Low MPG pulling trailer
- Thread starter Alan
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an RV or an interest in RVing!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
It's a 2001 GMC Sierra 1500 (1/2 ton) with 5.3 liter and 3.73 differential. Tow ratings show 8,500 LBs max but we're well under that. I can easily pull the TT at 65 or 70 on the flats, but climbing hills that have a fair rise cause me to kick up the RPMs to 4,000 to maintain 65.
Carl L
Moderator Emeritus
Shayne said:
Rating I see go as high as 8300 lbs for that combo.
Karl
Moderator Emeritus
There are some places that don't warrant any more utter boredom than necessary - like West Texas, Kansas, Iowa... My apologies in advance to those residents
ArdraF
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2006
- Posts
- 10,695
Worst of all is a lead foot, I suspect. ;D
On another side of the issue, please consider your stopping power and ability at 60 mph vs. 70 mph. The faster the speed, the more length you need in which to stop all that weight. When you see a jacknifed truck and apply that to your own situation you might want to slow down just a tiny bit for the safety of not only you and your family but the other folks around you who might not want to be in, what Jerry's mother used to call, your debris field.
Safe and happy travels,
ArdraF
Carl L
Moderator Emeritus
ArdraF said:
The numbers* say that your brakes and tires have to handle 36% more energy at 70 mph than at 60 mph -- 62% more energy than at 55 mph.
[ * E=?MV2. It is that V2 that does you in.]
Point about stopping distance well taken. Thanks. I never follow closely and I consider myself a very careful driver, but best to be extra carefull when towing thousands of pounds, family in tow vehicle, for the safety of others on the road. Never can tell about others on the road either.
I was hoping my K&N filter might help the MPG a bit. I'm guessing if any it's only a very small difference. I started using the synthetic old blend too, but I know that will not help MPG. Hopefully will help protect the engine.
Don't have this just right as I heard it second hand from a fella's wife. She tells me her husband drilled a few good size holes in the plastic leading to the air filter. He's pleased with the increased power. Not something I'll try here for power or increased MPG (wouldn't help there anyways as I see it). Anyone heard of this?
I was hoping my K&N filter might help the MPG a bit. I'm guessing if any it's only a very small difference. I started using the synthetic old blend too, but I know that will not help MPG. Hopefully will help protect the engine.
Don't have this just right as I heard it second hand from a fella's wife. She tells me her husband drilled a few good size holes in the plastic leading to the air filter. He's pleased with the increased power. Not something I'll try here for power or increased MPG (wouldn't help there anyways as I see it). Anyone heard of this?
Gary RV_Wizard
Site Team
If holes in the air filter cannister help, so will a K&N. But I doubt if either will do much, if anything. I suppose some air intakes may be somewhat restricted, though, so anything is possible.
Karl
Moderator Emeritus
Alan,
), "The Thing To Do" with a new glass-pack muffler was to get it good and hot and then stick a garden hose up the exhaust pipe to crack the packing and make it louder. Didn't really help the performance, but it sure sounded nice ;D
Yeah, people have been punching holes in lots of things for many years, usually with little or no improvement.
Unless the intake system was poorly designed to begin with, I'm not sure how he determined he's got increased power. Maybe it just sounds more powerful. Back when I was young and stupid (now I'm just stupid
), "The Thing To Do" with a new glass-pack muffler was to get it good and hot and then stick a garden hose up the exhaust pipe to crack the packing and make it louder. Didn't really help the performance, but it sure sounded nice ;D
Carl L
Moderator Emeritus
Yeah, when I was young and idiotic myself, the motto was: "If you can't afford a good engine, you can always afford a bad muffler."
cougar3514v
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2005
- Posts
- 290
Yeah, back in the old days when air cleaners were big round things on top of the motor, we used to flip the top which would leave a gap around the circumference letting us think that we were getting more power. What we were really doing of course was eliminating the little tube that "preheated" the incoming air by passing it over the exhaust manifold which in turn made the cars harder to run cold.
I'm pretty sure that the automotive engineers who have spent years trying to squeeze every ounce of power and economy from their engine designs would've thought of the "hole thing" by now given that it would have saved money on the reduced amount of plastic for the air cleaner housing. Furthermore, there may be a "ram air" effect that is lost by drilling holes in the air cleaner housing. I know that most air intakes are routed to grab clean, cold air from just behind the front bumper. I'm guessing the reason manufacturers don't use K&N's as standard equipment is because of cost.
-Dave
I'm pretty sure that the automotive engineers who have spent years trying to squeeze every ounce of power and economy from their engine designs would've thought of the "hole thing" by now given that it would have saved money on the reduced amount of plastic for the air cleaner housing. Furthermore, there may be a "ram air" effect that is lost by drilling holes in the air cleaner housing. I know that most air intakes are routed to grab clean, cold air from just behind the front bumper. I'm guessing the reason manufacturers don't use K&N's as standard equipment is because of cost.
-Dave
You certainly don't want to put holes in the air filter canister, that will only let dirt through to the engine and possibly destroy it in the process. If more noise=more power, we'd all be taking our mufflers off
Even putting holes in the air intake hose won't make much, if any, difference. To increase the air to the engine, you either need a larger intake and filter or add a turbocharger if one isn't already present.
A K&N may or may not improve air intake, but if it does, it's possibly at the expense of allowing some dirt to bypass the filter. Stick with the designed air intake system.
Even putting holes in the air intake hose won't make much, if any, difference. To increase the air to the engine, you either need a larger intake and filter or add a turbocharger if one isn't already present.
A K&N may or may not improve air intake, but if it does, it's possibly at the expense of allowing some dirt to bypass the filter. Stick with the designed air intake system.
edjunior
Well-known member
K&N and synth oil didn't help mine with mpg or power a whole lot. The synth oil will probably help with the life of the engine, and make you feel better, but let's face it. You're pulling a lot of weight with a lot of resistance to boot. If you can even get a mile per more out of it, you're doing good. I wouldn't expect any miracles though.
I honestly don't think you could run a Geo Metro down the road at 4,000 rpm and get over 8mpg yet alone a truck pulling a trailer. Don't set the cruise and let it lose some speed when going up a hill. Every vehicle has it's own little "happy spot" as far as load,rpm,throttle position go, find that and you'll gain some mileage.
azmuddawg
Member
I have a 2000 Chevy 1 ton crew cab 4x4 with a 6 in lift.A 454 to shove her down the road.Pulling my trailer I get 10.5 to 11 mpg.Empty I am at 11 to 11.5 mpg.I cringe at the pump but smile pulling the hills.I like the power.
