Dodge Cummins Diesel Forum - Reply to Topic
3rd Gen. Non-Powertrain Discussion of 3rd Gen Topics Not related to the Powertrain...NO ADVERTISING

Thread: New Ram Cummins- and long distance running Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

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










  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
04-28-2019 06:10 PM
cpitock
Quote:
Originally Posted by smelonas View Post
I understand the perfect transmission doesnt exist for these trucks. The OP just stated he was saving for firepunk setup. Wanted to give him some potentially useful insight is all.

The ideal transmission is an auto, and does have a neutral clutch for every time the vehicle stops. Locking the TC upon the first shift.

I was aware that autos in gear use a lot more fuel than just idling in neutral, I've always thought that was a way to save a lot of fuel. In neutral my CTS2 shows 0% load, in drive sitting still, it shows 5%.

Back draining the torque converter at a stop would lessen the load dramatically, but that would be like driving a space shuttle at that point. Your truck would be impossible to drive for anyone else.

So many things about transmissions to gain and you see it in modern cars. They gain more efficiency from playing with the TCM than with the ECM. Fact.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
If only we could improve the efficiency of them to come close to mid- high 90 percentile range like manuals. If I remember correctly a good automatic (planetary type) is still at most around mid to high 80 percentile. Cvt would be an improvement over planetary types, but making one durable enough and cost effective would be the issue. I know playing in the tcm is good for around 1.5mpg on the autos. In the data I have 12% is the difference in manual vs auto. So at cruise getting 25mpg in a manual that would drop to 22.3mpg. I'd be curious how that could be improved by going to a 2.90 rear end and eliminating the double overdrive as that is a backwards gain for efficiency. Obviously, that choice was determined by the bean counters and not engineers or they might have forgotten the basics.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
04-28-2019 02:54 PM
smelonas I understand the perfect transmission doesnt exist for these trucks. The OP just stated he was saving for firepunk setup. Wanted to give him some potentially useful insight is all.

The ideal transmission is an auto, and does have a neutral clutch for every time the vehicle stops. Locking the TC upon the first shift.

I was aware that autos in gear use a lot more fuel than just idling in neutral, I've always thought that was a way to save a lot of fuel. In neutral my CTS2 shows 0% load, in drive sitting still, it shows 5%.

Back draining the torque converter at a stop would lessen the load dramatically, but that would be like driving a space shuttle at that point. Your truck would be impossible to drive for anyone else.

So many things about transmissions to gain and you see it in modern cars. They gain more efficiency from playing with the TCM than with the ECM. Fact.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
04-28-2019 12:41 PM
cpitock
Quote:
Originally Posted by smelonas View Post
If you want to reach for low hanging MPG fruit, built trans and 15SS converter from goerend. Low stall converter will be worth at least 0.5 mpg at any time.

Another thing to look into is the firepunk Anteater. It allows full control of the transmission. Much better than the files that are within the ECM actually.. lock in second, or on the 1-2 shift and then keep it locked. Plus you can have 3 shift profiles to choose from. I'm almost to the point of getting one myself.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
For mileage, I would stay far from an auto. Another thing is having a low stall in the city (unless you switch to neutral at every light and stop sign) will cause you to eat up more fuel. Look at your fuel usage in park (engine temps to operating) and then in drive, I promise you'll realize a double to triple usage unless you have the ability like newer cars to completely disengage the TC at a stop while in drive. Datalogs have shown me that an automatic (factory) will use slightly more fuel at a stop than what it takes my truck to do 55MPH.

Example:

Manual manual uses 7.5mm3 of fuel to idle per injection while at light and stopped. Uses approximately 25mm3 to run 55MPH.

Auto pickup uses 28mm3 of fuel to idle per injection while at light and stopped while in drive. Uses approximately 30mm3 to run 55MPH

This is based on both trucks that have exact same tune with factory parts. They also use more fuel while TC is unlocked to accelerate and they always take HP to drive the pump. You can do a lot of mods to an auto and the ones that get better mileage on the highway will hurt you in the city or even just normal use. These reasons are typically why manuals get about 1-2MPG better under similar circumstances and same effective drive ratio. I'm not saying your mods didn't help you in mileage, I'm just painting a picture that what you see is due to your usage and could vastly change the other way for somebody else.
04-14-2019 02:52 AM
tryNto For all the pictures you could ever want to post. use imgur.com. upload your pics there, click on the pic you want to use then copy the bbcode. go to your thread post and paste the copied bbcode into the post and you have pictures.
04-12-2019 12:00 AM
smelonas If you want to reach for low hanging MPG fruit, built trans and 15SS converter from goerend. Low stall converter will be worth at least 0.5 mpg at any time.

Another thing to look into is the firepunk Anteater. It allows full control of the transmission. Much better than the files that are within the ECM actually.. lock in second, or on the 1-2 shift and then keep it locked. Plus you can have 3 shift profiles to choose from. I'm almost to the point of getting one myself.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
04-10-2019 12:11 PM
cpitock
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve05ram360 View Post
Thats weak dude... Weak....lol



I think your truck would like a fun road trip more often...
Yes, it's horrible, but that is only those data collection points. I'm probably around 18k total miles for the last 6 months.... winter is maintenance time for me, spring, summer fall are my driving seasons

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
04-10-2019 06:44 AM
steve05ram360
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpitock View Post
My city mileage for the last 6 months was 18.69MPG over 6020 miles with about 600-700 of those miles being highway. Figured I would throw the mileage in for winter city as I finally started using technology to track mileage rather a pen and paper.
Thats weak dude... Weak....lol

I think your truck would like a fun road trip more often...
04-09-2019 09:12 PM
cpitock My city mileage for the last 6 months was 18.69MPG over 6020 miles with about 600-700 of those miles being highway. Figured I would throw the mileage in for winter city as I finally started using technology to track mileage rather a pen and paper.
04-09-2019 09:00 PM
cpitock I used .52 as Drag coefficient and 35.1 ft2 for my hp numbers so by changing to yours my BSFC numbers go wack and won't line up with the real world.
04-09-2019 08:56 PM
cpitock
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.
So I did some BSFC curves for part load. My truck ~55MPH, ~1600RPM (G56 w/275/70/18 and 3.73) will be around .588 lb/hp*hr and sip at 13.2 lb/hr of fuel. This is figured at 7 lb/gal of diesel. That puts mileage at 29 1/6 mpg, which is VERY consistent with what I see on an average day on flat ground @ 55MPH. So that's approximately 22.5 WHP to move down the road @ 55MPH.
Math for 65MPH @ ~1900RPM
lb/hp*hr = .495242
lb/hr = 20.188
MPG=24.27
WHP Required=40.76

The mileage is VERY consistent again to what I see in real world with MY truck.

Just throwing the numbers out there to you and maybe that will help with some other numbers you may not be finding.
04-09-2019 03:14 PM
steve05ram360
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpitock View Post
Square wave output. I use a omega logger with it.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpitock View Post
Square wave output. I use a omega logger with it.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


I understand... your just trying to get your message across...
04-09-2019 02:25 PM
cpitock
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve05ram360 View Post
what signal does it provide? digital counter or analog?

I've seen some flow meters on-line that will handle diesel with a counter output. Some of them also come with a display to handle all the conversions.
dual post [emoji848]

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
This thread has more than 12 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

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

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