PDA

View Full Version : 50 MPG Truck?



madman
01-09-2010, 07:26 PM
Well use a tractor enginer Huhh??Kerfroink??? These giys say so? I still drive a 460 fuealed propane and gasolinf 1984 frod pickup man id love 50 mpg. Do you guys think this is Bullsh.t? LOL Thanx Mike
www.shadetreeconversion.com

x39
01-09-2010, 07:34 PM
About fifteen years ago one of my buddies had a late 70s Chevy 3/4 ton 2wd pick up with an Isuzu 4 cyl. diesel in front of a three speed manual transmission. It wasn't real fast but the mileage was phenomenal. BTW, couldn't get anywhere with your link.

Willy
01-09-2010, 07:38 PM
Mike I remember Shade Tree Conversions being discussed before.

You may want to read this thread from a while back for a little more insight.

http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net/showthread.php?t=26174

Ries
01-09-2010, 08:19 PM
You want high mileage, you need low weight, and low horsepower.
Its a simple equation-

remember
"Cheap, Fast, or Good- Pick one"?

well mpg is pretty similar-
"powerful, economical, or cheap" Pick one.

There are 50mpg trucks out there- they are used all over the world.

They have 4 banger diesel engines in em that are 2 liters or under. They are slow as molasses- usually 20 seconds or more acceleration to top speed, which is often as slow as 50 mph.
They are strippers- no AC, no Auto transmission, no mouse fur interior, no 8 speaker stereo with subwoofer, or digital compass, or 8 cupholders.
No pollution controls, or 5mph bumpers, or 8 airbags, no bluetooth or Sync. No power steering, ATC, or 4wd.
No chrome. No bedliner- in fact, usually no bed- just a flat bed with fold down sides.

In the USA, about half of that stuff would be illegal, and the other half unsaleable- 90% of all cars and trucks here are sold with automatics.
I once tried to buy a new Dodge ram without all that crap- I was told that, at the time (2003) there were FIVE new Dodge ram work trucks, without Hemi's and leather and auto trannies, in All Five Western States- Washington, Oregon, California, Utah, and Nevada.
FIVE. that shows what customer demand is for.

You want 50mpg, you would need a truck like a Mazda Bongo.
Me, I would like one. Of course, I used to drive a Cony 360cc minivan. Not much, but I drove it.

http://www.mazda-bongo.info/gallery/pic/1995/mazda_bongo_1442682.jpg

rockrat
01-09-2010, 09:11 PM
I once tried to buy a new Dodge ram without all that crap- I was told that, at the time (2003) there were FIVE new Dodge ram work trucks, without Hemi's and leather and auto trannies, in All Five Western States- Washington, Oregon, California, Utah, and Nevada.
FIVE. that shows what customer demand is for.

I wont argue with 90% of what you said except.... I have worked in auto assembly plants and they tell me that the only way that they can justify the research for blind spot detectors and rear seat dvd players is to force them into a specific number of vehicles. They come with the package and that is the way it is. Honda is bad about that. You get these 3 colors and these 3 packages and thats it.

Ford was the only one that would order me a truck the way I wanted it but I would have to pay some build fee and wait till they could get it into the lineup. Imagine a dealership wanting to sell a car today and having to give that news to a customer. They told me the same thing about a Mustang. 3 different Chevy dealers told me to take what they had and that was it.

So I dont know if it is really customer demand or a false creation of assumed customer demand based on what they will give you.

Once they get a truck here that gets 50+mpg and can tow a trailer with a Bridgeport on the back and not struggle over hills, I'll start looking again. Till then, my F150 will get me buy just fine.

rock~

Ries
01-09-2010, 11:19 PM
I think its customer demand- Ford makes a line of "work trucks", which I bought one of- no chrome, black paint instead. Vinyl bench seat, roll up windows.
And they sit on the lot for months at a time, while people buy the pimpmobiles. They cant keep a "harleydavidson" F150 in stock, at double the price...

Anyway, we will get a chance to see soon-
Mahindra, of India, is going to start bringing in very small, 4 banger diesel pickups soon to the USA. These will be basic trucks that get good mileage.
So if anybody actually buys em, then we will know its lack of choice, and if they sit on the lots unsold, while King Ranch versions sell, then we know its customer preferences.

http://www.mahindrana.com/

rockrat
01-10-2010, 09:58 AM
I'm now curious. Interesting little truck. But having that 2nd set of full sized doors instead of a half door and more bed?

Curious.
rock~

x39
01-10-2010, 10:22 AM
I'm now curious. Interesting little truck. But having that 2nd set of full sized doors instead of a half door and more bed?
I'm guessing they're smart enough to respond to market demands. I agree with you, it is an interesting little truck. I'd like to know their price points.

bruto
01-10-2010, 10:55 AM
I imagine we'd see a few more of those interesting little trucks here if the big three had not pushed for a 25% tariff on imported trucks for so many years, and then wasted their advantage.

I've seen a few of the little Japanese pickups going up for sale recently, for what seem like unusually high prices, especially for older models with RHD. Apparently either their age or a final relaxation of tariffs has allowed people to import them, although I'm not sure what the options are for on-road use.

I'd love to find a good later-generation VW pickup - the one based on the microbus, but with the post 1968 suspension. Long ago on a job we had an early version of this, and although the anemic engine actually made for only mediocre economy, and the swing axle suspension gave it a ferociously bad and scary ride, it was a wonderfully useful design, with a high but flat 5 x 9 foot bed, fold-down sides, a lockable tool box beneath, and a genuine one-ton load capacity. One of these with better suspension and brakes, and a decent diesel to push it would make for a very nice little truck indeed.

tdkkart
01-10-2010, 12:00 PM
The link that works:
http://shadetreeconversions.com/

I think it could be done. For now leave out the fact that it may not have exactly the performance of the same truck in a gasoline version, but here are my points of contention:

1. The engine they are using as an example is a 3 or 4 cylinder out of a Ford tractor. Rated at about 50-60hp and about 2500-3000 max rpm. Gobs of torque however, so it should roll the truck down the road fine once it's moving. These little motors sip fuel in stock form, with a bit of work they could be better, especially turbocharged.

2. They're using an older F150 2wd standard cab 2-door truck , not some oversized 4wd behemoth with 6 doors and no box. 4000lbs is alot different than 6000lbs+.
I have one of these trucks, with a 302 and a 3.55 rear gear and a 5 speed OD trans. I can squeeze 18mpg out of it if I'm careful as is. It's a bone stck truck with 146,000 miles. With some work it could get better. I had the same exact truck with a 3.08 gear that would get 20mpg easily when new.

3. I've got a buddy with a 3500 1-ton 4wd 4door Dodge with a turbo Cummins in it, stock with the addition of a chip in the computer. The thing is a tank, but will roast the tires pretty much at will, yet I have driven it and gotten the overhead console to show 24mpg without trying very hard. In fact at the time I was pulling an empty 16x7 enclosed trailer. I drove it over 25 miles after filling the tank, my trip average according to the computer was 20mpg. My wife was following me in our jeep on the same trip, averaged 17mpg not towing anything.
The old 6.2 Chevy's in a 4wd 1/2 ton truck would get mid 20's on the highway.

I see no reason that a considerably lighter truck, with a considerably lower powered diesel engine could not be made to get substantially better mileage.
50mpg?? Not too sure about that, but I don't doubt that upper 30's couldn't be done, especially if you had a good diesel tuner tied to the project.

saltmine
01-10-2010, 12:33 PM
It's all simple High School physics.
It takes this much fuel to move this much weight, this fast.

Remember the VW Rabbit diesel pickups? They had room for two large midgets inside and a cargo hold for two six-packs of beer (provided they were the 12 oz cans). Zero-to-sixty in one afternoon. But...they got 50mpg.

My brother used to drive 60 miles a day, one way, to downtown Los Angeles every day. His ride was a 1968 Renault, with the carburator off of a Ford Pinto (somebody had stolen the carb before he bought it, so we stuck a Pinto carb on it). He used to average 50-51mpg, all of the time. Not bad for a car that cost $75.

My youngest brother was a Honda mechanic. He owned ten Honda 600 Coupes and Sedans. They were easily capable of 50mpg, also. But they didn't like running at SoCal freeway speeds, and frequently stretched their connecting rods, requiring a complete engine teardown and crankshaft replacement. BUT, they were economical...when they ran.

barts
01-10-2010, 12:47 PM
I'd like to see a small truck w/ the sort of engine we have in our 2009 Jetta - a 2 L turbo diesel. It's about 140 hp, 240 ft-lbs of torque and does 0-60 in under 8 seconds - and when you don't jump on it, gets over 40 mpg on the freeway.

-= Bart

wierdscience
01-10-2010, 01:22 PM
Ford in 85' I believe it was offered the Ranger in a diesel.Small Perkins diesel in it,got 45-50mpg etc.The only real reason it didn't sell was they didn't quite have enough sound deadening in the cab,that and the diesel stigma.

wierdscience
01-10-2010, 01:24 PM
Anyway, we will get a chance to see soon-
Mahindra, of India, is going to start bringing in very small, 4 banger diesel pickups soon to the USA. These will be basic trucks that get good mileage.
So if anybody actually buys em, then we will know its lack of choice, and if they sit on the lots unsold, while King Ranch versions sell, then we know its customer preferences.

http://www.mahindrana.com/

Gawd,I hope they are better than they're tractors.Belarus tractors were/are the only ones worse.

Ries
01-10-2010, 02:24 PM
Ford in 85' I believe it was offered the Ranger in a diesel.Small Perkins diesel in it,got 45-50mpg etc.The only real reason it didn't sell was they didn't quite have enough sound deadening in the cab,that and the diesel stigma.

the "only reason" it didnt sell is that nobody has ever been able to sell very many units of a 4 banger diesel truck in the usa.
many have tried, and many have failed-
there have been diesel isuzu's, nissans, toyotas, fords, chevy luvs, and more- and they have all been met with a resounding yawn.

the only diesels that have sold in the usa, in trucks, have been big ones, for people who want to tow big trailers.

americans dont like diesel much.

and unlike europe, where it is government subsidised to be cheaper, and taxes are lower on diesel cars- here, diesel fuel has been more expensive for the last few years, diesel cars cost more, are harder to find repair shops for, and are perceived as stinky, slow, and expensive.

I had a Peugot 504 diesel sedan for a while in the early 80's- and it was, indeed, slow, stinky, fussy, and expensive to fix.
Had a nice sunroof, and comfy seats, though.

The other problem is that with our new, higher diesel pollution standards, virtually every diesel on the world market would require redesign to be legal here.
The only cars available now are very expensive luxury cars- because thats the only ones where there is enough profit to justify legalizing em- Mercedes, Audi, and VW. And most have the wacky consumable injection system- expensive, wonky, and sure to need regular work.

There is a loophole for trucks, but its closing soon too.

Honda and Toyota say they will be introducing new, next generation US legal diesels, and that may change things- but right now, the good diesels, the ones that are actually efficient and fun to drive, like they have all over europe, are just not legal here, and not worth bringing up to US spec at low price points. BMW, Mercedes, Renault, Peugot, Fiat- they all have great little 2 liter and smaller turbo diesels that get great mileage, are a hoot to drive, and would sell about as well as pet rocks in the USA- they are tiny. We like big cars.

wierdscience
01-10-2010, 03:51 PM
the "only reason" it didnt sell is that nobody has ever been able to sell very many units of a 4 banger diesel truck in the usa.
many have tried, and many have failed-
there have been diesel isuzu's, nissans, toyotas, fords, chevy luvs, and more- and they have all been met with a resounding yawn.

the only diesels that have sold in the usa, in trucks, have been big ones, for people who want to tow big trailers.

americans dont like diesel much.

and unlike europe, where it is government subsidised to be cheaper, and taxes are lower on diesel cars- here, diesel fuel has been more expensive for the last few years, diesel cars cost more, are harder to find repair shops for, and are perceived as stinky, slow, and expensive.

I had a Peugot 504 diesel sedan for a while in the early 80's- and it was, indeed, slow, stinky, fussy, and expensive to fix.
Had a nice sunroof, and comfy seats, though.

The other problem is that with our new, higher diesel pollution standards, virtually every diesel on the world market would require redesign to be legal here.
The only cars available now are very expensive luxury cars- because thats the only ones where there is enough profit to justify legalizing em- Mercedes, Audi, and VW. And most have the wacky consumable injection system- expensive, wonky, and sure to need regular work.

There is a loophole for trucks, but its closing soon too.

Honda and Toyota say they will be introducing new, next generation US legal diesels, and that may change things- but right now, the good diesels, the ones that are actually efficient and fun to drive, like they have all over europe, are just not legal here, and not worth bringing up to US spec at low price points. BMW, Mercedes, Renault, Peugot, Fiat- they all have great little 2 liter and smaller turbo diesels that get great mileage, are a hoot to drive, and would sell about as well as pet rocks in the USA- they are tiny. We like big cars.

I think your right,but I would also say much of the clean air act needs an overhaul.It was written when every apartment buliding had an incenerator in the basement and everything on the road had a carburator.My boss was in on the original science behind the CAA and said most of it was based on assumption rather than physical data.

Persoanlly I would rather see a few more "stinky" diesels running around getting 2xs the milage of they're gas counterparts.

Ries
01-11-2010, 01:03 PM
I think your right,but I would also say much of the clean air act needs an overhaul.

good luck on that one. :D

actually, its not the Clean Air Act that regulates diesels, in practice- its the State of California, which is the largest single market for cars in pretty much the whole world. And the California laws are determined by the very real pollution in LA. So the City of LA lobbies Sacramento to regulate diesel particulates, Sacramento does, and then every single auto maker, if they want to actually sell a reasonable amount of cars, makes a California compliant emissions car.
Remember "49 State" cars? They made em for a while, and it drove auto makers and dealers nuts, trying to make and stock the exact right numbers of 2 different versions of the same model. Instead, they just make em all meet the most stringent rules.
Which is LA.

That genie is not going back in the bottle, I am afraid.
Even with the new laws, we still have the inherent foolishness of 20 million people living in a bowl with no weather patterns to clear the air out...

dont get me wrong- I love LA- I lived there for ten years, and, on an 80 degree January day after the rain, with the mountains glistening in the distance, there is nowhere I would rather be riding my bike along the beach. But it is still smoggy there a LOT. Even with all the rules.

SteveF
01-11-2010, 01:11 PM
I saw an episode of that show about the port of Los Angeles and how they either have or are making a trucking hub well outside of LA. Container ships will unload onto rail cars which will haul out to the trucking hub and transfer the containers onto the trucks. Thus eliminating all those trucks coming into LA and reducing pollution. Yep, it's a problem.

Steve.

wierdscience
01-11-2010, 01:17 PM
good luck on that one. :D

actually, its not the Clean Air Act that regulates diesels, in practice- its the State of California, which is the largest single market for cars in pretty much the whole world. And the California laws are determined by the very real pollution in LA. So the City of LA lobbies Sacramento to regulate diesel particulates, Sacramento does, and then every single auto maker, if they want to actually sell a reasonable amount of cars, makes a California compliant emissions car.
Remember "49 State" cars? They made em for a while, and it drove auto makers and dealers nuts, trying to make and stock the exact right numbers of 2 different versions of the same model. Instead, they just make em all meet the most stringent rules.
Which is LA.

That genie is not going back in the bottle, I am afraid.
Even with the new laws, we still have the inherent foolishness of 20 million people living in a bowl with no weather patterns to clear the air out...

dont get me wrong- I love LA- I lived there for ten years, and, on an 80 degree January day after the rain, with the mountains glistening in the distance, there is nowhere I would rather be riding my bike along the beach. But it is still smoggy there a LOT. Even with all the rules.

Ya,that's the crux of it.Many of the smog capitals are located in basins.LA was a smog filled basin before Columbus landed in the new world.

What LA needs are several very large wind turbines.Feed them with power from a nuke plant and use them for giant oscillating fans:D

Can't we just make cars and label them like guns?"Not forsale in CA. and MA.":D

madman
01-11-2010, 05:38 PM
So when the Gas Sucking Ford 460 dies the Tractor diesel engine conversion will still be able to push it up steep hills towing my 14 foot aluminumn boat with fishin gear and lots of beer in the back and the Big Foot Fiberglass Camper in its bed? Thanx Mike May have to pick up a tractor some time soon or a motor. Just wondering if it would even be safe trying to get onto some of our highways /

saltmine
01-11-2010, 06:50 PM
Actually, Los Angeles isn't as smoggy as it used to be. Last time I was over there (last month) the only air pollution I saw was fog from an onshore flow, in the morning.

Cleaner running cars and trucks have done wonders for those poor SOB's. Too bad it's so hideously expensive to live over there. If I could afford to live there, I'd move back in a heartbeat.

Diesels are getting a lot of scrutiny lately from the EPA. New diesel pickups will be equipped with particulate traps and catalytic converters.

Using AdBlu injected into particulate traps will go a long way toward keeping the majority of these diesels squeaky clean....AdBlu? A simple mixture of distilled water and urea....(yeah, that's right urea..) So don't be suprised if you see a big rig trucker taking a leak in his urea tank, along side the road..

jmm360
01-11-2010, 10:36 PM
I think its customer demand- Ford makes a line of "work trucks", which I bought one of- no chrome, black paint instead. Vinyl bench seat, roll up windows.
And they sit on the lot for months at a time, while people buy the pimpmobiles. They cant keep a "harleydavidson" F150 in stock, at double the price...

Some dealers/leasors have a consumer demand: Every remote Alaskan gov't site I've worked at (lots) the contractors lease a herd of brand new plain white work trucks as you described, except they're crew cabs, every year brand new, so someones turning them (Thinking Worthington Ford does well on it)

Ries
01-12-2010, 12:20 AM
Well, considering there are only about 700,000 people in all of Alaska, meaning there MIGHT be a couple hundred government camps like you describe, and, at their height, a few years ago, Ford and GM were EACH selling over 2 million new pickup trucks a year, I kinda doubt the Alaska camp market is going to influence Detroit allocations much.

Even in this crummy market, Ford sold over 400,000 F series pickups in 2009.

as for the original question- I finally found his source- they have You Tube videos- they took out the V8 in a Ford truck, and replaced it with a 3 cylinder Ford tractor engine. They claim 40 mpg on that, not 50. And while they say it will go 100mph- It probably takes ten minutes to get there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzbfvbgXXKo


They have removed the gas engine, and replaced em with low rpm, high mileage industrial diesels.

Depending on where you live, this could be out and out illegal- it sure wont pass any kind of air pollution standards, and if its anything like my diesel tractor, that will be due to the huge clouds of black smoke.

The 3 cylinder diesels range from 158 cu inches to around 200- so at the BIGGEST, they are half the displacement of your 460.
The smaller ones are in the 35hp range, the bigger ones get all the way up to 60hp and more.

So to think that anyone used to a 460 is going to be satisfied with the performance of one of these things, even with a supercharger- well, I dont think they will be selling 400,000 a year.

Basically, if you toss all the legally required pollution control stuff, go back to a loud, vibrating, crude 3 banger diesel with 1/10 the horsepower, and spend a few months custom fabricating all the mounts, connections, wiring and plumbing, you could get your mileage up to 40 mpg.

You will note they call the truck "Ol Shakey".
For a reason.

madman
01-12-2010, 12:27 AM
We require Emmission Tests every two years but my truck is exempt now since its a 1984 model.

barts
01-12-2010, 12:31 AM
At some point, the price of fuel will get high enough that fuel economy will become a driving factor in truck sales.... and you'll start seeing smaller displacement diesels designed to deliver good economy at light load yet still deliver sufficient hp and torque for towing.

- Bart

Richard-TX
01-12-2010, 01:27 AM
If I could afford to live there, I'd move back in a heartbeat.



I could no more live in Cal. than I could on Mars. I would lose my mind. There is a reason they call it the land of fruits and nuts.

barts
01-12-2010, 02:02 AM
I could no more live in Cal. than I could on Mars. I would lose my mind. There is a reason they call it the land of fruits and nuts.

Wow - that's saying something... because California has almost every climate, geology, and political viewpoint found anywhere in this country. From desert to rainforest to alpine mountains to ... and from liberal SF bay to conservative orange county or central valley. Most folks will leave you alone if you can do the same for them, too.

It's a pretty nice place to live... you do have to be able to live w/ the idea of earthquakes - but serious tornadoes are rare, and we don't get hurricanes.
Most places don't get snow in the winter - and in the spring, you can snow ski on Saturday and water ski on Sunday.

The state politics & budget are a little &(*& up right now... but that'll get resolved sooner or later. As regards the fruits and nuts, they keep one from getting bored - if everyone was the same, there'd be no one with whom to argue :).

- Bart

jmm360
01-12-2010, 03:12 AM
Well, considering there are only about 700,000 people in all of Alaska, meaning there MIGHT be a couple hundred government camps like you describe, and, at their height, a few years ago, Ford and GM were EACH selling over 2 million new pickup trucks a year, I kinda doubt the Alaska camp market is going to influence Detroit allocations much.
.

Point taken, but during the short construction season tradesmen from all over the country flood in, and there are many more contaminated remote ex WWII sites than most people would dream of. So it might only add up to a couple hundred plain Jane crew cabs a year but it helps keep the window crank and vinyl seat division in business.

As an aside, "I heard somewhere" that a crank and regulator actually costs more to build than a power window. Nothing to back that up with though.

x39
01-12-2010, 08:44 AM
You will note they call the truck "Ol Shakey".
For a reason.
Riding in the truck I mentioned earlier in this thread was like being shaken in a tin can full of marbles, very noisy.

saltmine
01-12-2010, 09:55 AM
That was one of several popular engine conversions. A three-cylinder Perkins diesel (that would have been at home in a fishing trawler or running a deep well pump) Noisy, smokey, and slow.
Another conversion was replacing a Ford V-8 with a 4-53 Detroit diesel, four-cylinder, two-stroke. Not near as shakey, but much less fuel economy.

A friend out on the "left coast" had a small industrial Perkins diesel in a Datsun 240Z sports car (that was before the Japanese invented four-door sports cars) It ran pretty good, got great gas mileage...but you could hear him coming three blocks away.

Recently, I saw the high-tech Powerstroke diesel in a Ford F-250 replaced with a Cumins 5.9L six-cylinder diesel. (The owner got tired of sitting in the customer lounge at the Ford dealer all of the time)

The best one was a 19foot Bayliner with a 5.7L GM diesel....we would fill the fuel tank with suntan lotion and water ski all day long and not get sunburned.

David Powell
01-12-2010, 11:28 AM
a talented, but definitely slightly touched diesel mechanic converted his motor bike to diesel. According to legend it would go over 300 miles on a gallon. The fellow I knew who rode it said that it was like riding a mangle especially as, in top gear, it only revved very slowly. Oddly enough some years later it was the only item stolen during a workshop break in while many other valuables were left behind, do I smell oil company conspiracy or just curious kids??? Regards David Powell.