Jump to content

Cold weather and AFM


Recommended Posts

Posted

I live in Fairbanks....

 

I'm wondering what the -50 and colder will do to the AFM. Hell, it's 0 right now. Good thing I have a heated garage where it's 70 degrees, lol.

Just buy a tuner and get rid of it. It does more harm then good so I don't see why anyone would leave it activated.

  • 4 years later...
Posted
On ‎11‎/‎13‎/‎2013 at 7:03 PM, waumo1 said:

1.5 to 2 MPG loss in all my vehicles as soon as the stations switch to winter blend.

Last 16 tank average 25.9 mpg. Previous 16 tanks? 28.5 mpg. A 9% decline. The dividing line between these two is Sept 15th. The day of fuel change from summer to winter fuel. Just a higher Reed Vapor Pressure. More Butane. Can we blame all the decline on the fuel? No. Not with reason. Why? The weather changes. A bunch in my area. Temperatures decline winds increase. And while it may seem odd to those who don’t live in the corn belt, crops come down and the land is laid bare. The truck is no longer shielded from the wind by 8 foot tall crops a few feet either side of the roadway. And of course longer warm up periods and lower fluid temperatures in cases not moderated by the radiator. Transmission is a big one in the new trucks that bypass the radiator as long as the fluid remains below 190 F. Diffs and X-fer cases. Wheel bearing grease and yes even shock oil. We drive shorter distances and take fewer trips resulting in few ‘hot’ hours for those miles. Viscosity of fluids is a HUGE parasitic drag. AFM is load sensitive.  Snow, when it’s on the ground consumes fuel in drag and slip. It isn’t just the fuel mix.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Question for you Grumpy, why is diesel so much more than gasoline? Seems to me that it may be slightly a little less refined than gas and it doesn't have 10% alcohol which presumably lowers the price of gas
    • Thanks, so being a different beast altogether, anyone know what the "optimal" temp is for the 10L80/90 for proper shifting?
    • How many years have I pointed out every point in that link to the folks here and been avalanched with criticisms and outright hostilities at times? I ran counter to even the great CUSTOMBOSS and Lake Speed Jr and the half dozen experts on YouTube and in the final.....GM, Physics (Stribeck) backs that Grumpy old Bear.    Honestly, I never said a thing engineering hadn't studied silly and laid in concrete during WWII. But I'm old, the information is old and yet, the Laws of Physics are eternal.    Okay there is one exception. I vehemently disagree with their use of the word 'tolerances' when what it meant is "clearance".   The clearance is the distance between two objects. The tolerance is the degree of acceptable variation permitted in that clearance. I.E., piston to bore clearance is 0.004" with a tolerance of +/- .0002" so the clearance is in specification if it lies between 0.0038" and 0.0042". Cutting that 'tolerance in half has ZERO impact on lubrication requirements. Makes for more difficulty in manufacturing.  But a tighter clearance 'MAY'. Depends on finish. Anyway....   It's one of those statements made by people to make themselves look smarter than they are to convince people who are as un-enlighten as they seem to manipulate their behaviors. But hey, the blind leading the blind puts them both in the pit. 
    • Out and about yesterday on a long Saturday drive I passed a lot of Shell stations. My preferred, so I pay attention. Lot's of small town Illinois so not six stations in three blocks like the city.    Everyone of them over a radius of say 100 miles had regular at $4.19 but one which was the one closest to home at $4.15. However Premium pricing varied greatly between 85 cents over regular to $1.50 over. I'm not counting the price of the station with the lowest regular so the reference is the same for the remainder and all within the same brand. However the spread discrepancy holds across all brands.     @txab, any thoughts on that? 
    • What are your thoughts? The Chevy Blazer relaunch was an epic case of 'lunchbag letdown'. Jeep Wranglers and Ford Broncos stick out like a sore thumb.    The AI photos do not look like a 'retro version', but shrunken Tahoes. Get away from the 'futuristic look'. I've seen two concepts. One had rectangular headlight like a Rivian and the other way too big headlights (similar to a previous non-Wrangler SUV) should include dual round headlights like the early version.   If not this would look OK   At least it has GM styling (albeit the K2XX) A lot of the images floating around look like Bronco IIs or the current Bronco. Looking at the Broncos in my area (central Ontario, it seems to be a mix of 2 doors and 4 doors, 'mall rated' to ones that could go offroad.    I'm sure a AT4 and AT4X RPOs could be outfitted similar to a Rubicon if the braintrust understood the whole offroad scene. Crossing my fingers that if it does see the light that the front air dam/bumper doesn't extend below the center line of the tire...      
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...