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


Reply
 
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 08-17-2007, 03:40 PM
fordmtnman's Avatar
fordmtnman fordmtnman is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Green Valley, AZ
Posts: 150
fordmtnman is starting off with a positive reputation.
Has anyone here increased milage by lowering their truck?

Has anyone seen any tests along these lines? If lifting a truck causes more aerodynamic drag, thus reducing milage, you'd think that the opposite would be true...
__________________
2007 Ford F150 XL 2WD
4.2L V6, 5spd, 3.55:1
Average MPG: 20.6
aiming for 25 mpg
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-18-2007, 05:45 AM
phil6608's Avatar
phil6608 phil6608 is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Stanton DE
Posts: 18,157
phil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant future
Most people that lift there truck put oversize tiers on it. That's were the gas mileage goes.
I don't think you'll get any noticeable difference in mileage by lowering it,,,lol.
__________________
( Phil )2003 SuperCrew: JLP Built Lightning block/Stage 3 heads and cams.
L-conversion/Kenne Bell upgrade blower at 16PSI/BTS,4R100 tranny/100 shot nitrous.
594HP/620TQ Without the Nitrous 1.68 60' time/11.76 @ 116.17 with the 100 shot.
Join the the Delaware Chapter, HERE
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-18-2007, 02:32 PM
fordmtnman's Avatar
fordmtnman fordmtnman is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Green Valley, AZ
Posts: 150
fordmtnman is starting off with a positive reputation.
Bigger tires do not automatically mean lower mpg, it's the drag that the lift causes. You can increase your highway mileage by putting on bigger tires, thus effectively making your overall gear ratio higher. (numerically lower) You just want to be sure your new tires/wheels don't weigh a lot more than the stockers, but since I have stock steel wheels and I'm going to aluminum wheels, I should lose weight there...

But since increased drag lowers mileage, I just figured that with the same stock tire size, but less frontal area, the truck would have to get better mileage, and it would also fill up my wheelwells, which look rediculously empty with the dinky stock tires. I'll have to do one of two things, either of which might increase mileage: put on the tallest possible tire, or lower the truck until the stock tires fit.
__________________
2007 Ford F150 XL 2WD
4.2L V6, 5spd, 3.55:1
Average MPG: 20.6
aiming for 25 mpg
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-18-2007, 10:46 PM
phil6608's Avatar
phil6608 phil6608 is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Stanton DE
Posts: 18,157
phil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant futurephil6608 has a brilliant future
Sorry but I don't mean 1 or 2 inches bigger! MOST guys that lift a truck is to fit bigger tiers. And thous tiers are much heaver.
Something like this.
Click the image to open in full size.
Now I love the look of a lowered truck but don't think your going to break any MPG record by doing it. But it will look great!
Lets face it,,,,,it's a truck. Not a NASCAR. You will probably do better with a bed cover.
__________________
( Phil )2003 SuperCrew: JLP Built Lightning block/Stage 3 heads and cams.
L-conversion/Kenne Bell upgrade blower at 16PSI/BTS,4R100 tranny/100 shot nitrous.
594HP/620TQ Without the Nitrous 1.68 60' time/11.76 @ 116.17 with the 100 shot.
Join the the Delaware Chapter, HERE
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-19-2007, 12:20 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.
You can increase mpg (very little, I might say) by lowering your truck. But no, I didn't do it, and not planning on doing it either.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-01-2007, 02:59 PM
crehberg's Avatar
crehberg crehberg is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Georgia
Posts: 276
crehberg is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Hmmmm.....I've never thought about that. I'm thinking the difference in MPGs would probably not be that big.
__________________
"Cody"
DD: 1997 F-150, 4.2 L V6, Auto, Regular Cab
Other Ride: 1988 Suzuki 4-Wheeler

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vijay View Post
Women species are hard to understand in best of conditions let alone in the untamed territories.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-01-2007, 03:13 PM
MisterCMK's Avatar
MisterCMK MisterCMK is offline
Avid Winter Hater
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 20,218
MisterCMK has a superb reputationMisterCMK has a superb reputationMisterCMK has a superb reputationMisterCMK has a superb reputationMisterCMK has a superb reputationMisterCMK has a superb reputationMisterCMK has a superb reputationMisterCMK has a superb reputationMisterCMK has a superb reputationMisterCMK has a superb reputationMisterCMK has a superb reputation
One thing you could do is use sheet metal or aluminum and cover the bottom of the truck to reduce drag from under carriage stuff
__________________
Chris - Avid Winter Hater
2007 F-250 XLT 4x4 CC SB 6.0 PSD - ARP, IPR Gen2 EGR Delete, 4" turbo-back, no muffler, no cat, 6.4 banjo bolts, SCT X3, EA 270A Alt, coolant filter, air bags, Ranchos, etc.
1994 Mustang GT - HCI, Novi2k blower, MM suspension parts, etc
Hope & A Prayer Motorsports
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-01-2007, 04:08 PM
lostin90s lostin90s is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Central PA
Posts: 3,978
lostin90s is starting off with a positive reputation.
I had a conversion 4x4 3;55 rears had low profile tires and was lowered tire were same highth as 2357515 but wide.(2656015 I think) When I put Stock springs back on it and the right rear block I lost 1 MPG and still had same tires. Air drag Over 2 months I check every fill up.

But several guys have put on or removed sunvisors and lost or gained also . If you run on open road it might help but its still same weight truck only lower around town
__________________
Red Neck rule #1 If you drive a truck you should always be looking for trucks to get parts off of. If you can't find part used you aren't looking hard enough.

94 F150 XLT 4x4 SC LB MAF 302 E4od 3:55 ls rear
MSD blaster coil ,cap rotor ,Fordracing 9mm wires
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-12-2007, 12:27 AM
rubydist's Avatar
rubydist rubydist is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 601
rubydist is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Aerodynamic drag doesn't really become significant until you are at freeway speeds, so I'd expect you to see a little improvement on freeway trips, but certainly not around town, as was mentioned earlier. And, since the frontal area is somewhere in the area of 20 square feet, lowering it a couple of inches won't make a large difference on that area, hence not a big difference in drag or mileage.
__________________
98 Mark VIII
98 Mountaineer
96 F250 4x4
90 RX7 conv. project
66 F100 project
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-05-2007, 12:46 AM
jbbmw's Avatar
jbbmw jbbmw is offline
diesel_john
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: sw Ohio
Posts: 87
jbbmw is starting off with a positive reputation.
lowering a truck wll reduce aero drag

Lowering helps cover up the wheels and undercarriage. This reduction in frontal area will reduce aero drag. I believe trucks might benefit from lowering even below 50 MPH, because drag is not only caused by frontal area but also how many times that air gets hit passing under the truck. Benefits increase down to about 3 or 4 inches off the ground. Below 3 inches there is no benefit because the proximity to the road surface unless you have a well designed splitter. Covering the bottom with a flat skin will help also. Ideally for a truck, it would good to able to raise the ride height for off road or bad weather. The shape of the front and rear is also very important. I haven't seen a truck yet that was designed for optimal mileage. The need is, to ask, what does nature say a truck should look like instead of, what have trucks always looked like. I see no major improvements in the aero drag of light trucks since my 59.
__________________
59F350(292-7speed)see gallery (59F350)
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-05-2007, 01:13 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 jbbmw
I haven't seen a truck yet that was designed for optimal mileage. The need is, to ask, what does nature say a truck should look like instead of, what have trucks always looked like. I see no major improvements in the aero drag of light trucks since my 59.
Well, many of the things that could improve mpg via reduction in aerodynamic drag would make the truck less usable as a truck. Yes, a ground clearance of a few inches would be good on a highway. but not so on a dirt road. And cargo capacity is a more important design factor for the tailgate and bed than mpg. IMHO, today's trucks are more curvy and aerodynamic than older ones.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-05-2007, 10:12 AM
jimandmandy jimandmandy is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Running Springs CA
Posts: 5,228
jimandmandy has a great reputation on FTE.jimandmandy has a great reputation on FTE.jimandmandy has a great reputation on FTE.jimandmandy has a great reputation on FTE.jimandmandy has a great reputation on FTE.
I dont have the figures in front of me and there are other variables, such as powertrain improvements and increased curb weights, but the 97-04 F-150 at least looks a lot more aerodynamic than the -96 or 05- models before and after.

As far as lowering via tires, the problem is rolling resistance. A wide low-profile tire is generally less efficient than a tall, narrow one (still P and not LT, which are worse).

Jim
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-05-2007, 05:33 PM
jbbmw's Avatar
jbbmw jbbmw is offline
diesel_john
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: sw Ohio
Posts: 87
jbbmw is starting off with a positive reputation.
wide tires do have their disadvantages

Perhaps the largest mileage gains in recent history occurred with the radial tire. And then the trend went towards wide and low profile with no way to shield the front of the tire from the wind, we lost part of our gains. And raising a truck exposes more of the upper half of the tire. Which is going 110 MPH wind speed. I was amazed to find out that Indy cars are limited in speed primarily because the top of the tire is going 460 Mph wind speed. And that's a slick.
The front surface of a truck could be raised or lowered based on the ground clearance requirements. A trucks cargo and passenger areas could change shape based on those requirements. I am talking conceptual here because as soon as I think in the box then, I am stuck in the same old mud puddle.
__________________
59F350(292-7speed)see gallery (59F350)
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-05-2007, 05:59 PM
Beechkid Beechkid is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 3,257
Beechkid is a splendid one to beholdBeechkid is a splendid one to beholdBeechkid is a splendid one to beholdBeechkid is a splendid one to beholdBeechkid is a splendid one to beholdBeechkid is a splendid one to behold
Well, after being referred to as a fool in another forum, here's what I have:
2006 Mark LT 4x2
Mods:
cat back exhaust
PCM programmer
Rear sway bar (self built since the hellwig is a POS IMHO)
WIX HP filter
Flush mount bed cover (self built)

MPG City: 15-16
MPG HWY: 20 (with AC 18.5)

Note: based on my calcs, if I lowere the truck 2" up front and 2" in the rear, that would in theory increase MPG by .5 mpg at HWY.
__________________
Member: Never trust a person over 40 who drives a Chevy club
Flatheads ain't so bad!
Certified backyard mechanic I & II

Last edited by Beechkid; 12-05-2007 at 06:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-05-2007, 08:56 PM
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.
That seems quite a bit, but it's not an unbelievably high number. I have a 2.5" lift kit for my Bronco, so I guess the lack or presence of that much of a lift should yield a comparable mpg difference.
Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2007, 08:56 PM
 
 
 
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
in town milage... gopedoligist 6.4L Power Stroke Diesel 5 07-07-2009 08:15 PM
Diesel Milage dwkremer Pre-Power Stroke Diesel (7.3L IDI & 6.9L) 4 08-16-2005 08:27 AM
Fuel Milage = Fuel Filter Motown Fire 6.0L Power Stroke Diesel 23 02-19-2005 07:42 AM
Is this true???? powerstrokefreak 1999 - 2003 7.3L Power Stroke Diesel 28 05-08-2004 07:36 AM
Gas Milage?????? wolverineflight31 FE & FT Big Block V8 (332, 352, 360, 390, 406, 410, 427, 428) 2 07-24-2001 08:10 PM


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

Tags
150, 2010, aerodynamic, aeromodding, area, economod, f150, ford, frontal, ft, kamback, sq, towing, truck, xfoil

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


Participate In The Forums

Create new posts and participate in discussions. It's free!

Sign Up »





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 AC1
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. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.

vbulletin Admin Backup