When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
My purchased new 1978 Power Wagon, short bed 360 was a 12-14 MPG truck.
Thinking back I would guess I did as many of the cast iron transfer cases that I did of the Dana 60 and 70 axles - very few.
Curious was the 78 Power Wagon full time 4wd?
I remember the older Dana HD axles and the roller bearing king pin setup. They were a snap to rebuild compared to pressing out self enclosed ball joints.
As to the NP 203/205 - where you guys getting your info on the NP203 being junk?
Personal experience. They didn't hold up well for us in a rice field. Certainly not normal conditions, but the all gear 205 was and still is a workhorse.
My purchased new 1978 Power Wagon, short bed 360 was a 12-14 MPG truck.
I would say my experience was probably limited to trucks under 100K. I specialized in engines and drive trains and although a did do a few of those 200 pound ,monsters I would say compared to the rest of the heavy repairs I did the ratio was relatively small.
Thinking back I would guess I did as many of the cast iron transfer cases that I did of the Dana 60 and 70 axles - very few.
Unless being specifically designed for part time 4wd makes a difference, I think the economy hue and cry is pretty much hype. I knew several people who did the part time conversion, and they had to got to the right side of the decimal point to see an improvement.
Back then I drove a 76 Jeep J-10 360 2-bbl with Warn Quadra-trac. Performance/traction was superb, and I got 17 highway mpg regularly.
Unless being specifically designed for part time 4wd makes a difference, I think the economy hue and cry is pretty much hype. I knew several people who did the part time conversion, and they had to got to the right side of the decimal point to see an improvement.
Back then I drove a 76 Jeep J-10 360 2-bbl with Warn Quadra-trac. Performance/traction was superb, and I got 17 highway mpg regularly.
Think of economy and CAFE ratings, where that 'to the right of the decimal' makes a difference.
Think of economy and CAFE ratings, where that 'to the right of the decimal' makes a difference.
Or, they could have figured out out how Jeep got, conservatively, 4 mpg better hwy. 😀. (Also, my 2014 F-250 sticker says, paraphrased, that the Feds don't make them list mileage on these trucks.)
Or, they could have figured out out how Jeep got, conservatively, 4 mpg better hwy. 😀. (Also, my 2014 F-250 sticker says, paraphrased, that the Feds don't make them list mileage on these trucks.)
Mileage listings for the F250 class and up have not been mandated in the past. They will be included in the near future as they are being swept into the CAFE standards. I expect to see very fuel efficient models of the the Super Duty pickups along with the new standards. You know, the last ones to leave the line at the stop light and the last to leave the lineup at the dealer unless our fuel supplies are pinched off again.
Mileage listings for the F250 class and up have not been mandated in the past. They will be included in the near future as they are being swept into the CAFE standards. I expect to see very fuel efficient models of the the Super Duty pickups along with the new standards. You know, the last ones to leave the line at the stop light and the last to leave the lineup at the dealer unless our fuel supplies are pinched off again.
It will be interesting to see how the HD truck makers react to the CAFE requirements. Shedding weight is easy on other vehicles, but not on towing vehicles. They need the weight for towing stability. Therefore, the efficiency needs to come from drivetrain improvements. However, small engines and hybridization are least likely to be accepted by the HD truck customer. These folks tend to be right-leaning, have no problem with high fuel consumption, aren't worried about global warming, and want even more horsepower and torque.
Personally, I have no interest in any of these technologies. I'd just like to see more efficient versions of what we have now.
Personally, I have no interest in any of these technologies. I'd just like to see more efficient versions of what we have now.
I have a passing interest in that good things might come of them but I am not sure they will ever have a place in the heavy duty industries. And I stretch that to include the heavy duty pickups. I never thought the world would exist past 1981 after the first EPA standards ruined the cars back in the early 1970's.
Given the current state of affairs I think the only reputable thing to do going forward is to place a federal tax on the buyers of vehicles based on the expected mileage and pollutants of each model. It could be administered by a small group of say, 450,000 government workers and supervisors and think of the good it would do for the environment and the HD truck industries. This would be a great win for the government (formerly known as by the people and for the people) and credits could be issued for those who support the party!!