|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: billygoat]
#835379
09/15/07 06:58 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,511
Body Damage is Cool
|
If you want to get really technical with the math, you have to calculate for the actual tire diameter, which changes as the tire wears. A 33" tire is rarely exactly 33", and won't remain at that size throughout it's life. For example, suppose a 33" tire has 15/32 tread when new. When it's worn to 3/32 of tread depth, it will have decreased to a 32 1/4" tire (12/32 worn x 2 sides = 3/4"). The Tire Rack website has all the technical data for every tire it sells including actual width & diameter measurements. It's interesting to look at how many 33" tires aren't really 33" diameter.
95 Montero SR 3.8 MIVEC, Advance headers, 2 1/2" exhaust, Magnaflow muffler, OME shocks & rear springs, 2" body lift, 3" tank lift, 4.90s, TRE front locker, factory rear locker, Roger Brown Rock Sliderz, 315/75r16 (35") tires, Sport big brakes
|
|
Brain Fart.....
[Re: ryany]
#835380
09/17/07 01:57 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 77
Getting the Wheeling Fever
|
After working myself into a frothy mess thinking about this, I've figured you guys are exactly right, and I was exactly opposite of actual on this one. If you travel an indicated 1 mile in a truck with oversized tires, you have actually traveled further than 1 mile.
Sorry for the fuss, lol!
*************************************
TripleJack
85 GenI SWB 2.5/5-Speed on 33s
*************************************
|
|
Re: Brain Fart..... We all have them.
[Re: TripleJackInGA]
#835381
09/18/07 06:31 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,458
Trail Leader
|
TripleJack,
For the difference made by swapping from the stock size to 33" tires, my indicated mileage isn't affected that much. Depending on my project load and type, certain tire combos are better than others. I've just put the 33's back on because I'm close to home and working on a sandy fill for the new Folsom Bridge. When I was going to Tahoe everyday, 140 to 170 miles with highway only, lots of high speed downhill corners over the 6,000 foot differential between my office and the project site, it made more sense for the stock tires. I like stopping. Aside from the braking woes (:z:), I'd run the 33's all the time.
Russell
1987 Raider - Roxy 1988 Mighty Max 2.6L Turbo - Pearl 1997 Mountaineer V8 - Freddy 2000 Excursion V10 - Freya
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: TripleJackInGA]
#835382
09/19/07 12:13 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,494
Body Damage is Cool
|
I got 15.5 mph with my 2.6L and 31" muds. I now get 20.5mph with a 4.3L and 32" muds. You figure?
87 Raizer, 4.3V6, Mod TH700R4,231CHD, detroit rear and LSD front, bouncy seats, 2" lift and 32x15 BFG MT tires.
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: BobShaw]
#835383
09/19/07 07:16 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 11,727
Web Wheeler
|
I was told the 2.6 is a old diesel tractor motor design <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/cyclops.gif" alt="" />
98 Montero with cold weather package 96 Toyota Land Cruiser, fully locked Mall Machine :-)
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: LRJ4x4]
#835384
09/19/07 02:11 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,356
Trail Leader
|
I have also read Mitsu fork-lifts.
Big Truck: 00, 3.5, Endeavor, 5-Spd drive line in hand! Little Truck: 87, 2.6T I/C, MT, LSDs, Tonneau Top Her Truck: 03, 3.8, 20th Anniv, 65k Daughter's: 06 Eclipse, Keeping it Mitsu! FSMs: MitsubishiLinks.com
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: MontyMcV]
#835385
09/19/07 05:50 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 259
Mudrunner
|
I got 13 mpg with my 2.6 with 31" tires, 4.22 gears but I was never able to use 5th gear due to the gearing. I get 17 mpg with the swapped in V8.
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: Baldy]
#835386
09/24/07 12:17 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 262
OP
Mudrunner
|
Where's the best deal on a webber?
--Tres (John 14:6)
Black 87' Raider 2.6L/Webber 88 5 Speed Welded front,tight LSD in the rear Removed bump stops 4'x6' roof rack 10k. Lb. winch on receiver hitch/custom bumper 100 amp alt CB radio/AC inverter S.Winch hubs Enormous RV battery
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: TresMon]
#835387
09/24/07 03:57 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 122
Wheeler
|
http://www.racetep.com/montero.htmlGo through this site and find the application. I ordered from them when they were offering freeshipping. I've seen like 2 Webers on ebay in my time of owning this, but they didn't have the adapter plates. Just order this, its not cheap, but you get EVERYTHING you need w/ easy to follow instructions. I've never worked on a car before and I installed it and tuned it.
1989 Dodge Raider 2.6L/5spd 2004 Honda Element EX 1989 Dodge Daytona Shelby Z 1993 Toyota P/U
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: EyeOnCy]
#835388
09/24/07 08:25 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,356
Trail Leader
|
TEP and cheap prices generally do not get spoken in the same sentence...
Big Truck: 00, 3.5, Endeavor, 5-Spd drive line in hand! Little Truck: 87, 2.6T I/C, MT, LSDs, Tonneau Top Her Truck: 03, 3.8, 20th Anniv, 65k Daughter's: 06 Eclipse, Keeping it Mitsu! FSMs: MitsubishiLinks.com
|
|
|
|