Grumpy Bears 2015 Silverado 2WD

[AtlasFBG2]

5 hours ago, swathdiver said:

Around here, I've always been able to count on Shell to deliver 2 MPG less then my usual average in all of our vehicles and that is with their high octane fuel!

 

Try some ethanol if you ever come across it.  My truck gets better MPGs with 20% alcohol content than with 93 E10 octane gasoline.

With E85 actual ethanol percentage  range between 73% and 80% I am averaging 15.7 mpg.

 

This is with 0w20 oil in my 4.3 v6 which helps to keep it in v4 mode a little more.

 

 

[AtlasFBG2]

Grumpy Bear 

 

If the temp is in the mid 70's I can stay in v4 mode up to 64 mph in east or northeast direction. West or south direction about 55 mph is the max it will stay in v4. That little bit of tail wind makes a difference.  

 

At the speeds I drive if the temp stays in the 70's or higher all week v4 mode give me 1-1.4  mpg average gain over the course of a tank.

[Grumpy Bear]

Local I have access to E10 - E15 and E85 which test about E72. I also have access to 87, 89, 91 and 93 E10 and 91 Ethanol free.

 

There has never been more than about a 20% spread between E85 and E10 here locally so I've never tried it. I need 28-30% to even give it a look. And I will if I ever see a spread like Cowpie (Cliff)  gets over near Des Moines, Iowa. I've tried all octane values both E10 and Ethanol free and saw exactly nothing I could statistically hang my hat on. There is also the fact that it's about a buck a gallon more expensive for 91 than 87 so at $2.80 for 87 and $3.80 for 91 I need a 36% increase in mpg to make that pay. A 10 -12 mpg to my current numbers? And it didn't.  

[swathdiver]

7 hours ago, AtlasFBG2 said:

With E85 actual ethanol percentage  range between 73% and 80% I am averaging 15.7 mpg.

Wow!  Running E85 @ 80% I can get 18 mpg at 45 mph with my old Gen IV LS motor.

3 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Local I have access to E10 - E15 and E85 which test about E72. I also have access to 87, 89, 91 and 93 E10 and 91 Ethanol free.

 

There has never been more than about a 20% spread between E85 and E10 here locally so I've never tried it. I need 28-30% to even give it a look. And I will if I ever see a spread like Cowpie (Cliff)  gets over near Des Moines, Iowa. I've tried all octane values both E10 and Ethanol free and saw exactly nothing I could statistically hang my hat on. There is also the fact that it's about a buck a gallon more expensive for 91 than 87 so at $2.80 for 87 and $3.80 for 91 I need a 36% increase in mpg to make that pay. A 10 -12 mpg to my current numbers? And it didn't.  

 

My truck's averages since October 2017:

 

93 Octane Gasoline - $3.30 PPG - 14.02 MPG - $.24 CPM - It costs $72 to drive 300 miles.

E85 - $2.18 PPG - 11.40 MPG - $.20 CPM - It costs $60 to drive 300 miles.

E30 - $2.53 PPG - 15.18 MPG - $.17 CPM - It costs $51 to drive 300 miles.

[Grumpy Bear]

6 hours ago, swathdiver said:

Wow!  Running E85 @ 80% I can get 18 mpg at 45 mph with my old Gen IV LS motor.

 

My truck's averages since October 2017:

 

93 Octane Gasoline - $3.30 PPG - 14.02 MPG - $.24 CPM - It costs $72 to drive 300 miles.

E85 - $2.18 PPG - 11.40 MPG - $.20 CPM - It costs $60 to drive 300 miles.

E30 - $2.53 PPG - 15.18 MPG - $.17 CPM - It costs $51 to drive 300 miles.

Curious, what does the octane sticker say on E30? 

[swathdiver]

2 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Curious, what does the octane sticker say on E30? 

The yellow R+M one's I've seen say 95.  

[AtlasFBG2]

8 hours ago, swathdiver said:

Wow!  Running E85 @ 80% I can get 18 mpg at 45 mph with my old Gen IV LS motor.

 

My truck's averages since October 2017:

 

93 Octane Gasoline - $3.30 PPG - 14.02 MPG - $.24 CPM - It costs $72 to drive 300 miles.

E85 - $2.18 PPG - 11.40 MPG - $.20 CPM - It costs $60 to drive 300 miles.

E30 - $2.53 PPG - 15.18 MPG - $.17 CPM - It costs $51 to drive 300 miles.

Well the `15.7 average  is combined city and hiway driving. If the speed limit is 55 i am doing 58-59 and 65 i am doing 68-69.

 

E30 really is the sweet spot. You really dont loose mpg over e10 and the octane is 94 which is a little higher than premium fuel.

 

I made a chart so i could combine e85 and e10 and keep it close to e30 depending on how much i had in tank before refueling. Just kind of a hasle when the station is busy because the e85 is seperate from the other pumps.

[Grumpy Bear]

Just an example from last three outings. 87 octane E10

 

1276 miles / 41.964 gallons = 30.4 mpg. Cost per gallon $2.65 or $111.02 / 1276 miles = $0.087 per mile. 

 

Interstate,  State and Federal Highways. Small town Midwest city.

I don't normally track fuel cost but have for a few tanks as it interest others. 

Boys, I avoid big city traffic with Pepper like the plague. 

I take bypass Interstates or state roads around major Metro areas. 

 

One of the other posters recently shared how much his tank to tank fill variation improved by using the 2 Click method. Maybe it's my tanks shape but it didn't improve mine SO I am trying 3 clicks and so far on two fills I looks a great improvement. I will continue to track this for quite some time and report when I have a statistically probable number to report. It could take awhile.

 

Wish I could remember who schooled me so I could give them proper credit. Who ever thanks! And speak up, please.

[swathdiver]

10 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

One of the other posters recently shared how much his tank to tank fill variation improved by using the 2 Click method. Maybe it's my tanks shape but it didn't improve mine SO I am trying 3 clicks and so far on two fills I looks a great improvement.

 

Can you elaborate on this Marty?

[Black02Silverado]

This is a great thread.  One thing I like about my Cruze diesel.  I fill it up every time until diesel comes up to the opening and just about to run out.  No issues with it like this since there isn't any fuel system returns to worry about. Gives me accurate mpg every time.  Plus it gives me an extra 3 gallons that way on top of the 14 gallon tank.

[KARNUT]

I’ve been doing the one click forever, since I was told you could cause a problem over filling. Once I did two. I spent the tank expecting a check engine light. I’ve always been just naive enough to believe people who claim to know. Unless proven otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Grumpy Bear]

4 minutes ago, KARNUT said:

I’ve been doing the one click forever, since I was told you could cause a problem over filling. Once I did two. I spent the tank expecting a check engine light. I’ve always been just naive enough to believe people who claim to know. Unless proven otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yep over full is bad. But that is only possible if you withdraw the nozzle and fill until you are running over. Let the nozzle do it's job but realize that any running fluid with a high vapor pressure froths. 

 

48 minutes ago, swathdiver said:

 

Can you elaborate on this Marty?

I let the tank fill with the nozzle inserted as it should be on the slowest setting of automatic possible. The fuel will back up in the neck and trigger the pumps internal device to shut off. Give is few seconds. Like a count of 10 to 20. Set the nozzle to slowest a second time. Then a third. Effectively 'burping' the bubbles vapor pressure created that falsely triggered the 'off' feature of the pumps nozzle. The vapor return line to your canister is above that liquid level so withdrawing the nozzle can fill the canister...not good. Just keep the nozzle always inserted. It will be fine. 

 

As pump speed, tank temperature, tank shape and so on create different amounts of froth this method helps reduce it's effect. 

 

50 minutes ago, Black02Silverado said:

This is a great thread.  One thing I like about my Cruze diesel.  I fill it up every time until diesel comes up to the opening and just about to run out.  No issues with it like this since there isn't any fuel system returns to worry about. Gives me accurate mpg every time.  Plus it gives me an extra 3 gallons that way on top of the 14 gallon tank.

Dad use to shake the old Ford until not a drop more could be added. His numbers lacked any fill error. I don't think Peppers neck would hold three gallons though. LOL. 

[swathdiver]

I used to fight the clicking pump but gave up.  Once in a while, just to see I'll do it again and it always adds .4 gallons after a 30 second wait.  I always pump at the slowest speed possible and try to refuel at night or early morning when the tanks are coolest.

[Grumpy Bear]

91,801 Mile Modification Service

 

Installed the Reisch Racing 170 F 54 mm water thermostat then test drive. 100 mile round trip. 55 mph. I-39 (lots of construction moving at 55 mph). 69-72 F air temperature. 8 mph wind. Water temperature settled in at 177 F with the wind and 175 F against the wind. Oil was 197 with the wind 195 against the wind. Transmission 143 F both ways. Peaked 147 on the turnaround and then recovered nicely. 

 

Against my charts water temp is down about 8 F, Oil likewise. Transmission temperature however is only 3, maybe 4 degrees cooler. 

 

This thermostat has a 'jiggle pin' so drilling a min flow bypass hole was not needed. It is also smaller by bleed area, than the Stant 180*. Right away I noticed that the temperature does not sink below set point as far and recovers quicker. This stat is on the high side of the permissible target temperature tolerance. It is also open more than the 180 was. All good things when running this close to the lower limit. This all tells me the radiator is near it's heat capacity limit for the antifreeze mix ratio. It is now in at a balance point between flow rate and coolant heat capacity. I can get more cooling by diluting the antifreeze a few percentage points. Might be able to reduce the heat load going back to 0W20. I'll watch it for awhile and collect more data before I make any rash moves.

 

This is the first step to unwinding the earlier mistake. I have some oil to burn through.  

 

Also noticed it runs less KR. There is a plus. I have markers for certain hills. Seems willing to cycle the AFM freely. Metered fuel for the run netted a bit over 30 mpg for 100 miles. I started plotting a new line for trans temperature for this thermostat setting. Need fuel and temperature data to see more clearly. In the works but remember that last one took a year to construct. 

 

[Grumpy Bear]

More 170 F thermostat and triple tap gas fill data. 

 

Couple of things today. I'll add to the 170 F water thermostat line as data becomes available but the plot so far looks promising using the same 2 point poly trending.

 

When I ran through Rochelle today at 30 mph the trans crept up to 167 F and it took 20 miles to return to 150 F. Should be able to say under 180 F for slow running even on a 110 F day. We have darn few of those. What does give me a moments pause is the hot soak temperatures so there is a second cooler under consideration with a thermostat of it's own. Fan?  I'll keep an eye on this. Who knows, someday I might make it back to the AZ/NM area. 

 

 

Below. Pulling a mild hill with cruse set to 55 mph, a snapshot 3 hours in. Air temp 82 F. 63% humidity. 12 mph crosswind and 380 miles into this tank. It would finish at 30.3 and the third tank in a row to do so. Water temperature on the level runs a dead 175 F at this speed. It is crowding the thermal capacity limit of the radiator set this low and at the 50/50 mix. Here's what might concern some others is that I'm hitting all my 'target temperatures' and not towing anything. Not hauling anything. Driving at the lower limit of rational and it isn't really hot.   

 

 

The Triple Tap fill method is yielding some great results. +/- 3 ounces (0.1 liters) over three fills. No matter which pump or station or time of day or temperature.....so far. Made one 0.1 liter adjustment to center the data on the graph (not shown). 

 

6/5/2019

2200.3 hours 92,532 miles. Finally broke 42 miles per engine hour.

 

Edited June 5, 2019 by Grumpy Bear
additional content