New Ram Cummins- and long distance running - Page 2 - Dodge Cummins Diesel Forum
3rd Gen. Non-Powertrain Discussion of 3rd Gen Topics Not related to the Powertrain...NO ADVERTISING

 8Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #13 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-09-2019, 09:20 AM
Diesel Freak
 
cpitock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Michigan
Posts: 623
Thanks: 7
Thanked 45 Times in 44 Posts
Garage
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve05ram360 View Post
I use smugmug... Had photosucket but they wanted a large sum monthly to post pics... Smug mug was $5.

Cody this is the thread you mentioned...? Looking in the wrong forums... Doh!
Yes, this is it!

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

steve05ram360 likes this.

2009 2500 CCSB G56 4x4, 3.73-Self tuned w/WARP 552HP & 1225 lb-ft
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 3 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Record MPG: 31.2MPG Average over deleted life: 24.4MPG Next Tank Goal MPG: 35
cpitock is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #14 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-09-2019, 10:01 AM Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Marquis Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Mid West
Posts: 18
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
OK, I cant post pictures right now then, but I can post some of my simulation results.

The take away from my real world fuel economy results is this- On my other cars, normal cars, like Jaguars XJRs, VW Golfs etc- stop start driving usually brings the average fuel economy down and longer distance Highway driving brings the average up.

For the Ram diesel it seems to be the opposite- I think this is because of the immense frontal area of the truck and the poor drag coefficient- that driving it at speed kills the mpg.

FWIW the simulation shows exactly the same trend. It's best not to focus on the exact numbers of the simulation but to utilize it in terms if trends and then compare it to our real world experiences;

So I have

Stock Quad Cab Dodge Ram 2500 with 48RE , 3.73 rear end and 265/70 -17 tyres

Fed Highway sim avg: 20.94 mpg

Stock QC Ram 2500 with NV5600 ,3.73 RAR and 265/70-17

Fed Highway sim avg: 18.49 mpg
My problem with this result is that the Fed Highway doesn't utlise 6th and revs the engine quite high, more so than any driver seeking fuel economy would- so I would like to modify the shift schedule if possible

QC 2500 with 48RE, 285/70-17 tyres and a 3.42 rear end
Fed Highway: 21.35 mpg- Here you can see the effects of both the larger diameter wheels and the 3.42 rear end. I need to separate out the effects



Stock QC 2500 with 3.73 RAR and 265 tyres
running constant 75mph: 12.23 mpg

QC 2500 with NV5600 with 3.42 RAR
running constant 75mph: 13.51 mpg

QC 2500 with 3.42 RAR and 285/70 tyres
running constant 75 mph: 12.98 mpg

I know I need to separate some of these effects out.

Other notable assumptions- I used a drag coefficient of 0.56 as a guess. The SRT10 was 0.45, the stock 1500 is listed as 0.53 so I guessed at 0.56 due to the higher stance and I increased the frontal area accordingly.

I used 88% as average efficiency for the 48RE- most autos ( like the NAG1 Benz trans are low to mid nineties). Because this is derived from an old torqueflite_ assumed a low figure. This is probably a bit harsh of me but I'd rather be pessimistic.
I assumed the efficiency of the NV5600 at around 98% in direct drive top and 97% in 0.73 over drive ratio.

There's quite a lot of 'stop and go' in the Federal Cycle.

This is the cycle-

https://www.dieselnet.com/standards/cycles/hwfet.php

It doesn't really get up above 60 mph- which is why the figures look quite good.

The other factor is that for the BSFC map (break specific fuel consumption) for the 5.9 Cummins I used some measured data from a Semi Truck dyno data I had and some 8 mode test data I had I extrapolated the rest. Also the spec of he semi truck application of this engine isn't EXACTLY the same as the Ram pick up. In addition, when this BSFC data is derived- its steady state on an engine dyno, what a vehicle achieves when driving can be a bit different.

Living Life One Transmission At a Time
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 3 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Marquis Rex is offline  
post #15 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-09-2019, 10:27 AM
Diesel Freak
 
cpitock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Michigan
Posts: 623
Thanks: 7
Thanked 45 Times in 44 Posts
Garage
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marquis Rex View Post
OK, I cant post pictures right now then, but I can post some of my simulation results.

The take away from my real world fuel economy results is this- On my other cars, normal cars, like Jaguars XJRs, VW Golfs etc- stop start driving usually brings the average fuel economy down and longer distance Highway driving brings the average up.

For the Ram diesel it seems to be the opposite- I think this is because of the immense frontal area of the truck and the poor drag coefficient- that driving it at speed kills the mpg.

FWIW the simulation shows exactly the same trend. It's best not to focus on the exact numbers of the simulation but to utilize it in terms if trends and then compare it to our real world experiences;

So I have

Stock Quad Cab Dodge Ram 2500 with 48RE , 3.73 rear end and 265/70 -17 tyres

Fed Highway sim avg: 20.94 mpg

Stock QC Ram 2500 with NV5600 ,3.73 RAR and 265/70-17

Fed Highway sim avg: 18.49 mpg
My problem with this result is that the Fed Highway doesn't utlise 6th and revs the engine quite high, more so than any driver seeking fuel economy would- so I would like to modify the shift schedule if possible

QC 2500 with 48RE, 285/70-17 tyres and a 3.42 rear end
Fed Highway: 21.35 mpg- Here you can see the effects of both the larger diameter wheels and the 3.42 rear end. I need to separate out the effects



Stock QC 2500 with 3.73 RAR and 265 tyres
running constant 75mph: 12.23 mpg

QC 2500 with NV5600 with 3.42 RAR
running constant 75mph: 13.51 mpg

QC 2500 with 3.42 RAR and 285/70 tyres
running constant 75 mph: 12.98 mpg

I know I need to separate some of these effects out.

Other notable assumptions- I used a drag coefficient of 0.56 as a guess. The SRT10 was 0.45, the stock 1500 is listed as 0.53 so I guessed at 0.56 due to the higher stance and I increased the frontal area accordingly.

I used 88% as average efficiency for the 48RE- most autos ( like the NAG1 Benz trans are low to mid nineties). Because this is derived from an old torqueflite_ assumed a low figure. This is probably a bit harsh of me but I'd rather be pessimistic.
I assumed the efficiency of the NV5600 at around 98% in direct drive top and 97% in 0.73 over drive ratio.

There's quite a lot of 'stop and go' in the Federal Cycle.

This is the cycle-

https://www.dieselnet.com/standards/cycles/hwfet.php

It doesn't really get up above 60 mph- which is why the figures look quite good.

The other factor is that for the BSFC map (break specific fuel consumption) for the 5.9 Cummins I used some measured data from a Semi Truck dyno data I had and some 8 mode test data I had I extrapolated the rest. Also the spec of he semi truck application of this engine isn't EXACTLY the same as the Ram pick up. In addition, when this BSFC data is derived- its steady state on an engine dyno, what a vehicle achieves when driving can be a bit different.
If I have time today, I'll try to get bsfc part load numbers from my truck. I recently put the flow meters on for some testing so this is an ideal time to do it

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Marquis Rex likes this.

2009 2500 CCSB G56 4x4, 3.73-Self tuned w/WARP 552HP & 1225 lb-ft
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 3 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Record MPG: 31.2MPG Average over deleted life: 24.4MPG Next Tank Goal MPG: 35
cpitock is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #16 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-09-2019, 10:54 AM Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Marquis Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Mid West
Posts: 18
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpitock View Post
If I have time today, I'll try to get bsfc part load numbers from my truck. I recently put the flow meters on for some testing so this is an ideal time to do it

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Conversely I have a lot of good data for the 6.7, including measured in cylinder pressure data.

All Ram Truck based.

I could have used the BSFC map from the 6.7 for the 5.9 but wanted to do better.

Extracting the BSFC data and inputting into the simulation is a pain!

What kind of flow meters did you use? Coriolis type?

Living Life One Transmission At a Time
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 3 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Marquis Rex is offline  
post #17 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-09-2019, 11:03 AM
Cummins Nut
 
4everlearning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Humboldt County, CA
Posts: 399
Thanks: 8
Thanked 35 Times in 35 Posts
Garage
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Just a thought, I get the best fuel mileage from my truck when Iím on a long run at an avg speed of 60-65mph. 55 might do better but thereís nowhere that I run this speed at.

2005 QCSB, cold air intake, guages, a trans built by me and HPTuners tunes by me
4everlearning is offline  
post #18 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-09-2019, 11:13 AM Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Marquis Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Mid West
Posts: 18
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4everlearning View Post
Just a thought, I get the best fuel mileage from my truck when Iím on a long run at an avg speed of 60-65mph. 55 might do better but thereís nowhere that I run this speed at.
I agree that The Ram should get a lot better fuel economy at 60-65 mph (although weirdly, a guy who works for me with a Duramax GM, claims he gets worse at 60 mph than 70- which I find hard to believe).

But much like Steve05 has said in some of his threads, Im doing my tests and driving as I would normally- and quite 'press on'. Im doing this less for the purposes of saving money (Im from Europe originally- our fuel was $8-9 a gallon- its cheap here-trust me!) but more as an exercise for nerdy fun .

I will one day try to maintain a constant 65 mph and see what figures I can achieve.

Living Life One Transmission At a Time
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 3 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Marquis Rex is offline  
post #19 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-09-2019, 11:26 AM Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Marquis Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Mid West
Posts: 18
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Thought I would post some other stats for comparison, car data. Often a comparison helps to put things into perspective

This data from the simulation is very well correlated to real world, so I have a lot of faith in it, more so than the Ram Diesel data I put up.

2000 model year Jaguar XJR 4.0 Supercharged- stock

Fed Highway- avg 26.19 mpg. Best I ever got driving highway was 22-23 mpg. I have good faith in the BSFC maps as I was involved in the testing way back and was there at the dyno collecting it! The lie-o-meter on the Jag lies the other way to the Ram and is modest! Must be a British thing!

At 75 mph- it takes 38.9 Bhp to keep it at constant speed


2006 model year Aston Martin V8 Vantage

Fed Highway: 26.58 mpg. Im lucky to get 22 mpg out of mine, but I haven't done a brim to brim real world test.
This data I trust a lot as I was lead on this powertrain/vehicle project way back when, and attained the data myself.

At 75 mph- it takes 33.18 Bhp to keep it at constant speed


2002 BMW M3 (S54)

Fed Highway: 28.49 mpg. I have no idea how accurate this is real world. Ive never owned one, although I have faith in the person who collected the BSFC data for me


At 75 mpg it costs 34 bhp to push the BMW through the air


2012 Dodge CHarger SRT-8

Fed Highway: 22.89 mpg. I have modest faith in this- I used 6.1 BSFC data and extrapolated and cobbled together this data set! Its not far off what some are getting on our Ram Cummins! I have no idea how economical a Charger SRT-8 is real world!


Oh and almost forgot- at 75 mph it costs the Ram 2500 Cummins about 98.6 Bhp to maintain constant speed. Kind of puts things into perspective!

Living Life One Transmission At a Time
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 3 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Marquis Rex is offline  
post #20 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-09-2019, 11:36 AM
TECH SPECIALIST
 
steve05ram360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 10,121
Thanks: 526
Thanked 1,373 Times in 1,001 Posts
iTrader Score: 3 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marquis Rex View Post
I agree that The Ram should get a lot better fuel economy at 60-65 mph (although weirdly, a guy who works for me with a Duramax GM, claims he gets worse at 60 mph than 70- which I find hard to believe).

But much like Steve05 has said in some of his threads, Im doing my tests and driving as I would normally- and quite 'press on'. Im doing this less for the purposes of saving money (Im from Europe originally- our fuel was $8-9 a gallon- its cheap here-trust me!) but more as an exercise for nerdy fun .

I will one day try to maintain a constant 65 mph and see what figures I can achieve.
I can duplicate that in my truck... its the tune doing it. More efficient at the higher rpms @ 70 than at 60. Last summer on a road trip I managed mid 19's doing 85 across Idaho and into Utah spinning at 2500 rpms. Truck was back to stock suspension wise and had 33" tires. Was pretty happy with the 19's and after the trip, truck ran better.

AFE PG7 drop in filter, AFE Torque Tube, HTT 2.5 turbo, AFE e-mani, ATS Arc Flo, 50HP DDP , 417k, HPTuners, G56, 25.065 mpg, mpg threads ->
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 3 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
steve05ram360 is offline  
post #21 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-09-2019, 11:37 AM
Cummins Nut
 
4everlearning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Humboldt County, CA
Posts: 399
Thanks: 8
Thanked 35 Times in 35 Posts
Garage
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
I get 22-23 if I keep it between 60 and 65mph. On that same stretch of road my mileage drops to within .5 of 19mpg if I kick it up and keep it between 75 and 80mph on that same stretch of freeway. This freeway is fairly level without many turns so itís perfect for this type of testing.

2005 QCSB, cold air intake, guages, a trans built by me and HPTuners tunes by me
4everlearning is offline  
post #22 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-09-2019, 11:40 AM Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Marquis Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Mid West
Posts: 18
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4everlearning View Post
Just a thought, I get the best fuel mileage from my truck when Iím on a long run at an avg speed of 60-65mph. 55 might do better but thereís nowhere that I run this speed at.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4everlearning View Post
I get 22-23 if I keep it between 60 and 65mph. On that same stretch of road my mileage drops to within .5 of 19mpg if I kick it up and keep it between 75 and 80mph on that same stretch of freeway. This freeway is fairly level without many turns so itís perfect for this type of testing.
Is your truck stock?

Living Life One Transmission At a Time
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 3 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Marquis Rex is offline  
post #23 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-09-2019, 11:42 AM Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Marquis Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Mid West
Posts: 18
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve05ram360 View Post
I can duplicate that in my truck... its the tune doing it. More efficient at the higher rpms @ 70 than at 60. Last summer on a road trip I managed mid 19's doing 85 across Idaho and into Utah spinning at 2500 rpms. Truck was back to stock suspension wise and had 33" tires. Was pretty happy with the 19's and after the trip, truck ran better.


That's incredible.

I reckon my truck would get mid to high 17s doing that right now.

Living Life One Transmission At a Time
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 3 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Marquis Rex is offline  
post #24 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-09-2019, 11:42 AM
Cummins Nut
 
4everlearning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Humboldt County, CA
Posts: 399
Thanks: 8
Thanked 35 Times in 35 Posts
Garage
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Stock engine, stock tires, minor lift, and tuning done by me with HPTuners

2005 QCSB, cold air intake, guages, a trans built by me and HPTuners tunes by me
4everlearning is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Dodge Cummins Diesel Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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 Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome