str86diesel

I'm hop'n to bag it..If I can find some way to find a system that'll work

Dayyyumm...We've already had roads shut down, chain laws in affect and we are supposed to get another 12-20 inches of snow between today and tomorrow in the hills...

If it wasn't for all of the snow in our mountains, i'd be there.

Well guys...kelderman is out of the picture. They make Medium duty towing kits and Lift kits...but nothing that offers towing and lowering

Lower your tires air pressure a little bit for better traction.

If it was a place that I frequent...hell yeah I would have done the same. Being that your friends own the place, we'll consider you the volunteer bouncer taking out the trash Your punishment will be to pass the hamma (inside joke guys..sorry)

I'm disappointed B..you're supposed to be my hookup

IF anyone has any leads on heavy-duty setups...I'm interested

how are bags at holding weight? bout 2 weeks about I had about 7000 on the hitch.

Ok guys...need some advice. As many of you guys know, I roll a 3/4 ton truck (bout 6500lbs dry). I am starting to travel downtown quite a bit for my job and well I'm having a helluva time parking down there. The garages are just to low. So I got to thinking about the idea of Hydryo's/Baggin my truck and thinking how nice it would be to drop the truck a couple of inches to be able to fit in the garages.. What are the pros/cons of both? Here are a couple of things that I need to keep in the back of my head 1) I do not want to give up the ride feeling (as I have my suspension tuned pretty tight) 2) I can't give up the capability of tow heavy loads 3) Everything that is installed, must have the capability to be removed if the truck is traded in (probably 3/5 years out) 4) I need to keep the factory overload springs in the rear for stabilization. Thoughts?

Yeah, Diesel prices are a bit out of hand right now, but when you compare what my truck is getting in mileage compared to a gas Truck or Big Suv, I'm actually saving money compared to them. My last run hand calculated was 19.2 (partial city, partial hwy)

Another news article just out. Again I state...Diesel FTW!!! http://www.9news.com/money/article.aspx?storyid=81922 WASHINGTON - Anything's better than ethanol blend E85, even ordinary gasoline, a new cost-benefit analysis of alternative fuels by researcher John Graham at the Pardee Rand Graduate School finds. Diesels scored highest, surprising even the researchers. "We were kind of expecting that hybrids would outperform diesels when we went into the study. It's close, but the advanced diesel" provides better performance and fuel economy for the price, he says. Compared to gasoline, a driver could spend as much as $1,600 more on fuel over a vehicle's life burning E85, a mix of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline, Graham calculates, while a diesel could save as much as $2,300. Diesels are just creeping back into the USA as automakers introduce clean-burning models that meet new pollution rules. The study, which Graham plans to discuss today at a National Academy of Sciences roundtable in Washington, undercuts E85 at a time Detroit automakers are lobbying Congress for ethanol-supportive legislation and fuel-economy credits for building E85-compatible vehicles. General Motors and Ford Motor, both pro-ethanol, are among companies that support the Rand school. "They aren't crazy about the results," Graham says. The study also comes just as ethanol organizations are ramping up promotion of so-called intermediate blends of ethanol fuel, such as E20 – 20% ethanol and 80% gasoline – that they say could safely be used in conventional vehicles. Automakers currently limit regular vehicles to E10 blends, saying heavier concentrations of ethanol could damage fuel systems. "Do we jump from E10 to E85? That's not a logical leap. That's why we're looking at these intermediate blends," says Brian Jennings, executive vice president at the American Coalition for Ethanol. Graham's team calculated the individual and societal costs and benefits of conventional gasoline vehicles, gasoline-electric hybrids, high-tech diesels and flex-fuel vehicles burning E85 full time. Conclusion: Unless gasoline prices, averaging $3.10 a gallon now, rise above $4 and average $3.50 or more the next few years, or ethanol prices drop a lot, diesel's the best overall solution; E85's the worst. Ethanol has less than 70% of the energy of gasoline, so more ethanol in the blend means fewer miles per gallon. Adjusted for lower energy content, E85 averaged about $3.25, AAA reported Thursday. Drawbacks outweigh the high marks ethanol gets for adding almost nothing to the cost of a vehicle modified to burn E85 and for energy independence, Graham's team concluded. Ethanol is made from grain, mainly corn. Graham, dean at school in Santa Monica, Calif., earlier worked at the U.S. Office of Management and Budget and founded the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis. Rand is a non-profit corporation that researches public policy issues

I'm speechless...that is just insane.

that is hillarious....I'm just bust'n up laughing my ass off.

I'm not to sure, but I always make my own. Get some PVC Pipe, some silocone boots and then I can place it where I want and put a conical filter on the end. Why pay $100+ for something, when I can put it together cheaper, put it where I want and get better performance out of it If you prefer to buy one pre-made. I'd check out ebay.

I'm sorry, I must have missed something..what are you looking for?

brutha...you need to chill on the vicadin...lol j/k Actually that is pretty coo...

they are easy to install, I have installed a couple...but E85 is a joke. Sooo it burns cleaner. It burns at a lower BTU rating, which means your vehicle actually burns more of it then gas. So if you think about it...you pay less for it, but you are at the gas station filling up more often, so you end up paying the same price if not more for it. Kev EDIT: This is taken from our local news station http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=37310 9NEWS consumer reporter Mark Koebrich says testers found good performance and low emissions from the fuel, but it does have a downside. GM’s ad campaign for ethanol says the answer to our energy independence may lie in America’s yellow cornfields. Consumer Reports just tested one of GM’s flexible-fuel vehicles, which can run on either E-85 ethanol or gasoline. It’s the 2007 Chevrolet Tahoe FFV. Consumer Reports’ Director of Auto Testing, David Champion, compared how the vehicle performed with the two fuels. “To actually drive the car, the difference between gasoline and ethanol was not noticeable. They drove much the same,” says Champion. Acceleration was also the same. With E-85, the Tahoe did have lower emissions of smog-forming nitrogen oxides, although hydrocarbon emissions were comparable. Next came fuel efficiency tests to see how many miles you get per gallon in both highway and stop-and-go driving. The tests showed the overall fuel economy actually dropped when the Tahoe ran on E85 – from an already low 14 miles per gallon with gasoline down to ten miles per gallon with E-85. That makes it lower than any vehicle tested in recent years. So, what does that say about flex vehicles being a green alternative? “The vehicles that are made as flex-fuel vehicles are not really the most fuel efficient cars in the first place. Then you add to that, if you run them on E-85 ethanol, you are getting 27 percent less fuel economy,” Champion says.

Actually most vehicles have the MAS wired in, so if you disconnect it (I know you didn't mention doing this) you'll get a check engine light. You can buy better sensors that will tell the computer that more air is entering the system, but still your ecm will only add fuel within a range. It doesn't have the capability to completely accomodate for fuel outside of it's programmed range.

Keep in mind that more air in, more air out, doesn't make Hp. You need a combination of Air and Fuel to make Hp. If you do an intake and an exhaust, your motor has a huge chance of running lean, due to not having enough fuel to burn. Is it fuel injected or carb'd? If it's carb'd you can adjust the jets to give you more fuel, but your fuel mileage will suffer. If it's injected you'll need to get some type of programmer to help adjust the a/f ratio and add fuel.

Sure...I guess I should have touched on this a little more...sorry. If you look at older cars, Carb's were typically jetted at a range of 0-5000 ft. At these levels of altitude, the average A/F ratio changes anywhere from 1- 3% per 1000 ft. So Automobile manufactures set ECM's to work within the same range as previous test results. Being that the higher in altitude you go, the lower octane fuel is offered (example, the stations in my area carry 85 for cheap, 87 for mid and 91 for premium), this allowed automobile manufactures to only have to program the ecm's to need an average of 1% change per 1000 ft, hense the total tolerance of 5% that most of them have.

Great Question....the answer is yes and no. ECM's can re-calculate the A/F ratio, but they still can only calculate within a certain tolerance. Most of the ones that I have played with can't compensate more then a 5% change.

Think of this as a form of physics. Every Action has a Reaction. Gas Motors require a certain amount of back pressure (created by the exhaust system) to be able to run efficient. So by lowering the amount of back pressure, you change the characteristics of the motor. Whether it be the amount of fuel it burns (or lack there of), how much air it breaths in..etc. So when you start changing its characteristics, you have to make up for somewhere/somehow.

if you don't have the power to make up for the lost back pressure, then No, I wouldn't do it.

damn...that little boy can roll....