Should I waste an underdrive pulley on my '93 Ranger OHV?

Well, pretty much what the title says.
I have a '93 Ranger 4.0L-OHV, 5spd, 4x4. The crank pulley is shot. It hasn't separated yet, but it is dry rotted and cracked, so it is going to be changed tomorrow.
I have a brand new Dorman stock-type balancer, which I actually bought for this truck a while back, knowing it would need to be changed.

I also have a brand new ASP underdrive crank pulley, that I bought for my '99 Explorer, which hasn't moved or ran in about 5 years. I eventually plan on getting the Explorer running again. However, I also plan on putting an M90 blower on it, via the RP Caster kit. So, then I wouldn't be able to use the U/D pulley anyway. Of course, it could be several more years before I even get it running at all.

On the other hand, I currently drive the Ranger on an almost daily basis. I use it as a work truck, and I put a lot of miles on it. So, any improvement in MPG would be nice, plus the increased power would be good too.

The thing is, while I understand the idea behind the u/d pulley, and how it "helps", I don't really see where I would gain anything on the Ranger. It doesn't have a/c (didn't come with it), I don't know if I really want less p/s "boost" at low speeds ( I spend a lot of time in traffic, as well as maneuvering in tight spots), and I'm also putting in an electric fan tomorrow, so I don't think I really want to slow down the alternator. So, if I then O/D the alternator w/ a smaller pulley, what am I really gaining by "using up" a $300 pulley (roughly)?

Am I wrong? Will I still see a noticeable benefit from installing the u/d crank pulley? What about if I then speed the alt back up some, with a smaller alt. pulley? Will that cancel out any small gains I might have made?

On that note, I can't really afford an ASP alternator pulley, nor do I have the time to get one. I have a couple of later model Ford Alt. pulleys I pulled from junk alternators. They are smaller diameter, and the shaft appears to be the same inside diameter. The only thing is, they are 8-rib pulleys, whereas the Ranger uses a 6-rib belt. It appears that the first 6 ribs of these other pulleys line up with my stock pulley. The belt appears to sit in the grooves correctly. Would it be ok to use an 8 rib pulley, with a 6-rib belt? My gut answer is that it looks like it would be fine, but I though I'd get some additional opinions.

 

[jd4242]

Ugghh... This is turning into a never-ending disaster....

First, I ended up spending $35 on various electrical connectors, to install the fan. I figured maybe $10, but not $35!

Got the crank bolt at Ford, another $9. Now that I see it, I don't see what is so special about it, that a grade 8 hardware store bolt wouldn't have accomplished, but oh well I have it now.

I found 1 parts store that had the front seal in stock, and they wanted $14 for it! (More on that later)

I tried to locate 2 longer 8mmx1.25 bolts, for the puller, as the ones in the kit were slightly too short. Nobody had them. Oh well, in the end I couldn't of used them anyway... See below:

The real trouble started today. I did discover that I had longer 8mmx1.25 bolts, that came with the ASP pulley. Unfortunately I couldn't get them to thread into the balancer holes. I spent over an hour just trying to figure out what was going on, thinking maybe my ancient truck had different size holes, maybe even standard threads?? No, I finally decided they were the same thread, but they were just badly rusted up, from many years of road spray, salt,etc...
OK, so I'll just run a re-threading die through them, right? The first hole worked ok. On the second, my re-threading tap broke, in the hole. There was enough of a stub sticking out that I could have gotten an easy-out on it, except my smallest one (10mm) was too big.

I thought about using the larger, un-threaded, holes, and just using a bolt, with a nut behind the balancer, but there wasn't enough clearance, and I probably wouldn't have had a bolt long enough anyway. So, now what do I do?

I decided to try a regular 3-jaw puller, with the teeth around the outer edge of the balancer. Yes, it would destroy the rubber, but this thing was junk anyway. It did move the balancer a small amount, before the jaws slipped, and the puller popped off. Wasn't gonna work..... So now what?
Well, normally I wouldn't do this, but as I said, the stock balancer is already junk anyway. I managed to just barely get an air hammer in there, at the right angle, along with a curved chisel. I put the chisel on the back side of the balancer, just inside of the rubber ring, so I was pushing on the inner hub. It worked, fairly easily. My biggest concern at that point was having the balancer pop out unexpectedly, and fall on my head.
Ok, so its out. All's well right? Nope..... I decided to go ahead and change the crank seal. The old one came out easy enough. When I tried to put the new one in, it started to get "****ed" to one side. I get it straightened out, and thought I was good-to-go. When I tried to make sure it was seated all the way in, it went right through, and into the timing cover. I assumed there would be a "stop" built in to the cover, to stop the seal from going through, but apparently not! I was able to fish it back out, but the lip was cut. I can't get another seal until tomorrow, so I'm stuck; losing yet another day....

Oh, and I found that the upper rad hose is leaking, where I inserted the probe for the fan controller. I knew that was a bad idea, but this probe won't work anywhere else. It's too fat to fit in between the fins on the rad, and it's too long for that anyway; at least with a single core rad. Most of the probe would be sticking out the front, and reading cold air temps. I just pulled the hose back off, and jammed some black RTV in there. Hopefully that will seal everything up. I have to be careful not to tighten the hose clamp too much, or it will crush the capillary tube. I have a flex-a-lite controller, with a probe meant to go in the fins, but I was saving that for the Explorer. Plus, I'm not quite sure where it is.

Hopefully, this thing will be running tomorrow. I need to get back out and make some money.

I've had the same problem before and did same thing you did, used a jaw puller.man I should have mentioned about the seal couod go in to far, I did that but the motor was on a stand.I had to pull the pan off to get it back out.

I hate probe sensors, they never seem to work right.don't really understand where you have it at now but sounds like its going to leak.that rad gets hot and under pressure it may blow out.I put a "T" in my heater hose and that's where my sensor is.

Sure your get it all figured out today and be back up and running.hopefully saving you some cash also, udp combined with fan should give you a good noticeable difference.

 

[Maniak]

I put the probe for the fan controller between the fins down near the lower radiator hose.

I can't remember the exact #'s but The fan turns on around 170F and off around 160F (its a Hayden adjustable fan controller).

That way the Fan is only trying to keep the coolant coming out of the radiator cool. The thermostat is then controlling how much coolant is flowing to control the heat in the engine. This combo has been working really well on the tow rig for a couple years now.

Some people (and companies) like to control the fan by the engine temp but IMHO your behind the curve at that point. I say keep the coolant cool and let the thermostat control the heat of the engine.

~Mark

 

[Carguy3J]

I put the probe for the fan controller between the fins down near the lower radiator hose.

I can't remember the exact #'s but The fan turns on around 170F and off around 160F (its a Hayden adjustable fan controller).

That way the Fan is only trying to keep the coolant coming out of the radiator cool. The thermostat is then controlling how much coolant is flowing to control the heat in the engine. This combo has been working really well on the tow rig for a couple years now.

Some people (and companies) like to control the fan by the engine temp but IMHO your behind the curve at that point. I say keep the coolant cool and let the thermostat control the heat of the engine.

~Mark

It may work for you, but the theory behind it doesn't seem to make sense to me.
The thermostat doesn't control the engine temp. All it does is restrict coolant flow, initially, to allow for quicker warm up. Faster warm up is really only for emissions/fuel economy reasons. (and quicker heat in cold weather) Otherwise, you could just run with no thermostat, and be fine. A thermostat is either closed below a certain temp, and or open above another. Once open, its doing the same thing regardless of whether the engine is at 195deg (assuming a stock 195 t-stat) or 250deg. The only "control" of temp is how quickly, and how much of it is dissipated through the radiator. In term, that rate of cooling and overall temp drop from rad inlet to outlet is controlled via the fan, whether electrical or mechanical) Besides, its not good to constantly "cycle" the t-stat. Get it hot enough to keep the t-stat open all the time, under normal driving conditions, the use the fan to keep the coolant temp where you want it, but always above the t-stat open temp.

Reading the temp at the radiator OUTLET tells you one thing only, and that is the temp of the outlet coolant. Without comparing to inlet temp, it doesn't even tell you the efficiency of the rad or the fan. Also, what the outlet temp of the radiator is, isn't really important. Well, it is, but only indirectly. The coolant temp on the INLET side is what tells you what the motor is seeing/producing, as far as heat. In theory, you could have an engine overheating, with coolant at 250 deg at the rad INLET. Given a good enough rad and/or powerful enough fan, your OUTLET temp could be 160deg. But the motor would still be overheating, as something in the way it is running (maybe super lean?) or something wrong internally is making it produce enough internal heat to take the coolant from 160 to 250 .

Oh, and as far as the probe location, I can't put it between the fins. Either my probe is unusually fat, or the fins/tubes on my rad are really close together. I would have to force the probe through. I was afraid of damaging the rad. Plus the probe is so long that very little of it would be within the rad core, with most of it exposed to air.

 

[Carguy3J]

More problems.....

I've had the same problem before and did same thing you did, used a jaw puller.man I should have mentioned about the seal couod go in to far, I did that but the motor was on a stand.I had to pull the pan off to get it back out.

I've never seen a front cover that didn't have a "stop" on the backside. That was dumb on Ford's part. Why did you have to pull the pan? The seal should have still been "trapped" on the crank snout at least. I ended up getting a hold of it with some 90deg probe tips, and pulling it out.
When I put the 2nd one in today, I got it just flush with the outside of the cover, and let the "oil slinger" on the crank push it the rest of the way in, as I seated the balancer.

I hate probe sensors, they never seem to work right.don't really understand where you have it at now but sounds like its going to leak.that rad gets hot and under pressure it may blow out.I put a "T" in my heater hose and that's where my sensor is.

Its a long "bulb" permanently attached to a tiny diameter capillary tube, like a mechanical oil or water temp sender, except the probe end doesn't have any kind of fittings or anything, so the "T" wouldn't do me any good. This pic is almost identical to mine:

This pic shows how it is installed.

Sure your get it all figured out today and be back up and running.hopefully saving you some cash also, udp combined with fan should give you a good noticeable difference.

Yeah well... Ran into more problems. I did finally get the pulley on. It ended up needing the 78in belt. Figures it would be the more expensive of the two. The 78.5 went on, and might have worked for a while, but once the new belt stretched, and the new tensioner "settled" in, it might have started to slip

Unfortunately, I ran onto a big problem w/ the fan. For whatever reason, I can't seem to solder wires now. The stubs left on the fan motor were too short for more then one try, so I took the cover off the motor, to see if could fix that way. I found how the wires are attached. They are just crimped onto little flat "bus" bars. Great, I can just remove the "nubs" of wire left, and reattach longer ones...... I got the positive side off. The negative fought, but I got it off. However, when I went to re-fold the crimp on the new wire, the little bus bar decided it had been folded one time too many, and snapped in the middle. Now I'm trying to solder a wire directly to whats left of the bar, as the other end of it go too deep in to the motor to mess with.
Like I said, for whatever reason, I can't seem to solder. Despite keeping the soldering iron on long enough that the HANDLE almost burned me, I can't seem to get the wire hot enough. I can melt solder on the tip of the iron, but it just rolls right off the wire. Now, I know the wire is getting hot, as the insulation is just about smoking, but it won't melt solder????

 

[Maniak]

It may work for you, but the theory behind it doesn't seem to make sense to me.
The thermostat doesn't control the engine temp. All it does is restrict coolant flow, initially, to allow for quicker warm up. Faster warm up is really only for emissions/fuel economy reasons. (and quicker heat in cold weather) Otherwise, you could just run with no thermostat, and be fine. A thermostat is either closed below a certain temp, and or open above another. Once open, its doing the same thing regardless of whether the engine is at 195deg (assuming a stock 195 t-stat) or 250deg. The only "control" of temp is how quickly, and how much of it is dissipated through the radiator. In term, that rate of cooling and overall temp drop from rad inlet to outlet is controlled via the fan, whether electrical or mechanical) Besides, its not good to constantly "cycle" the t-stat. Get it hot enough to keep the t-stat open all the time, under normal driving conditions, the use the fan to keep the coolant temp where you want it, but always above the t-stat open temp.

Our understanding of how a cooling system works isn't the same..

For example. When your driving down the road at 50mph pretty much everyone agrees that a fan isn't going to much, if anything. So, that means the thermostat is what is trying to keep the engine from over cooling while the 50mph wind is running through the radiator. Its not like there is any control over the air flow... The thermostat isn't an "on/off" switch, it does have in between values. A 195 thermostat is "completely" open at 195 but at 190 it is already flowing coolant. Put one in a pot of water and watch it..

So, with that in mind, I'm using the Fan to work like the wind does. The Fan is keeping the output temperature within a certain range by pulling air through it just like the wind does when at speed.

Reading the temp at the radiator OUTLET tells you one thing only, and that is the temp of the outlet coolant. Without comparing to inlet temp, it doesn't even tell you the efficiency of the rad or the fan. Also, what the outlet temp of the radiator is, isn't really important. Well, it is, but only indirectly. The coolant temp on the INLET side is what tells you what the motor is seeing/producing, as far as heat. In theory, you could have an engine overheating, with coolant at 250 deg at the rad INLET. Given a good enough rad and/or powerful enough fan, your OUTLET temp could be 160deg. But the motor would still be overheating, as something in the way it is running (maybe super lean?) or something wrong internally is making it produce enough internal heat to take the coolant from 160 to 250 .

You're combining two things here.. Knowing the temp of the engine and knowing the temp of the output of the radiator. As you said, the Probe for the engine should be somewhere in the hot side. I always try to add after-market coolant temp sending units to an area that is getting coolant flow even when the thermostat is closed. For example, putting it in the thermostat housing (some vehicles have it there) doesn't make sense to me as it doesn't read anything until the thermostat starts to open. I personally like it in a heater hose, assuming that hose always has flowing water. Some systems block the flow of that line unless the heater is on. On those vehicles I normally add a heater control bypass valve so it doesn't just "block" the flow. Anyway, by putting it in the heater hose I can see the temp the engine really is.. If its 250F then its 250F. The fan better be on way before then (assuming were not heading down the road at 55mph)

Now back to the radiator. By reading the output (or near output) temp of the radiator you are again trying to keep the coolant that is going back to the engine at a temp cool enough that it will allow the motor to stay cool just like it stays cool when on the freeway.

Think of it this way... If you read the temperature (for fan control only) from the coolant as it is exiting the motor you have to set the temperature high enough that the fan isn't running on the freeway (55mph) since the fan isn't going to help any there and may actually hurt. For a number, lets assume it runs at 200F. Now you set the turn on temp for the fan at 210. Now when you are at idle and the fan isn't on the temperature of the output of the radiator is going to be over 200F if not upwards of 210 before the fan turns on since it is waiting for the output of the engine to get hot and the coolant is already flowing. At this point you are behind the curve and the motor will continue to get warmer as your try to cool down the coolant so the engine will cool off.

Now lets say you control the fan from the output of the radiator. You know the output temp of the Radiator is about 160F when heading down the freeway @ 55 so you set the turn on temp to 170F. Now when you're at idle and the output temperature of the radiator gets up to 170F the fan turns on and keep the output temp of the coolant at 170F or less. As far as the engine is concerned it is just getting coolant that has cooled off just as if there was a lot of wind coming through it. As that cooler coolant gets into the engine the thermostat will restrict flow if the coolant coming out of the engine drops below the target temp of the thermostat just like it would if there was wind cooling down the coolant.

Oh, and as far as the probe location, I can't put it between the fins. Either my probe is unusually fat, or the fins/tubes on my rad are really close together. I would have to force the probe through. I was afraid of damaging the rad. Plus the probe is so long that very little of it would be within the rad core, with most of it exposed to air.

I saw your next post and you have a different style controller than I expected. That probe on the one you have is really big.
I thought you had this style.

I did experiment with putting some foam in front of the probe thinking like you were that the wind was going to make it read wrong. From what I can tell it made no difference.

Every E-Fan I've installed or helped to install except for 1 has been done with the fan control run off the output of radiator (or at least close to it). The one vehicle that isn't run like that still works but he does get much bigger temp swings (rise) since the motor temp still rises some after the fan starts. If we lower the turn on temp on that vehicle the fan tries to run when heading down the road at 55mph which we don't want.

Over all though, I think it all comes down to personal preference. Just like how some people want to know the temp of the trans fluid going to the cooler and others want to know the temp in the pan.

So in the end, pick which method you want to use and see how it works. You can always switch how you control the fan later by moving the probe and adjusting the temp settings to match.

~Mark

 

[Carguy3J]

Well, just thought I'd update everybody. Everything is installed and running. I put about 100 + miles on the truck, yesterday.

I was finally able to get the upper hose to seal, with the probe in. I gooped some RTV in the area around the probe, and carefully tightened the clamp until the leak stopped. It will be a pain whenever I have to remove the hose, but otherwise, I'm confident it won't leak.

The truck actually warms up pretty quickly, now that the defective clutch fan isn't constantly pulling air. That will be nice in the winter.

As far as cooling, it seems to run at about 205 deg or so, with just natural airflow, at pretty much any speed. I have the fan set to come on at 214 deg, and it runs until 196 deg. I have no control over the "spread" , as this is built into the controller, as is the case with most of them. These temps are from ECM itself (ECT sensor), as read on my Snap-On MT2500 scanner. I think this temp range is a good compromise between power and fuel economy. Most modern cars/trucks run at around 210-220, as a normal operating temp. I think this alone will make a big improvement in my fuel economy, as the stock clutch fan was over-cooling it. In cooler weather, the t-stat would constantly cycle, causing "thumping" in the cooling system. Even in warmer weather it never really ran at the proper temps.

This fan does pull a decent amount of amps though. At idle, the system voltage drops from 14.2 to 13.1 immediately, and eventually, if the fan runs long enough, will drop it into the low 12v's (12.4-12.5). You can hear the fan sort of "struggle" and run at a lower speed. Conversely, as soon as you raise the idle a little, you can hear the fan speed up, and it doesn't need to stay on for nearly as long (since it is moving more air).
I could probably live with this, if that was as bad as it got. However, once you turn on the headlights, its a problem. Turning on the blower motor is the final straw, and drops the voltage to 12.2v, almost immediately. This enough of a draw that the headlights will dim, the blower will run slow, the e-fan will run slow, and it may affect ignition. It will also be very hard on the battery, and especially the alternator, over the long term.

I don't want to have to "babysit" this situation. I want it to be "install and forget", and have it just work. So, I think I will need an even smaller alternator pulley. The stock pulley was 2-3/4" diameter, as measured around the front side outer lip. I believe this is what "they" call a 66mm (2.6") pulley, as measured on the top of the "ribs". The smallest pulley I had, which I put on, is 2-5/8" (I think. It's raining out, and I don't feel like going outside to re-check) This seems like it is probably a 63mm (2.48"), measured at the ribs, not the lip.

I THINK what I want is a 57mm (2.25") pulley, as measured at the ribs, not the outer lip. The problem is this may then require a shorter belt. I can't return the brand new belt on the truck, as 100 miles is enough that it will show some signs of use. So, that's another $30-$50, between a pulley, and another belt. :-(

As far as the UD pulley..... I don't know. I don't really feel a "seat of the pants" difference. I guess I'll have to wait and see, after I go through a tank or two of gas. Either way, it's on there now. I'm not going to take it back off, so I guess it doesn't matter.

 

[Carguy3J]

Well, a little follow up..........

Prior to this little adventure, the truck has consistently gotten right around 17.5mpg, for the last 3 years.
I have now recorded 18.65mpg on 2 back to back full tanks. I used to get right around 240 miles on a full tank, running it down to empty. I'm now able to go about 280 miles.

Is it an improvement? Yes, but not nearly what I was hoping for. Especially considering I did both the UDP and the e-fan.

Perhaps it will improve a bit more as the fuel trims continue to readjust? I sat this because the "normal" engine temp ranges had not occurred much before this, due to the clutch fan over cooling. This would mean that the corresponding "cells" in the ecm tables may not have been accesses/trimmed by the ecm in a long time.

I also had a vacume leak, and a sticky TB that were fixed right after this install. Again, maybe its just taking time to "trim" out the excess fuel that the vacume leak was confusing the ecm into calling for?

It may also be that I am using some of my new found "oomph" a bit too much. Despite my previous assesment, upon further review, I do notice a definite increase in power. Its not huge, but it is there.

On the alternator/fan matter, its cooling fine, even in 90deg plus temps-sitting traffic. On the downside, I definitely need to address the charging issue. I will be getting a smaller alternator pulley soon.

 

[jd4242]

Well, a little follow up..........

Prior to this little adventure, the truck has consistently gotten right around 17.5mpg, for the last 3 years.
I have now recorded 18.65mpg on 2 back to back full tanks. I used to get right around 240 miles on a full tank, running it down to empty. I'm now able to go about 280 miles.

Is it an improvement? Yes, but not nearly what I was hoping for. Especially considering I did both the UDP and the e-fan.

Perhaps it will improve a bit more as the fuel trims continue to readjust? I sat this because the "normal" engine temp ranges had not occurred much before this, due to the clutch fan over cooling. This would mean that the corresponding "cells" in the ecm tables may not have been accesses/trimmed by the ecm in a long time.

I also had a vacume leak, and a sticky TB that were fixed right after this install. Again, maybe its just taking time to "trim" out the excess fuel that the vacume leak was confusing the ecm into calling for?

It may also be that I am using some of my new found "oomph" a bit too much. Despite my previous assesment, upon further review, I do notice a definite increase in power. Its not huge, but it is there.

On the alternator/fan matter, its cooling fine, even in 90deg plus temps-sitting traffic. On the downside, I definitely need to address the charging issue. I will be getting a smaller alternator pulley soon.

That's not bad, would expect more.but I'd take an extra 1mpg and added power, saves you little over 2gallons every fill up and with gas prices that can add up real fast.did you reset your ecm? Also what size tank do you have? Its also summer time now so summer gas always lowers your mpg and I'm sure your running your AC

 

[Carguy3J]

That's not bad, would expect more.but I'd take an extra 1mpg and added power, saves you little over 2gallons every fill up and with gas prices that can add up real fast.did you reset your ecm? Also what size tank do you have? Its also summer time now so summer gas always lowers your mpg and I'm sure your running your AC

I don't have AC. I wish I did.

The prior 17.5 was pretty consistent, for any semi-warm weather, through the summer, so summer gas isn't a factor, as the "before" number already accounted for it. In the winter, it would drop to about 16-16.5, probably due to the clutch fan never letting the engine reach normal temps.

I think its a 16 gallon tank?

 

[jd4242]

I don't have AC. I wish I did.

The prior 17.5 was pretty consistent, for any semi-warm weather, through the summer, so summer gas isn't a factor, as the "before" number already accounted for it. In the winter, it would drop to about 16-16.5, probably due to the clutch fan never letting the engine reach normal temps.

I think its a 16 gallon tank?

O that's right, we talked about itI'd give it a little time to relearn.still an improvement tho

 

[Carguy3J]

Well, I got a smaller alternator pulley. I went with a 1.9", off ebay. It would have been about $20, but I had just enough, on my ebay rewards. So, it cost me $0.45 out of pocket.

Unfortunately, there was no way my previous belt would work. Waayyy too long. So, I went to the computer. kinda bummed at having to spend more money. I figured a 77" belt (vs the 78" I had on already) would be about right. So, I did a part number search on Advance Auto's website. Well, guess what? They "said" it was an exact fit for my '89 Olds Cutlass-Cierra 2.5L, a car I junked a year ago, but still have on my "list"
on the website. Luckily, I had saved the belt when I junked the car, as it was fairly new. Sure enough, it fit just fine. It was even a bit hard to get on, so a 77.5 would also have worked.

So, '93 Ranger 4.0L OHV w/ PS, no A/C, w/ 25% UD crank pulley and 1.9" alternator pulley, you need a 77" or 77.5" belt.

Now, when the fan kicks on at idle, it still charges ok. It is still pulling it down pretty good, but its not too bad. I think I would like to upgrade to a 130amp alternator, if I can manage to score one for next to nothing, in my scrap travels. I sometimes buy core alternators in bulk. They come from a scrap yard that doesn't sell parts. They just crush the vehicles, so I could easily end up with a good one.

As for mileage, most recent tank was down a bit to 18.05mpg. Still pretty bummed on the minimal mpg improvement, but the extra little power is nice.

I guess I might try some aero mods next. Thinking about lowering and reshaping the front air dam. I want to get it below the front pumpkin, and flare the sides so it covers the tires more. I was also thinking about side skirts, like you see on the big rigs. I might also experiment with a partial grill block. I don't think I need all that air coming in under the hood and creating drag. Maybe some heat extractors too?

Was also thinking about trying these: http://www.airtab.com/how.html

 

[Carguy3J]

Wooo! Just got 20.15mpg! First time this truck has broken 20.

Its also the first tank with the 1.9"alt. pulley. Maybe that is the difference? With this pulley, I'm not holding up the rpms at traffic lights.

If the 20mpg holds, I'll be very happy. That's right around the same as I'm getting with my 98 Buick Century!

 

[jd4242]

Good to hear.bet it gets better the long you drive it, you may just be" enjoying" it a little more than you realize; )

I'm only getting avg 14 in city right now..but I drive the wheels off my truck.I'd LOVE to see 20

 

[jd4242]

I look at it this way.you gained 3mpg, that's 57 extra miles per tank.that's saves you about 3 gal every fill up.gas at around $3.50pg that's an extra $10.50 every fill up.depending on how often you fill up, that can add up real quick.I'm sure it will only get better to, plus you gained some power and took stress off the motor.

 

[Carguy3J]

I look at it this way.you gained 3mpg, that's 57 extra miles per tank.that's saves you about 3 gal every fill up.gas at around $3.50pg that's an extra $10.50 every fill up.depending on how often you fill up, that can add up real quick.I'm sure it will only get better to, plus you gained some power and took stress off the motor.

I don't quite follow the way your calculating, but the end result sounds about right, at a savings of roughly $10 per fill up, from totally empty. That tank, I went 305 miles, before I got nervous enough to stop.
Sometimes the truck will just sit for a week, other times, several fillups in one week.

I'm thinking about trying a slightly larger water pump pulley. I don't plan on buying a new one, but rather I have a scrap motor, with a w/p pulley that looks like it will fit, and is slightly larger. I figure it might be worth a shot.

I may also raise the turn on temp of the fan, to reduce the amount it comes on at brief stops; hopefully slightly reducing the charging load as well.