 5.7 liter Hemi gas V-8. There were two owners who mentioned they had the Cummins, but only ONE mentioned mileage, and he said 21mpg, and we don't know if he was running an auto transmission or the 6spd manual like I have. As for the 6.7 link, I purposefully AVOIDED the 6.7 engine specifically because of the awful fuel economy reports from owners, as well as the troublesome emission-related equipment fitted to these engines. Therefore, I consider them irrelevant in a head-to-head comparison with early 5.9 CRD engines. Apples and oranges I'm afraid.
You must have a good one because none are close to you mileage.
:B
In comparison to the 9 pages of people who responded that had 5.7 V8 Hemis, or the fuel-hog 6.7, I DO have a good one, and indeed none ARE close to my mileage.
You perfectly expressed why I did NOT buy a 5.7 Hemi or a 6.7, in fact.
I am even willing to admit compared to other 5.9 Six Cylinder Cummins (not just the ONE Cummins operator in those 9 pages of the owner reports), I do, indeed "have a good one." If I hadn't thought it was somewhat abnormal, I wouldn't have ASKED the question that started this thread. Naturally, I'd prefer to think my mileage is a GOOD thing, but when presented that it could be a HARMFUL thing, I needed to ask, and learn.
No, I didn't expect the kind of fuel economy I am getting from my truck when I purchased it, (though I have been more than delighted) and I have been told that it is out-of-the-ordinary in both polite, and quite impolite ways as has been demonstrated here.
I am willing to accept it is ABNORMAL both because of my expectations as well as those comments, which is the VERY reason I came here asking whether the fact I am getting better-than-average mileage could somehow lead to engine damage (as the rebuild shop suggested).
Maybe it's just better to NOT ask questions that somehow bring trolls up to the bait they incorrectly perceive was presented for their entertainment and accusations.
I guess I have learned my lesson that for far too many people, entertainment by ridiculing others is a stronger motivation than assisting.
To those who offered sincere, helpful answers devoid of sarcasm or cynicism, I thank you for your candid information, and will not obsess further that I am somehow harming my engine by virtue of reduced fuel flow as was suggested. My question has, by a long and circuitous path, been answered.
With all of that said, any further dialog on this topic by me would probably be repetitive, and perhaps only cause hard feelings, so I cannot imagine anything good could come of further beating of this near-death horse, and will, therefore, cease doing so.
|
bobinyelm
|
11/25/11 01:21am |
Tow Vehicles
|
|
RE: Is it possible to get TOO GOOD fuel economy?
duplicate
|
bobinyelm
|
11/25/11 01:11am |
Tow Vehicles
|
|
RE: Is it possible to get TOO GOOD fuel economy?
To the OP.
I own many diesels. From 42 to 360 HP.
When you're talking pre-emission diesels they all have about the same BSFC figures. IOW they all put out about the same amount of power for the amount of fuel put into them.
My BIL and FIL have or had the same truck you have other than they are a 4X's. I have spent many hours going to races in those trucks pulling a 28" car trailer at about 7K. My BIL drives like an 85 year old grandma on quaaludes.:Z He does not go a mile an hour over the limit in Ca which is 55 towing. He cut the muffler off and his truck is straight piped to pick up a touch of mileage. His mileage when towing is right at 13 to 13.2 race after race after race. This is on level mostly flat roads.
I have a stock 105 HP 5.7 that I drive daily to work. It is in a car which is way more aerodynamic then any truck. This engine has no smog at all on it. I can get 30 MPG when I'm real easy on it. Most of the time I'm at 28 or so.
This is in a car that has a 105 HP diesel engine with no smog and was designed to get ultimate milage because of the oil crisis at the time. This car also has some VERY tall gears in it to get the best mileage possible. I've never checked it but from the RPM I would say mid 2's to high 2's. This engine also has very high compression to get the best mileage possible.
In short this car and engine is designed to get the ultimate mileage from a diesel with no smog and it barely get's 30 MPG average. Right at what the EPA says it will get.
Here is what the EPA says about your truck.
Do I think you're truck can get 28 MPG? Yep.
Do I think you're truck can get 28 MPG average? Nope.
Don't CRDs get better BSFC than indirect injection engines? All of the pre-2003 Cummins 24v 5.9 engines make less power and use more fuel than the CDRs that came after as I understand?
When you say you don't think my truck can get 28mpg average, you are, with all due respect, just plain making an ignorant statement. For that to be true, either I can't read a gas pump, or I can't operate a 6 function calculator, and I can assure you neither of those is true.
Do I get that every tank? Hell no, but on the 1100 mile trip I DID average that over those total miles where I mentioned specifically where I covered the miles in 2 days, shutting the engine down only once at the motel, was traveling empty, had the cruise set for 60mpg on the level portions (and turned off for the hillier parts, where I allowed the vehicle to slow to 50 on hills rather than downshift or lug the engine). I filled 3 times, using 40.1 gallons overall for 1126 miles, and topped off until there was liquid fuel in the filler neck.
This was NOT an "ordinary" run in that it was all Interstate/4 Lane (Waxahachie, TX-Russelville, AL RT), with no traffic to mess with, and generally, once I got up to speed, I just maintained it hour after hour (I didn't even stop to eat, and just carried water and snacks, though I did stop w/ out shutting down every 4-5 hours for physiologically "relieving" myself). I was especially curious since this was the first out-of-town run after I got my rebuilt engine installed (except for about 300 local miles after installation), so the engine was pretty tight. The best I saw on the fuel computer on that trip was 30mpg on level ground steady-state cruise (of course on slight grades it dropped below that, and on downhill slopes it far exceeded that), but I am sure I averaged what I did because 99% of the time I was just cruising at an optimum speed, rather than stopping/going, or accelerating from traffic lights, etc.
I was running Shell Rotella 15w40 (I now use Delo 400) in the engine, and Amsoil in the manual transmission and differential, with 65psi all around in the stock sized 17" Michelins (about 50% tread). The odometer was dead-on using highway mile markers, and using the GPS, the speedometer was exactly right as well (and I verified that 60mph indicated indicated exactly 1mi/min to cross check everything). As a professional military and airline pilot with 26,000 flight hours, I am hardly sloppy about how I make time/speed/distance/fuel calculations.
For the record, I routinely get between 20 and 23mpg around town (mostly rural Texas, where it's pretty flat, though it includes some Dallas city driving as well).
The 17mpg towing my 5th wheel was over 500+ miles, again filling until liquid remained in the filler neck on level ground after starting out w/ a full tank.
http://media.use.com/images/s_1/89536e0019582ff2a11c.jpg
The EPA is more than welcome to come ride along with me if they want some real-world experience if they disagree w/ my results, BTW. I didn't SEE my truck (Ram 3500 Dually 5.9 Diesel HO, 4dr, 2wd) in their list (I went through all 950 entries), but see below for what I did find.
Towing my tiny fiberglass 17ft Casita travel trailer (pretty streamlined and low profile) weighing 3300# or so I get 23mpg highway on trips. And yes, it DOES look dumb behind the Ram. I usually tow it w/ my Sprinter van (FedEx size) and get 20.5mpg average towing w/ it.
http://media.use.com/images/s_1/b269f67074e3594dfdac.jpg http://media.use.com/images/s_1/d519df3d401a252fff08.jpg
As an aside, I didn't come here to post to create a discussion about fuel economy other than to ask if what I am getting could DAMAGE my engine as the rebuilder suggests. Unfortunately, it turned into a "That's impossible, so he must be fabricating/mistaken/using bad data" discussion, which was pretty far afield.
Some of those who responded actually tried to answer my question, for which I am thankful. For the most part, I am satisfied that I am probably NOT hurting my engine, though I do wish I understood a bit more how an electronically direct injected diesel works vs. an indirect, mechanically injected engine.
Even in those indirect mechanical injection days, I remember discussions many years ago about somehow adjusting the injection pump so the engine produced a clean exhaust (low power), or a smoky black one (more power), which doesn't make sense if the throttle controls only the fuel volume. In my old Mercedes 240D and 300D (non-turbo) the engine could not produce more power regardless of how much fuel was added (and the result of more throttle was just more black smoke, but no additional acceleration), so clearly in those, more smoke did NOT indicate more power.
These days, with turbo boost and electronic injection, more throttle may produce more smoke, but it ALSO produces more acceleration-a LOT more.
Bob
As I mentioned, I didn't find my Ram in the 2003 EPA list, but I did happen upon my 2003 Mercedes SLK230, which EPA says 26mpg highway, but on which I get 33mpg (that's summer w/ the A/C on), and my 2003 Mercedes C320 Wagon, which EPA says 23mpg, but on which I get 30mpg, again A/C on. I drive them like I drive my truck: sensibly and not above the speed limit, ever. Not ashamed to say I have not gotten a speeding ticket for 33 years.
The EPA obviously uses a more aggressive drive cycle than I do for their testing.
|
bobinyelm
|
11/24/11 10:28pm |
Tow Vehicles
|
|
RE: Is it possible to get TOO GOOD fuel economy?
Running lean should be inturpreted as running less fuel that engine was designed to. Out side the manufactuer's MAPing.
I never called you a liar I just said it was hard to beleive and it is.
You need to take it to a Cummins dealer. Maybe the injectors were incorect from the factory and were the cause of the original problem. They can identfy the injectors by part number or test the flow.
Towing the weight you mentioned and running less fuel then the vehicle was designed to WILL raise the exhaust temps and WILL cause power issues and possible melt down. Just go to a Cummins dealer and talk with them.
The injector part numbers were verified, and I sent the injectors out and had a flow-test done at operating pressures when the engine was being rebuilt (I MENTIONED THE FLOW TEST IN AN EARLIER POST). They said they were "right-on." I have a set of freshly rebuilt ones still sealed in their plastic tubes from a Dodge dealer I bought on ebay for $1000 "just in case," but the injector shop said it was a waste of money to install them.
If you run less flow (uniformly), doesn't the vehicle just produce less power, and wouldn't it just slow down? Isn't the throttle in a diesel basically control the fuel flow (unlike in a gas injected spark engine where it controls both air flow AND fuel flow)?
If a couple injectors were not providing enough fuel, I would think the engine would not be so incredible smooth. Believe me, a 3ft gear shift lever is pretty good at indicating engine smoothness. When looking for my truck, I drove a few where the gear shift was actually shaking a bit either at idle, or under load, kind of like you' expect a gasser to do with a misfiring plug, or a bad injector.
I don't know, but it would seem if the engine were developing too much heat from too little fuel (overall), would it take 8-10 miles to come up to operating temperature from cold as I mentioned it does? And if the injectors are supplying too little fuel for the throttle position, wouldn't the truck be a bit gutless or unresponsive to slight additional throttle?
I know in the old days of mechanical injector pumps and indirect injection, the pump took care of injection timing, and the throttle pretty much just determined fuel volume.
|
bobinyelm
|
11/24/11 09:30pm |
Tow Vehicles
|
|
RE: Is it possible to get TOO GOOD fuel economy?
Im not saying either way about your fuel mileage claims. At one time I had a 2007 Dodge (6.7 Cummins) 6 spd. It would get 10-12 towing typical 5ers. It would get about 18-20 empty. After I removed all smog stuff, replaced factory******exhaust with "basically" straight pipes, installed a bigger bearing in the turbo, and "chipped/programmed". It would easily get 25-27 empty. (Thats not on flat roads). I can understand 28 empty on flat (Assuming you did aftermarket work too).
--What I am saying is---It is funny how many people called your bluff and you rebuted (And you should) but when one guy said he believes you---you gave him praises for being honost. That struck me as funny. When someone agrees they are honost. When several other tell of their HONOST past experiences. They become liars.
--picture this please!!!! If you are travelling down the highway, and EVERY car is coming right at you, It is likely that YOU are in the wrong lane.
--Now then, if you are getting that kind of mileage (STOCK) then I wouldnt mess with it. If you did the aftermarket stuff I did, then announce it that way! Just realize. You are one in (who knows how many) that does get that good of MPG. That is why people are calling you on this. It seems every first time diesel owner gives wild stories about "unbelievable" MPG. Only to be proven wrong. If you are telling us the true facts, then "as I said" by all means enjoy it!! If you are actually too lean, it will cause damage for sure, but you are saving enough in fuel to pay for the damage being done.
Other than having no muffler-just the straight 4" all the way back, it's dead stock unless the PO altered the program (which I have no way of knowing at this point). It has a sticker saying it was re-flashed by a dealer in '06 under a service campaign, there's nothing to indicate it was ever messed with.
I bought it from a dealer, so there's no one to ask. It was clean as a whistle w/ a flawless Laramie package and all the books, so I assumed it was a private owner who really cared about the truck, which after looking at countless 6spd manual Cummins duallies that had been run commercially, was very refreshing. When I replaced the clutch (when the eng and tranny were out, so why not), the original still looked new, so I doubt the truck had ever been hot-rodded or worked hard (the B&W gooseneck hitch had no wear-marks to speak of).
I suspect the Michelins may help the mileage a little but, since I've always done a bit better on most of that brand, but not more than a couple of thents MPG I'd ecpect.
Well, as far as my "defense" of those that "believed" me, it's only natural for me to praise/thank someone who believed me, since in this case they is affirming fact. Those saying otherwise based on THEIR experience may be "statistically correct" for their own experience and some others they've maybe known, but not in ALL cases, nor in MY case, which is why I was asking here after being told only a "problem" would yield such mileage results. Obviously you are doing as well (25-27), and the 6.7 is widely known as a fuel hog compared to the '03-04.5 5.9 models. I don't think the '03 has any of the emissions stuff to begin with that you took off on your later model, in fact.
My concern isn't bragging since I won't likely ever meet any of you all, so what would be the point of an anonymous brag? Here I am only a screen-name, not a real person. Hell, for all anyone knows, I don't even OWN a truck. In reality, there HAS to be a bit of trust to make this Forum stuff work at all.
My true concern is understanding what the shop was trying to tell me (since it didn't make sense to me, being that diesels run open-throttle, so air:fuel ratios are different than in the spark-ignition engines I am more familiar with), and making sure I was indeed NOT damaging my "new" engine.
I feel reassured with that now, and that's all I was interested in, though I would prefer that those who don't know wouldn't bother passing judgment on facts they cannot possibly verify, and which I can only "claim." The question wasn't whether I get that mileage (I do), but rather does that mileage indicate a physical problem which could harm my machinery.
I mean, even if I scanned and presented my fuel log in image form, I could STILL be falsifying it. Anyone who would lie, would probably also falsify, and that person would be a sick puppy for lying w/o purpose. I mean, if you asked me if I committed a crime, I might lie to save my skin and avoid punishment (and wouldn't feel too bad if it worked), but lie about something meaningless (it's not like I modified something to achieve the better performance claiming I was a genius) to people I don't know? Pointless.
Now, I thank those who presented honest information, but I wasted a lot of time and words talking about something other than the question. But maybe that it's Thanksgiving that best explains turning a question into the Salem Witch Hunts.
|
bobinyelm
|
11/24/11 01:12am |
Tow Vehicles
|
|
RE: Is it possible to get TOO GOOD fuel economy?
Diesels need fuel to make power...period. If your truck pulls that well, its getting the fuel it needs, besides, I've never heard of a diesel engine running lean, they don't run the same type of induction system that a gasser does, fuel delivery is controlled by the pump and the injector size is not a factor if the pump won't deliver. If you don't feed fuel to a diesel, no power or performance, on the other hand, pour the fuel to that engine, tons of power, tons of smoke. If you're happy, leave it alone, enjoy the truck, if you want more, start by turning up the pump, when the pump won't push anymore fuel, then its time for bigger injectors. The short answer is....go drive it, you can't hurt it.
Thanks. I appreciate the straight answer. That was my understanding of "diesel theory" as well. I've owned several non-turbo diesel autos (Rabbits and several 240 and 300 Mercedes) and I remember if I added extra throttle (more fuel) than the engine could use to make power (it just did not accelerate with extra throttle), I just turned the extra fuel into lots of black smoke with no increase in forward speed.
Happy? I am ecstatic! I have MUCH more power than I need, so I can't anticipate trying to push more fuel as long as the present operating conditions are not harmful for the engine in any way.
It was suggested by one of the guys in the shop that I add enough 2cycle oil to the fuel when towing to make a 200:1 fuel-to-oil ratio to improve fuel lubricity, due to the ULSD fuel being deficient in this regard, as well as to increase the cetane of the fuel. My '03 doesn't have EGR or a CAT, so he said the oil would be helpful. Is that reasonable, or is it a complete waste of money?
Bob
|
bobinyelm
|
11/23/11 09:56pm |
Tow Vehicles
|
|
RE: Is it possible to get TOO GOOD fuel economy?
Are you recording every tank fillup, gallons and odometer, and calculating the MPG for each and every tank?
MPG based on one tank can be erroneous. MPG based on electronic dash readouts, likewise.
I record and calculate every tank without fail (on this and every other vehicle I own), and have done so for over 40 years.
As I said, I fill to the neck until I see diesel and not foam (takes a while I can tell you).
I have seen 30mpg on the electronic fuel readout at a constant 60mpg on flat ground (It was right after getting the truck back after the new engine so I didn't really believe it), and the 28 average empty was actually calculated by dividing miles by gallons over an 1100 mile trip where I shut down the engine only once when I overnighted, and refilled each tank while idling (I never shut down unless stopping for a LOG time). Around the local area I get more like 23mpg (calculated using gallons added and miles traveled).
Like I said I NEVER EVER exceed 60mph, I accelerate smoothly, I try to hypermile anticipating lights, etc., and I do the usual egg-between-the-foot-and-the-throttle, but other than Michelins, the truck is dead stock.
Believe me, When I bought the truck in '09 I was expecting only 20mpg empty, but I was hoping for 15mpg w/ a 5er like I now have because an older fellow in a WalMart lot w/ "my" identical truck said he was getting 15 pulling his 27ft 5er.
Bob
|
bobinyelm
|
11/23/11 09:47pm |
Tow Vehicles
|
|
RE: Is it possible to get TOO GOOD fuel economy?
Sorry but I have a hard time beleiving that good of mileage. If it was running that lean it would run like******and would have melted down by now. It would fall on its face and have NO power and more than likely a rough idle and hard starting along with high exhaust temps.Criss-crossing the Rockies with a 4000 pound Lance in the bed towing a Jeep would of for sure melted things down.
You need a new calculator.
Man, I KNEW I'd run into comments like yours. I've heard it all before, and been called a liar, etc. but I have fuel logs for the 13k miles since I bought the truck (I NEVER fail to calculate fuel mileage for any of my vehicles and I always top off when fueling, filling over and over until I see fuel in the filler neck after the foam goes down).
I generally get better mileage than most on all my vehicles because of my conservative style, but I only got so-so mileage w/ my Jeep Cherokee (16-20), and my Powerstroke E350 I had for 100k miles (11mpg towing a 10,000 pound 32ft Road Ranger TT, and 18-20mpg hwy empty w/ 3.55 gears), so I do know how to divide on a calculator, thank-you very much.
I am just trying to figure out if the shop is full of crap. I am not a diesel mechanic. (I was actually a physicist, an Air Force pilot during Nam, and now am a retired airline pilot, so I am not illiterate, or incapable of doing basic math)
I want to learn enough from someone who knows more than I about diesels to keep from spending money I don't have to, and keep from damaging my engine.
BTW, the engine starts great even cold w/out prewarming the grid heater, and idles so smooth you only know it's running by the sound. I do not have an exhaust gas temperature gauge. Figured if I kept the throttle position light, and didn't lug it, I wouldn't need to add one. SHOULD I install one?
Bob
|
bobinyelm
|
11/23/11 09:25pm |
Tow Vehicles
|
|
Is it possible to get TOO GOOD fuel economy?
I have an '03 Dually Quad Cab Cummins (2wd) that I bought 2 years ago w/ 110k miles and blow-by from a broken ring, but otherwise running like a Swiss watch.
I had the engine remanufactured (also the 6spd manual tranny), and while the truck runs GREAT, the rebuilder (large fleet diesel rebuilder) says I am risking my engine because it is getting too many MPG. They say even though the injectors were flow-checked, I must be "under-fueling" and that could burn valves and pistons. The reason I asked them is because it's never really broken in and is still using some oil (though is not smoking). It actually used almost no oil w/ the broken ring before rebuild.
They say I should get about 16-20hwy empty, and 10-12mpg max with my weight/height trailer to get enough fuel through the engine.
I drive VERY gently (never exceed 60, and tow my 5er at 57-60mpg) and get 23mpg local empty, up to 28mph highway (empty) and am getting 17mpg towing my single-slide Wildcat 25ft 5er (about 8000 pounds wet) on flatish TX roads.
The truck idles and runs so smoothly you cannot even feel it vibrating through the long gear shift, so it's hard for me to believe I am hurting the engine in any way. It's the smoothest engine I've ever owned-incredible really.
It takes about 10mi to come up to full temperature (they changed the first thermostat out to make sure it was closing fully) when empty (maybe 5mi pulling the trailer). They say that's normal for the 5.9 Cummins.
The shop says I should install larger injectors to get more fuel into the engine, but my understanding is that since there's no throttle, a diesel makes whatever power is possible based on the amount of fuel, and the injection timing, and not the size of the injectors (assuming you are not pedal to the metal).
I have plenty of power, and doubt I depress the throttle more than about 3/4"-1" to get the power I need (I have never even approached 1/2 throttle, and last year I criss-crossed the Rockies with a 4000 pound Lance in the bed towing a Jeep, and did just FINE averaging 16mpg overall). I always select a gear that never feels like I am "lugging" the engine, but I don't exceed 2200rpm much either (In mountains, I just pick a gear which at 2200rpm the truck feels like it's not working hard at all, and let the speed be whatever it is. If it's 3rd gear at 35mph, so be it. I make no effort to flog the horses to keep my speed up, in other words.)
I am absolutely delighted with the incredible power* I have and the excellent fuel economy, and would hate to screw it up by spending $2000 for new injectors. Compared to my old Ford Powerstroke (which had the 4spd auto trans), this engine has SO much more power as well as superior MPG that I would hate to think I have to degrade the performance I have grown to love. But if I am somehow damaging the engine, I'd rather not do that, either.
Bob
*Yes, I am aware that compared to my 305hp and 555ft-lb torque, the new trucks have 50% MORE, but to me, I have more than enough.
|
bobinyelm
|
11/23/11 09:01pm |
Tow Vehicles
|
|
