Improving Fuel Efficiency (MPG) - Page 4 - TundraTalk.net - Toyota Tundra Discussion Forum

User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #46 of 75 (permalink) Old 10-15-2017, 10:34 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Idaho
Posts: 163
Thanks: 72
Thanked 74 Times in 53 Posts
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by EngineeringNick View Post
And I believe the point of the electric fan is that it is battery driven opposed to directly adding to the engine load.
The point of an electric fan is to remove parasitic losses. The electric fan only turns when it is actually needed.

2012 Silver Sky Metallic Sequoia SR5 4WD 4.6L
TRD Pro eng skid, Or-Fab trans skid, custom transfer case skid, RCI gas tank skid, 1.75" lift with 6112 on lowest notch, Wheeler's Superbumps (front), Revtek 441R & 5100 (rear), Michelin Defender LT275/70R18 on MB Chaos +25, 3rd Row Removed
MtnClimber is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #47 of 75 (permalink) Old 10-15-2017, 11:43 AM
Senior Member
 
rruff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Ruidoso, NM
Posts: 1,151
Thanks: 224
Thanked 385 Times in 308 Posts
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 469 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by EngineeringNick View Post
I was looking to see if anyone had tried to modify the fuel injection process to inject vapor from the get-go instead of trying to spray a mist to get to the same result.
So you vaporize the fuel (by heating it?) and then inject it? Wouldn't that require a completely different fuel and intake system and ECU, to supply a gaseous rather than liquid fuel? And this is one of those things I'm sure Toyota would have done if it provided a measurable improvement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EngineeringNick View Post
When it comes to power input to run the generator I was thinking of trying to harness the motion of the wheels to start the generator similar to how the starter helps start the engine.Once the generator is on it shouldn't require a constant power source - if you understand how permanent magnet generator work...
Harnessing the motion of the wheels? Where is the energy that is making the wheels turn coming from, and how would you harness it?

If power is coming out, then *more* power is going in from somewhere. That's basic physics. It's a question of efficiency, output/input, which is always < 1. No free lunch, again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EngineeringNick View Post
I believe the point of the electric fan is that it is battery driven opposed to directly adding to the engine load.
The battery *stores* energy. The energy it receives comes from the alternator, which is driven by the engine. And again, there is a loss due to inefficiency which is substantial. Probably over 50% in this case (alternator+battery+fan motor).

And @MtnClimber , isn't the fan on the Tundra already controlled with a clutch so it is only driven when needed? This has been common on vehicle fans for a long time.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

2016 SR DC Long 4x4 5.7L. Intermittent wipers added (?!). MB TKO 18x9 +25. Hankook Dynapro ATM 325/65r18 (34.6x13) Future Offroad RV plans: Bed removed, homebuilt camper installed. Rear seat removed to make room for storage and bikes. King or ADS shocks with 700 lb springs, ~2" lift (may cheap out though). Rear leaves, maybe air bags. And more!
rruff is offline  
post #48 of 75 (permalink) Old 10-15-2017, 12:25 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: I'm Just Outside of Weird, TX
Posts: 1,090
Thanks: 265
Thanked 654 Times in 441 Posts
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 370 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by EngineeringNick View Post
...alternately, I was looking to see if anyone had tried to modify the fuel injection process to inject vapor from the get-go instead of trying to spray a mist to get to the same result...
No, not even the manufacturers with virtually unlimited resources and knowledge have successfully done it, and it probably has to do with Boyle's Law and the vapor pressures of hydrocarbon compounds.

Gasoline is a "middle of the barrel" product and contains a range of hydrocarbons, mostly C4-C12. In any event, they all remain liquid at typical ambient temperatures on earth, with some negligible loss at higher temps. Take the charge volume of a typical fuel injector, vaporize it (how to do this is "left to others"), and what do you have...probably a fraction of a cubic foot (I have no idea, and I'm not doing the calculation). Imagine trying to get that fuel vapor charge into a typical cylinder displacement once you've added enough air to get a stoichometric ratio for combustion.

Well, if you raise the pressure ENOUGH...No, wait a minute here, are we talking about injecting the fuel charge UPSTREAM of a supercharger!? Not exactly something which the NHTSB will endorse. But, theoretically, maybe it would then all squeeze into a volume expanding and contracting 5000 times a minute. No, wait, if you raise the charge pressure, then the gasoline will just go back toward a liquid state...and you're right back where you started.

No, Nickster, I think you need to apply some of that engineering training you received and do some thinking of your own instead of barnstorming and throwing out crap ideas for us to think about.

Then there's always liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen...uh, no, that's already been done, but it was the Saturn V. The astronaut said he was literally sitting on the tip of a bomb, and he was right. Brave guys.

(Edit: Oops, should have fact-checked before I spoke...the first stage Saturn V fuel was actually a form of kerosene with liquid oxygen as the oxidizer, so liquid hydrogen IS still on the table. )

Last edited by OldGuy43; 10-15-2017 at 03:33 PM.
OldGuy43 is offline  
 
post #49 of 75 (permalink) Old 10-15-2017, 01:56 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Idaho
Posts: 163
Thanks: 72
Thanked 74 Times in 53 Posts
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rruff View Post
And @MtnClimber , isn't the fan on the Tundra already controlled with a clutch so it is only driven when needed? This has been common on vehicle fans for a long time.
Yes, but the viscous clutch only partially disengages when not needed. There are still friction losses from the fluid coupling and fan constantly turning. Of course, the electric fan also has inefficiencies due to losses in the electrical conversion/storage/usage. According to the "ultimate authority," Wikipedia:

Quote:
The conversion of mechanical energy to electricity and back to mechanical rotary power with a fan motor is less efficient than a direct mechanical connection, but this is more than compensated by greater control of an electric fan through electronic thermostatic controls which can turn the fan completely off when the engine temperature is below the setpoint.
From: Fan clutch

Is the efficiency advantage of an electric fan over a clutch fan significant? Probably not.

2012 Silver Sky Metallic Sequoia SR5 4WD 4.6L
TRD Pro eng skid, Or-Fab trans skid, custom transfer case skid, RCI gas tank skid, 1.75" lift with 6112 on lowest notch, Wheeler's Superbumps (front), Revtek 441R & 5100 (rear), Michelin Defender LT275/70R18 on MB Chaos +25, 3rd Row Removed
MtnClimber is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to MtnClimber For This Useful Post:
rruff (10-15-2017)
post #50 of 75 (permalink) Old 10-15-2017, 10:01 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Mattituck, NY
Posts: 324
Thanks: 0
Thanked 133 Times in 100 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Garage
Am I the only one that wants to see this guy completely re-engineer the tundra, spending probably enough to buy a new prius; only to get 18 mpg in the end...

2014 SR Work Truck Package Double Cab 4x4 4.6L Magnetic Grey Tundra.
Official tri-state club member #48
dforlenza is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to dforlenza For This Useful Post:
Wacked (10-15-2017)
post #51 of 75 (permalink) Old 10-15-2017, 10:40 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 500
Thanks: 40
Thanked 254 Times in 169 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 185 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by EngineeringNick View Post
I'm scavenging here, but I see lower the truck, lower rolling resistance tires, and no fat chicks... Understand this isn't about saving money...
I agree. Lowering and low rolling resistance tires...preferably more narrow. (You'll never find wide tires on any economy car, so dont push the physics of a wider tire having less psi on the road because it doesn't equate to less rolling resistance!)

Money is where reality sets in. So you lowered the truck and added some more narrow eco tires. You might gain 1-2mpg long term average, tops. And how much did you spend to get it?

Do the math. Will you ever see a return on your investment within your or the trucks lifetime? Nope.

You bought a truck. If you want max MPG, drive it slow on the highway, coast to a stop for as long as possible, and get up to speed quickly but not aggressively.
RinconVTR is offline  
post #52 of 75 (permalink) Old 10-15-2017, 11:01 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Idaho
Posts: 163
Thanks: 72
Thanked 74 Times in 53 Posts
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldGuy43 View Post

Then there's always liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen...uh, no, that's already been done, but it was the Saturn V. The astronaut said he was literally sitting on the tip of a bomb, and he was right. Brave guys.

(Edit: Oops, should have fact-checked before I spoke...the first stage Saturn V fuel was actually a form of kerosene with liquid oxygen as the oxidizer, so liquid hydrogen IS still on the table. )
Space shuttle main engines burned liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen from that lil' external tank.

2012 Silver Sky Metallic Sequoia SR5 4WD 4.6L
TRD Pro eng skid, Or-Fab trans skid, custom transfer case skid, RCI gas tank skid, 1.75" lift with 6112 on lowest notch, Wheeler's Superbumps (front), Revtek 441R & 5100 (rear), Michelin Defender LT275/70R18 on MB Chaos +25, 3rd Row Removed
MtnClimber is offline  
post #53 of 75 (permalink) Old 10-15-2017, 11:07 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: I'm Just Outside of Weird, TX
Posts: 1,090
Thanks: 265
Thanked 654 Times in 441 Posts
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 370 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MtnClimber View Post
Space shuttle main engines burned liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen from that lil' external tank.
Ha! White Sands guy, am I right?
OldGuy43 is offline  
post #54 of 75 (permalink) Old 10-15-2017, 11:44 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Idaho
Posts: 163
Thanks: 72
Thanked 74 Times in 53 Posts
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldGuy43 View Post
Ha! White Sands guy, am I right?
Nah, Idaho guy, never been south of Los Alamos.

2012 Silver Sky Metallic Sequoia SR5 4WD 4.6L
TRD Pro eng skid, Or-Fab trans skid, custom transfer case skid, RCI gas tank skid, 1.75" lift with 6112 on lowest notch, Wheeler's Superbumps (front), Revtek 441R & 5100 (rear), Michelin Defender LT275/70R18 on MB Chaos +25, 3rd Row Removed
MtnClimber is offline  
post #55 of 75 (permalink) Old 10-15-2017, 11:47 PM
Senior Member
 
rruff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Ruidoso, NM
Posts: 1,151
Thanks: 224
Thanked 385 Times in 308 Posts
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 469 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RinconVTR View Post
I agree. Lowering and low rolling resistance tires...preferably more narrow. (You'll never find wide tires on any economy car, so dont push the physics of a wider tire having less psi on the road because it doesn't equate to less rolling resistance!).
Wider tires actually do have slightly lower resistance though, all else being equal.

It isn't going to make a lot of difference, but skinny tires on a Tundra look like shit. Might as well make it look and handle decent on the road while you are at it, eh?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RinconVTR View Post
Money is where reality sets in. So you lowered the truck and added some more narrow eco tires. You might gain 1-2mpg long term average, tops. And how much did you spend to get it?
That would easily pay for itself if you kept the truck 10 years (~$2500 in gas savings). Street tires would even be cheaper and last longer than the ones most of us "upgrade" to.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

2016 SR DC Long 4x4 5.7L. Intermittent wipers added (?!). MB TKO 18x9 +25. Hankook Dynapro ATM 325/65r18 (34.6x13) Future Offroad RV plans: Bed removed, homebuilt camper installed. Rear seat removed to make room for storage and bikes. King or ADS shocks with 700 lb springs, ~2" lift (may cheap out though). Rear leaves, maybe air bags. And more!
rruff is offline  
post #56 of 75 (permalink) Old 10-16-2017, 01:25 AM
Junior Member
 
gcomptech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Oregon
Posts: 9
Thanks: 2
Thanked 15 Times in 7 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have a 2012 DC 4.6L. I have had it since new. I installed a K&N CAI and MagnaFlow cat-back duals. I went from 14-16 mpg to 16.5-18 mpg. Plus, it screams. Many people on this forum, and others, have said that those mods don't make a difference. They did for me. Next up will be BAMs.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

2012 Tundra Double-Cab base work truck. K&N CAI, MagnaFlow cat-back duals, Linex bed liner, Black powder-coated steps, U.S. Rack Weekender. It's a work truck and it does that better than any truck I've ever owned.
gcomptech is offline  
post #57 of 75 (permalink) Old 10-16-2017, 01:51 AM
Senior Member
 
rruff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Ruidoso, NM
Posts: 1,151
Thanks: 224
Thanked 385 Times in 308 Posts
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 469 Post(s)
Modding the intake and exhaust at least has the potential for reducing pumping losses. Problem is, when you are in "high mpg" mode it will be at low power levels, where these losses are minimal.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

2016 SR DC Long 4x4 5.7L. Intermittent wipers added (?!). MB TKO 18x9 +25. Hankook Dynapro ATM 325/65r18 (34.6x13) Future Offroad RV plans: Bed removed, homebuilt camper installed. Rear seat removed to make room for storage and bikes. King or ADS shocks with 700 lb springs, ~2" lift (may cheap out though). Rear leaves, maybe air bags. And more!
rruff is offline  
post #58 of 75 (permalink) Old 10-16-2017, 05:58 AM
Senior Member
Premium Member
 
RIjon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 4,609
Thanks: 5,289
Thanked 6,091 Times in 2,793 Posts
Mentioned: 81 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 532 Post(s)
This thread has gone full retard

08 RCSB B00STED
10 T4R
RIjon is offline  
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to RIjon For This Useful Post:
Azblue (10-16-2017), Big Shasta (10-29-2017), RingSteel (10-17-2017)
post #59 of 75 (permalink) Old 10-16-2017, 09:04 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 500
Thanks: 40
Thanked 254 Times in 169 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 185 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rruff View Post


That would easily pay for itself if you kept the truck 10 years (~$2500 in gas savings). Street tires would even be cheaper and last longer than the ones most of us "upgrade" to.
A new set of wheels and tires and complete cost to lower the truck you see being only $2500 and realistically getting a full 2mpg better than stock?

I see $2500 being low, a full 2mpg being high, the better low rolling resistance tire compounds wear faster than anything else I know, wider tires get you into performance compounds that rarely come molded in LRR compounds for good reason.

I cannot believe I got sucked into this thread.
RinconVTR is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to RinconVTR For This Useful Post:
Wacked (10-16-2017)
post #60 of 75 (permalink) Old 10-16-2017, 12:21 PM
Senior Member
 
rruff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Ruidoso, NM
Posts: 1,151
Thanks: 224
Thanked 385 Times in 308 Posts
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 469 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RinconVTR View Post
A new set of wheels and tires and complete cost to lower the truck you see being only $2500 and realistically getting a full 2mpg better than stock?
You don't need new wheels, and tires are something you need to buy anyway. And it was a 10% improvement to get $2500 savings in 10 years, not 2mpg.

Just as an example for a tire, the Michelin Premier LTX 275 /60 R20 (33") was tested to have the lowest rolling resistance at Consumer Reports, and has a 60k mile warranty. https://www.discounttire.com/buy-tir...er-ltx/p/31566

If you have 18" wheels and want to go full eco, these are probably your best bet: Michelin Energy Saver A/S - Size: P265/65R18 (31.5"). Only $124 here: https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires...ESAS&tab=Sizes


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

2016 SR DC Long 4x4 5.7L. Intermittent wipers added (?!). MB TKO 18x9 +25. Hankook Dynapro ATM 325/65r18 (34.6x13) Future Offroad RV plans: Bed removed, homebuilt camper installed. Rear seat removed to make room for storage and bikes. King or ADS shocks with 700 lb springs, ~2" lift (may cheap out though). Rear leaves, maybe air bags. And more!

Last edited by rruff; 10-16-2017 at 12:33 PM.
rruff is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  TundraTalk.net - Toyota Tundra Discussion Forum > Tundra Discussion > Tundra Performance Modifications

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TundraTalk.net - Toyota Tundra Discussion Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may 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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome