Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Misc. > Alternative Fuels, Hybrids & Mileage
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


Welcome to Ford-Trucks Forums!
Welcome to Ford-Trucks.com.

You are currently viewing our forums as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Ford-Trucks Forums community today!





 
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 05-05-2007, 06:58 AM
velcro7279 velcro7279 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Grayling, MI
Posts: 420
velcro7279 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Remove Visor for More MPG?

The other day I was talking to a guy at the auto parts store and he asked me if I noticed any mileage difference with the visor that is on my truck. I told him it was there when I bought the truck, so no. He was telling me about his and a buddys truck. Both are inentical Toyota trucks except his buddys is extended cab and his has a visor. He said that his buddy gets about 5-6 mpg more than he does and he was wondering if it was the visor. His visor was on his truck when he got his, too. I know that there are a lot of factors that could make that mileage difference like driving habits, state of tune, etc. It got me to thinking about the visor on my truck though. I was wondering if anyone here has any actual experience with the visor to no visor mileage difference? I don't want to remove mine if it won't make a noticeable difference.

Steve
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 05-05-2007, 07:14 AM
fellro86's Avatar
fellro86 fellro86 is offline
Iowa Benevolent Dictator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Marengo, Iowa
Posts: 11,526
fellro86 has much to be proud offellro86 has much to be proud offellro86 has much to be proud offellro86 has much to be proud offellro86 has much to be proud offellro86 has much to be proud offellro86 has much to be proud offellro86 has much to be proud of
I have been told that they do make a difference, it is a big wind catch, and the air can't get through fast enough to not make pressure, as well as turbulence.
__________________
the workhorse:86 F250 4x4 6.9 Diesel 4-spd, 4.10 axles
the other workhorse 92 F350 2wd crew cab,3.55 rear axle, 92 6bt Cummins, NV4500
the project: 78 F150 4x4 shortbed 351 auto
Iowa Chapter leader, ASE certified parts specialist
Come on down and join us in the Iowa chapter, or your own local chapter!! Thanks, Roger
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 05-05-2007, 10:57 AM
aurgathor aurgathor is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bothell, WA
Posts: 2,886
aurgathor is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Anything that increases air resistance will worsen mpg, but 5-6 mpg difference seems a bit (?!) too much for that.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 05-10-2007, 10:28 AM
wiingnut's Avatar
wiingnut wiingnut is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Monroe, MI
Posts: 1,710
wiingnut is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
I would think it would make a difference, but 5-6 mpg sounds a little extreme
__________________
08 F350 SRW KR CC LB 4X4 Dark Copper Metallic V-10/Torque Shift, Loaded UP w/ Fac Nav and rear DVD
12 Escape Limited
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 05-10-2007, 11:48 AM
biga17133's Avatar
biga17133 biga17133 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: lexington N.C.
Posts: 279
biga17133 is starting off with a positive reputation.
well i have not noticed a change on my 84 ford 4x4 and i drive a 100 miles a day round trip to work have had it on for about 65 days or more... so i have to vote no..lol
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 05-12-2007, 01:18 PM
wrobo23's Avatar
wrobo23 wrobo23 is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: WI, sometimes MN & IA
Posts: 874
wrobo23 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
plugged fuel filter maybe, but not 5-6 with just the visor
__________________

Wisconsin FTE Chapter - Club SNL Member #8


'99 F-250 LD XLT, SC, 4x4 with 5.4L and 3.73

Leave the bowties for the little boys... Ford Trucks all the way!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by FarmForward
You gotta wonder if this guy's parents saw each other across the table at a young age...

Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 05-17-2007, 01:37 PM
uriah's Avatar
uriah uriah is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Powell, TN
Posts: 179
uriah is starting off with a positive reputation.
Uriah Rose II
Take it off and see, but I'd say it won't make much difference, unless you normally drive 100 miles an hour or something.

A bunch of little things do add up, my 1979 F100 was getting a little over 24mpg, but that was ALOT of trail and error (with the right engine and gearing).
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 05-17-2007, 08:33 PM
velcro7279 velcro7279 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Grayling, MI
Posts: 420
velcro7279 is starting off with a positive reputation.
I agree with the 5-6 being a little extreme. Doesn't sound from most that it will make much difference with it off or not. Thanks for everyones opinions and experiences. The fuel filter was changed last fall and nothing changed after I changed it then. Oh well. I guess I will just suffer with the 11-13 I am getting now. Thanks all.

Steve
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 05-18-2007, 02:53 AM
uriah's Avatar
uriah uriah is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Powell, TN
Posts: 179
uriah is starting off with a positive reputation.
Uriah Rose II
Quote:
Originally Posted by velcro7279
I agree with the 5-6 being a little extreme. Doesn't sound from most that it will make much difference with it off or not. Thanks for everyones opinions and experiences. The fuel filter was changed last fall and nothing changed after I changed it then. Oh well. I guess I will just suffer with the 11-13 I am getting now. Thanks all.

Steve
I experimented alot with my 79 (factory 302, OD, 3.00 gears shortbed stepside) that was getting 19.1 when I first got it to 24.3 currently.

I found a bunch of weird stuff like it gets it's best economy at 68mpg, second best at 62mpg (but worse with the cruise set in between). Tailgate down (and off) is worth about .1, which isn't enough gain to really TELL if it's a gain.

Cruise control does help (except on big hills where you do better gradually backing out of it), proper tire pressure, typical tuneup stuff, tire size, wheel bearings, exhaust, just alot of little things that add up. I didn't do any one thing to get a 5mpg gain, but lots and lots of small things.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 05-18-2007, 05:46 AM
velcro7279 velcro7279 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Grayling, MI
Posts: 420
velcro7279 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Did you put synthetic grease in the wheel bearings and diff lube in the differentials? Just wondering if that would make a difference worth the expense.

Steve
Quote:
Originally Posted by uriah
I experimented alot with my 79 (factory 302, OD, 3.00 gears shortbed stepside) that was getting 19.1 when I first got it to 24.3 currently.

I found a bunch of weird stuff like it gets it's best economy at 68mpg, second best at 62mpg (but worse with the cruise set in between). Tailgate down (and off) is worth about .1, which isn't enough gain to really TELL if it's a gain.

Cruise control does help (except on big hills where you do better gradually backing out of it), proper tire pressure, typical tuneup stuff, tire size, wheel bearings, exhaust, just alot of little things that add up. I didn't do any one thing to get a 5mpg gain, but lots and lots of small things.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 05-18-2007, 10:21 AM
aurgathor aurgathor is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bothell, WA
Posts: 2,886
aurgathor is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by uriah
it gets it's best economy at 68mpg, second best at 62mpg (but worse with the cruise set in between).
That is a strangely high number for a truck, and I assume you meant 68 mph. Did you try something like, ummm, err, 55 mph?
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 05-18-2007, 05:08 PM
uriah's Avatar
uriah uriah is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Powell, TN
Posts: 179
uriah is starting off with a positive reputation.
Uriah Rose II
Quote:
Originally Posted by aurgathor
That is a strangely high number for a truck, and I assume you meant 68 mph. Did you try something like, ummm, err, 55 mph?
Yep, 68mph. At 55 in OD it's turning slightly under 1500, at 68 it turns slightly over 1700.

Just a quick rundown, it's a 1979 Ford Free Wheelin' F100 shortbed stepside (dry weight, 3800 somthing, with a 302, factory SROD overdrive, 3.00 gears, 245/70-15 rubber. Custom curved vacuum advance Unilite, Jacobs Mileage Master ignition, Jacobs Ultracoil, electric fan, electric water pump, Gasket matched Edelbrock Performer intake, screened intake gaskets with well sorted Holley 4100 4 bbl, slightly reworked 5.0 factory shortys, ported and polished heads (stock valves, upgraded slightly heavier springs), Comp 260 cam (degreed in), Rhodes lifters, 9.5:1 compression, balanced and blueprinted. Homemade ram-air (with dryer ducts, no less) and a K&N filter. Other then a homemade tonneu cover (from a dumptruck tarp) that's pretty much it.

Oh, and I run full synthetic in the front bearings, tranny, engine (generally 5W20) and diff. Also SLIGHTLY overinflate the tires to 35psi, but it does wear the center out a little faster.

I use cruise 90 percent of the time, and watch my vacuum gauge constantly. Trying to break 25mpg, btw. Not really much more I can do, but I've got some other ideas when I put it back together.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 05-19-2007, 11:25 AM
racsan's Avatar
racsan racsan is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: central ohio
Posts: 1,846
racsan is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.racsan is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
i had a '88 ranger with the 2.3 4 cyl. had n visor when i got it, put one on after haveing it 5 moths, i didnt notice any difference. havent had a visor since, i like the look, but it just isnt worth the 200+ $ for something like that. step bars and stuff like that that actully do serve more than a apperance thing i'll get. i suppose if i removed everything id gain mpg, but that would just be due to the fact of weight reduction in general.
__________________
'93 Ranger Supercab,4.0L, "the green machine" http://www.myspace.com/small_dog_trucking
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/321686...er-regular-cab
I have determined that every last Automotive Engineer is an atheist.......it is quite apparent that not a single one believes in intelligent design
http://www.therangerstation.com/foru...d.php?t=148057
Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2007, 11:25 AM
Reply

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Misc. > Alternative Fuels, Hybrids & Mileage

Tags
6bt, 78, cam, f150, f350, ford, gas, increased, miles, mpg, remove, removing, truck, visor, vizor

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not 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 On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Statement - Jobs
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.

vbulletin Admin Backup