Yeah, i would be really happy to get that kind of mileage.

Consider yourself lucky, and leave it as it is. These motors can go for alot more miles....just consider yours 240xxx miles young. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" />
-J <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/kewl.gif" alt="" />

trade your rig for an older turbo diesel or 2.3 truck and you'll get close to that number.

to maximize what you have, make sure the thing is maintained regularly (ignition and exhaust systems are up to spec, fluids are good, etc), make sure air pressure is correct, and dont carry any unnecessary junk. lose the back seat if possible. driving like an old lady helps too.

Hi Steve, I can tell you if you do consider to go diesel you would most likely see 25+ mpg pretty easy. The factory turbo diesel Troopers usually got in the range of 28-30 mpg at best, so if you wanted to get another Trooper then the diesel is something to consider. You can also just stick with your Trooper if it has been loyal and I'd imagine it has after 249,000 miles. Glad to see the 2.8 is still running good.



Like I said if you get an 86 or 87 Trooper turbo diesel you'll see the fuel mileage of 25 or more, but you may not like the power the C223-T diesel puts out after recording some high mileage (ex: 200,000 miles). There is another solution to getting the much better fuel mileage, same or slighty improved power, and still going diesel if you consider the 4JB1-T 2.8 turbo diesel engine that 87-91 Troopers saw from the factory in the UK. This diesel engine is a proven unit and I've heard many claims of UK owners getting 30+ mpg in their Troopers with this powerplant. Although that would require you to see about buying/shipping one over from Great Britain or going with an engine importer here in the US. Then you are talking about spending at least $1,000 to do so. It's up to you and do visit the Isuzu Diesels forum for more information on the diesel engines you can choose for a possibility. Thanks and hope I could provide some helpful information.

Salvy

Hey Guys, Thanks for all the posts to my question, I really appreciate the input. I have been e mailing, making phone calls and researching how to get the most mileage out of the "Brick" otherwise known as the TROOPER. I think I am making some headway. I don't know how much MPG I can squeeze out of the engine I decide to put in the Trooper but I think I will make it a project and keep everyone up to date on the results. I believe with the current gas situation not changing in the future it is time and money well spent. I plan to keep the Trooper FOREVER so whatever results I accomplish will benefit me and maybe others for some time to come...especially die hard Trooper fans like me who plan to keep it in the family and drive it along time. I have had several recomendations to just get a car with better gas mileage a prius or some other small car... the only problem is that it's not a Trooper. I believe I may be able to achieve still driving the Trooper which I love and achieve a respectable gas mileage to boot. By respectable I mean 25 or better. Currently my research, of which I have lots more to do, has left me with looking in the current direction. Since the 2.8 is very underpowered to start with and because of this the Trooper is somewhat low geared I don't think the 2.8 is a candidate for a build that would net the desired mileage or power. At present my research points to a 3.4 used by GM in pre 95 Camaro and Firebird and maybe some others. This engine has adequate power and as I understand it pretty much of a shoe in as far as installation is concerned. I also have found out that rocker rollers, a cam upgrade to a more efficient design, and a more efficient ignition system would all be steps in the right direction for optimum mileage. Also with the more powerful 3.4 engine a higher gearing set up would definetly be called for and most beneficial. I am also going to explore using the fuel injection system used on the 3.4 in camaros and firebirds instead of the TBI system most people use in this swap. I have been told the fuel injection is much more efficient and would net better mileage overall. I will keep everyone updated with my research. I also understand that the money and effort I am expending to achieve a more efficient Trooper would not appeal to all but if you are like me and see people spend thousands to install hi powered stereos and equipment to make their Troopers climb up the side of mountains billy goats would shy away from my effort is well spent on a more practical level. Not that their is anything wrong with all these upgrades I like a nice stereo as much as the next guy but these mileage upgrades would benefit the ones out there that use their Trooper as an every day driver to haul supplies, take critters to the vet,go fishing camping or hiking, hit the backroads occasionally on the weekend and in general take pride in driving a vehicle that is well made and that you don't see in everyone's driveway. Please keep the suggestions coming in and hopefully by the time my project is over I will have a Trooper that can handle the trails AND get great mileage on the highway. Steve

Well, Steve, I really look forward to see what you come up with. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/cheers.gif" alt="" /> Definitely keep us all informed.

Salvy, The option of the 2.8 TD from Britian sounds Great. I have checked around for an American Trooper Diesel 2.2 and it seems they are scarce as hens teeth and I have also been told the power is as lacking as the 2.8 Gas. Concerning the 2.8 TD do you know what is involved in the swap? I would imagine the tranny I have would not work. And it sounds like their would be alot of mods electrically. A swap like that would be way out of my range even though my wifes cousins husband is a diesel mechanic from Europe. He said he would be hands on on what ever project I decided for the Trooper. I will ask him about the 2.8 TD option and see if he knows how much would be involved. I also think the cost for a diesel upgrade would be quite a bit more than a good ole gas engine upgrade. Although you have the bio diesel option with a diesel which is very appealing. Thanks for the positive input...only time and research will tell what the final solution will be... Steve

Concerning the 2.8 TD do you know what is involved in the swap?

Two things. Either get the EPA to change all of their rules concerning the importation of newer, non-EPA approved engines or move to the UK.

While you can "never say never," the chances of you importing a 2.8 into the US (legally) are very slim.

On the goal of increasing mileage, I will again give you the basic economics of it. At an "average" price of $3/gal, you are looking at reducing your fuel cost by 4 cents a mile. You are talking about spending thousands of dollars to gain that goal and you are looking at having to drive 25K for every thousand dollars spent to just repay your project. And that is only if you actually achieve 25MPG. If you only get 2MPG, that makes it 50K miles for every $1K in cost.

It is one thing to rebuild an engine, but when you get into changing fuel injection systems and that kind of thing you are talking big dollars, custom wiring, and reduced reliability (just on the fact it becomes a "custom" job).

Changing fuels (where diesel is, and has been, about 10% higher in cost) via an engine swap and your costs just skyrocketed. Other than the 2.8TD swap (see the issues above) you are also talking about swapping in a smaller motor (that will also require a tranny swap) that is actually much older in technology than what you have now. While bio-diesel is an "option" it is not widely available and it is currently as much or more than diesel. If we are paying this much for diesel (you know, the first cut, more crude easier to refine stuff), there is no reason for bio producers to charge any less.

But, you have also added another goal to your plan. Your first stated plan was MPG MPG MPG. Now, you are talking power. Well...they don't quite go hand-in-hand. There is a certain efficiency issue to be gained, but the answer is not to be found in roller-rockers and high-output ignitions. Even with the MPFI injection found in the later Camaros, I doubt you will get 25MPG. Those systems (and the driving electronics) were not built to be economy engines. As soon as "power" crept into your goal, you just became a little less logical in the thought process. Yes, you might be able to find a mid-point of happiness between more power and better mileage (but I doubt it) but you no longer can do it for economic reasons, as it will never pay out.

Since this seems to be something that you are not 100% solid in doing yourself (please correct me if I am wrong and I mean no offense), it makes me nervous. Other than your options of a) keeping the current 2.8 b) rebuilding the 2.8 or c) doing a basic 3.4 swap, you are talking about massive amounts of fabrication, tranny swapping, wiring changes, ECU changes ect. This means it will need constant attention and tweaking just because of the nature of the beast. Are you comfortable doing that? Are you comfortable (or able to have) your vehicle not be as reliable as it currently is? These are two VERY important questions.

Again, I strongly suggest if you are stuck on keeping the trooper to consider keeping the 2.8 you have, keeping it running as well as possible until it dies and then consider swapping in the 3.4. If you are dying for more power, just do the 3.4 swap and be done with it. It is a tried and true swap that is proven and it is a bolt-in swap.

Other than that, your option is to go with that smaller econo-box and just drive the trooper when you need the cargo space. I know you don't want to hear this, but if your goal it to reduce your driving expenditure, then this will do it. But again, that is still only a maybe.

Good Luck,
Michael

PS, Please try and space out your posts into paragraphs. It makes them much easier to read. Thanks.

Michael, Thanks for the reply. I understand that you are one of the moderators on this forum but it sounds like you are playing the role of the "Logic Police". Hopefully this forum is dedicated to the free expression and discussion of "Ideas". One mans Logic may not be anothers. And while we are on the logic issue where is the logic of taking your vehicle out on the trail and putting it in places which could trash it with one turn of the wheel while spending thousands to put it in that very position. This has no "Logic" to me but the people who have the desire to do this have every "Right" to do it and also talk about it and how to improve on it as much as they wish. And they should be able to do this without me telling them they are not exercising logic in their pursuit.

My pursuit of an efficient engine for my Trooper is logical to me if I talk to the people who can advise me in my quest such as the mechanics I have been quizzing. These mechanics tell me that in the case of the Trooper and the 2.8 that often switching to the 3.4 will automatically increase gas mileage if you drive moderately. They say this is because of the weight to power ratio improvement of the 3.4 engine swap. And they tell me their are many things you can do while building an engine to improve gas mileage and POWER that would not cost any more than a standard rebuild.

I completely understand your equation and it makes perfect sense. And I do plan to follow your advice of building a 3.4 before I need it and installing only when I am finished. I also want to get "Everyone's" advice before I decide on the tack I will take and that is why I joined this forum. I understand you may be only trying to help but it comes across as being condesending and as if you are frustrated that I continue to search for ideas to improve my Trooper after you have already told me what you suggest.

If I am mistaken I humbly apoligize but I am not accustomed to being talked down to. If the free pursuit of knowledge and ideas is not supported by the moderators on this forum without condemnation I will gladly un-subscribe

Steve

clark, it seems that you are stuck, no, maybe bound, into too much structure. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/lol.gif" alt="" /> Many people, like myself, and maybe Steve, are not simply looking into a 1:1 ratio between investment on equipment and return on fuel savings. Why not factor in intangibles into the equation? Personally, I would not mind spending more on equipment that in the end reduced my fuel consumption without returning every cent invested.

Sure, a pragmatic response would be "get a Geo Metro" etc., etc. However, Steve stated some of the parameters that he was working with and the main one was a 1st gen Trooper. We are all constrained by physics, but human ingenuity is amazing in it's potential. Nay say all you wish, discourage if you want, but try not to extinguish every last flame. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" /> With Isuzus my glass is half full. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/cheers.gif" alt="" />

Steve-

I don't know what to tell ya. You are mistaken. My role as a moderator has no bearing on the advice I give. You wanted advice and that is what I gave. It just may not be what you want to hear.

You came here for advice. All I have to go by is what you have posted. You wanted better mileage. I also think you have mistaken the true definition of logic. Logic has no "good" or "bad" connotations. It has to do with how the decision making process works. Illogical only means a decision does not line up with the constraints of the problem. Change the constraints and that same decision becomes logical. Make sense?

For example, if your solitary goal was better mileage, then you would spend any amount for any gain. That means 1, 2 or 3 MPG would be sufficient cause for you to open your checkbook. But, we know that is not the case. So, somewhere there is a minimum amount of gain you are looking for. You set that at 25MPG. Ok, again logic based on that means you are looking for at least a 6MPG gain. Again, without the constraint of dollars, you could maybe achieve this. But...your whole goal is to save money, so, we all know there is only so much you (or any of us) would throw at the problem to achieve the goal. So, regardless of your desire to have a Trooper that gets 25MPG, I suspect it really is "25MPG at less than $X-dollars." Now we have something to work with, but it puts us back to numbers I gave you above.

But, you are looking to actually save money. Again, for example, you are not going to spend $5K to save $3K. That, is not logical. If you want to spend less on gasoline, it is logical only to spend money that you will see a repayment on in a reasonable amount of time. I don't know what that amount of money or reasonable amount of time is for you. But, if you have to drive 150K miles to see a break even (i.e. it would cost you the same to do nothing as it would be to dive into an engine swap), it might not be worth it to you. I am just trying to provide you the WHOLE story, as it is greater than simply what the mileage is.

On the aspect of rebuilding for the sole goal of increased mileage it is my opinion it is not worth it. If I had a 2.8 that was knocking down 19MPG, I would not touch it. At that mileage, it is in excellent condition. I would not even put a compression gauge on it. Tune it up and go. This is my personal advice from an "If I were you..." standpoint.

But...all of that goes out the window when you start talking about better performance. The 2.2TD is out as is the 2.8TD. The former for power, the later because of the EPA. I honestly do not believe you will see your goal from doing something like a 3.4 swap. Yes, theory might tell you there are efficiency gains, but you will be making more power, maybe more efficiently, but it is going to require more fuel. Remember, the 2.8 and 3.4 are the same family. They share the same mechanics. They are not OHV, they are not MPFI, the ECU is primitive, the 60* orientation of the cylinders is generally less efficient, (when compared to 90* and 180* blocks). I don't know what the stroke to bore ratio is, but I doubt it is ideal. These are all hard set parameters of the engine that you have to work around. They make more power, and you might end up with an engine that is more efficient, but it will most likely be getting lower mileage. It is a case of burning more fuel, efficiently. No matter what you do, it will be still pushing around a 5000 pound brick and it will take an immense amount of efficiency to overcome that.

You came to us looking for advice. From only reading your posts, I can't tell if you know one end of a wrench from the other. Again, you may, but that a factor here. You stated it is your daily driver and what you use for your HS work. I hesitate to suggest to anybody to highly modify a rig that they rely upon on a daily basis. There is a certain amount of reduced reliability whenever major changes are made. If you can address these issues and live with them, great. But, if you have to pay someone to do the work and the continued tweaking, it starts to really up the initial and continued cost of what you are proposing to do.

Do you see? There is more to the problem than "I want at least 25MPG." If you came to us and told us that your 2.8 was burning 2qts of oil every 500 miles, belching tremendous amounts of smoke and you were getting 8MPG, my advice to you would be different.

Again, I wish you luck. I also suggest that showing up on a 4x4 board and subtly insulting what we do, may not be the best approach. It may not be "logical" to you, but you are failing to factor in that this is a hobby and recreation for most of us here. Many of us also enjoy helping people like you who are looking for advice specifically tailored to Isuzus. We enjoy what our rigs do and cost and potential damage play a small role in that enjoyment. From turning wrenches ourselves to getting out and wheeling in some of the most beautiful places in this country, plus the comradarie we build, is all worth the cost involved and the very minimal amount of damage we incur while wheeling. In fact, in all my years involved in wheeling, I can think of very few people I know of (here) who have totaled their rig on the trail. Many more rigs have met their maker while on the asphalt.

Good Luck,
Michael