High RPMs on the freeway with manual transmission mini trucks

[JoshT]

now donuts....thats a different deal.

Controlled slides are more the idea than simply boiling the tires to make smoke. Speed and hand brake would definitely be involved.

I was thinking torque multiplication to break them loose. I guess it makes sense that wheel speed is need more. Clutch kick and/or handbrake to break tires loose and initiate slide.

Don't care much about pure donuts or the burnout pit and know that raw power rules there.

 

[bobbywalter]

Donuts and slides are more the idea than simply boiling the tires to make smoke.

Don't care much about the burnout pit and know that raw power rules there.

the gearing is a thing. i used to rule some pits and autocross tight course with a 280-330 hp engine because low range and modified brake controller with an air locker really goes a long ways. even with the 2.9 i could pop it in low range and rip on the tires....it would toast the a4ld too...locking up individual fromt brakes makes for some easy donuts.


this guy was worried about swapping out to the manual....thats .75 vs .79...

not gonna be an issue with high rpm and a otherwise stock 2.9 truck.


coming from beetle and gti background....tire frying is an unknown.....

 

[JoshT]

this guy was worried about swapping out to the manual....thats .75 vs .79...

True. Getting a little off topic aren't I. That never happens around here.

Edited last post while you were replying. Still, that's better discussed in a other thread, since it's basically the opposite of what the OP is wanting.

 

[MISWFL]

4.10 rear end is great for the 3.0 v6 in my old 04 ranger and 5 speed. Maybe you should look for a 4.10 rear end to swap in?


My 71 karmann ghia would do 100 really easily with a single port 1600 and pic 3 carb tuned for the short stinger exhaust and the 010 distributor.

I had a 58 bug with a 40hp engine and a 56 Ghia with a 36hp engine at the same time. The bug would top out at like 68 mph, but the Ghia would do 72 lol. I guess the better aerodynamics of Ghia made a big difference. Same size tires. I can't remember if they both had original non synchro 1st gear transmissions or later ones. I believe the ratios were the same or very close.

 

[superj]

The aerodynamics made the difference, 100%. All my bugs were maxed out around 70, also

 

[sgtsandman]

Most engines will happily rev higher than what most people are accustomed to with little to no penalty in mpg.

With most of the engines in the Rangers, you can cruise around the 3,000 rpm mark with no problem. The exceptions have already been noted.

As far as the shift points with a MO5D, 3,000 rpm seems to be a good number, at least with the 4.0 SOHC. My 1998, with the 2.5 Lima, didn't have a tach. So I have no idea what rpm I was shifting at. I do know the engine was a lot happier with a 4.10 rear axle over the 3.45 one it came with and the average mpg didn't change.

I had done some experimentation with my 2011 by not using the 5th gear, just to see what the mpg would be like since I'm considering regearing to 4.56 from the 3.73 I currently have.

While not an apples to apples comparison, the rpms were close enough to what the gearing spreadsheets tell me the rpms with 4.56 would be to at least make somewhat of an informed decision. The mpg was about the same and the engine wasn't screaming. So, it would work, unless the best mpg possible is the end goal.

Now, keep in mind, this is with 31" tires. Factory tires of 27" - 29" will be different.

 

[SenorNoob]

I actually got my best recorded MPG with the 4.0 OHV when it spent the whole time from gas station to gas station on the interstate. 21mpg at 2500RPM and 70MPH

 

[MISWFL]

I actually got my best recorded MPG with the 4.0 OHV when it spent the whole time from gas station to gas station on the interstate. 21mpg at 2500RPM and 70MPH

That's impressive for a big engine. What was the best you got from a 2.9?

 

[sgtsandman]

That's impressive for a big engine. What was the best you got from a 2.9?

Before I put the bigger all terrain tires on the 2011 with a 4.0 SOHC, it would hit 21-22 mpg on a highway road trip very regularly. I actually got the 23 Ford said it was supposed to get once. The stars, tailwind, and weather conditions must have just been in the right combination for that to happen. But you have to have the factory size tire in an all season or highway terrain tire to get that.

Once you throw an all terrain tire tire on the rims, all bets are off because they tend to have a higher rolling resistance. This is not factoring a lift or any accessories that stick out in the air stream or add a significant weight to the truck.

With the antennas and the windshield visor on the truck now, even if I went back to stock size, I doubt I'd ever see those numbers again.

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

I once was able to wring 31 mpg out of a 3.0 on the highway. Cruised at 70 the whole time. 00, extended cab, 3.0, 3.73 gears, 5-speed, 235/75-15 AT tires, tonneau cover. Usually I was 21-23 around town and 28-31 highway and that lasted up until the ethanol gas became popular.

 

[SenorNoob]

That's impressive for a big engine. What was the best you got from a 2.9?

I only drove about a 1/4 mile on the 2.9 and it was running VERY poorly. My 2.3 trucks were always about 16-18mpg.