Grumpy Bears 2015 Silverado 2WD

[Grumpy Bear]

Ben and I are done playing phone tag. New 600# King springs are ordered. This should lower the spindle to fender 1" adding nearly 2" of rebound provide more road imperfection compliance. The conversation was well worth having. Phone is always better than emails or PM's for getting nuts and bolts sorted.

 

Again, this is not an aesthetic modification but a ride compliance motivated exchange. It was noted during the last tire rotation how little the wheels dropped when lifted by the frame and measurements showed the droop, while in spec, was indeed at the upper end to the preferred range. I mentioned in another post that I've never struck the bump stops and the upper ball joints are under no distress however having spent this type of money to get what I want I will ferret out the remaining devils cut from this set up and find the perfection I seek. 

 

Fact is 500# springs are what the math indicates but we agreed that even 600# under the influence of a leverage ratio of about 2:1 is a HUGE step from the factory installed 750# springs. Elephants are best eaten a little at a time. 

 

Ben confided that this has been a fun project for his team as Filthy Motorsports bread and butter is, as you know,  off road racing and while they do street occasionally  it's often that they get the chance to sort one out like this. I guess most buyers are one and done. 

 

Whey they arrive Deegan's will swap springs. Reset the front rear leaf bushings and upgrade the grease. Install a ride height correction shim to the left rear leaf and realign to my specs. I'll have about 100 miles to evaluate the set up if I wish to take advantage of Ben's spring exchange program. If all good I have about 20K on this set of tires to assure the alignment is still giving the wear patterns I like before giving her some new shoes. Updates as they happen. 

[Grumpy Bear]

Milestone mileage!

 

 

Edited May 14, 2018 by Grumpy Bear

[Grumpy Bear]

Delete obsolete post

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 12, 2018 by Grumpy Bear
Chart Updated

[Grumpy Bear]

Arrived Monday but it will be a week or two before I can get the swap on the schedule.   

 

Updated chart in above post. 

 

 

 

Edited May 23, 2018 by Grumpy Bear

[Grumpy Bear]

5/26/2018

First hot day of the season. (over 90 F) 

First hot day since the transmission thermal bypass modification in addition to the 170 F water thermostat. Over 29 mpg. 

Ambient 92 F +/- 2 F

IAT 95 F +/- 2 F

Water 172 F +0 F /  - 4 F

Oil 195 F + 0 F / - 7 F

Transmission 160 F at 60 MPH with a 15 mph tail wind. 148 - 153 Into the wind. 173 F after a 20 minute hot soak. 

Test length 4 hours.  

 

5/27/2018

First day of the season with a temp of 100F!

All day 60 mph with the air on and still over 29 mpg. 

Ambient 100 F 2-5 mph east north east wind. 

IAT 102 F

Water 173 F

Oil 199 F

Transmission 160 F when rolling 163 F when trolling. 

 

We don't get many days over 100 F in northern Illinois so this was a pretty good test.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 28, 2018 by Grumpy Bear

[Grumpy Bear]

GM would like me to use 5W30 in my 4.3 Ecotec3 motor.

 

My preference is 0W20. Why? That’s the question this post answers.

 

The easy answer is; it’s more fuel efficient. Few would disagree there is benefit to using a lighter (thinner) oil. The disagreement starts in the degree of improvement when weighed against oils primary function which is protection. Are the gains in fuel efficiency worth the ‘risk’ of reduced protection? So the first thing that needs to be explored is what is it about oil that is protective?

 

The long answer will require a pot of coffee and a Danish.

 

Oil is simply it is a substance the prevents one part from touching another part and has the ability to cool and limit frictional heat. That’s a good thing as heat reduces the method oil uses to accomplish the task. Viscosity.

 

Most people believe that the thinner oil reduces the oils internal frictional energy, and it does. It’s the very definition of viscosity. That said we tend to look at a motor as a device that spends the majority of its time at operating temperature and as that is not the actual case we look at the viscosity at all temperatures as the mechanism that provides the fuel savings. I’m going to introduce a different idea. It’s the heat up portion of the operating cycle that provides the bulk of the savings and you actually already know this if you do any driving above the tropics.

 

I have plotted (below) four lubricants in today’s graph. The straight weight data if for a Lucas product and the other three are Red Line Oil products. Just chosen at random from published literature. All for passenger car or light truck service. The X axis is the temperature in degrees Fahrenheit and the Y axis in viscosity in centistokes.

 

There is allot of information on this graph but to make the intended point most clear we will look at the Lucas 30W (red) and the Red Line Oil 0W20 (blue) products viscosity slopes.

 

Note that at operating temperatures all products converge near 212 F. On a percentage basis the numbers are large but in terms of absolutes not so much. Just a few centistokes separation.

 

It’s the white line I want to concentrate on. That line represents 48-cSt. The viscosity of 0W20 at 104 F (40C). Note that the 30W is not that thin until the temperature reaches 164F, almost warmed up.  Also note that at 104 F the 30W has a viscosity of 93-cSt. In terms of absolute this 30W is allot more viscous.

 

It takes a pretty hot day to get your bulk oil temperatures to 100 F as she sits in the drive and that is important because motor oil viscosity slopes are only linear between 104 F and 212 F and let me impress that on you.

 

0W20 viscosity at 212 F is 9.1 cSt and at 302 F it is 2.9 cSt

5W30 viscosity at 212 F is 11.9 cSt and at 302 F it is 3.7 cSt

 

This means that at the chosen bulk oil operating temperature GM’s 207 F thermostat provides, nearly 230 F there is about 1 cSt difference in actual bulk oil viscosity between 0W20 and 5W30.

 

Now let’s look at the other end of that stick. (numbers from equivalent Quaker State Ultimate Durability products as Red Line doesn’t publish this data in this format)

 

0W20 viscosity at 31 F below is  5040 cSt.

5W30 viscosity at 31 F below is 12,550 cSt!

 

Make my point? Good. This means on even a spring day the viscosity difference in your pan is in hundreds or maybe a thousand centistokes. On either end of the 104 to 212 F range some pretty weird polymer science is going on that is heat and shear activated.

 

So about this time you saying to yourself, “But the warm up period is short and has little effect on the tanks average”. Yea, the math doesn’t work that way. The fuel used during the warm up is allot more than once at full heat and the warm up is defined by…viscosity not temperature. Protection is defined by…viscosity not temperature.

 

The more viscous the starting point, the longer it takes to bring to operational viscosity and the shorter the average trip length…the higher the hit on fuel.

 

You will note on the graph some small type; numbers, 103, 166, 172. These are VI or the oils VISCOSITY INDEX. It is a measure of the viscosity slope and not a viscosity absolute. The flatter the slope the higher the index. Just information.

 

I run coolers. GM is using coolers. The difference is the size, number and regulation used. I’m going to keep it simple.

 

I run enough cooler to keep the viscosity for the lower rated oil above the viscosity of the higher rated oil. In other words and to be exact:

 

GM’s cooler/thermostat layout provides somewhere around 5-8 cSt viscosity using 5W30. My layout provides 14-18 cSt utilizing 0W20. I have no fear the oil is too thin to be of use as protection.

 

The orange line is Dexron 6 which I try to regulate at 160 F. This provides two pretty important things. A viscosity around 17-18 cSt ( same at the motor) and its peak lubricity or slipperiness. That’s just something I know from nearly 40 years in the business. The point of lowest friction coefficient. Think of it as boiled Okra or raw Oysters. Removing the thermostat brings it to heat quicker and keeps it lower overall.

 

Truth is, most motors spend the majority of their life warming up and cooling down especially in the winter her above the tropics.

 

 

[Grumpy Bear]

Tuesday June 7 Pepper gets her front springs changed; rear springs remounted and her 65,000 service. This will include an alignment and dropping of the gas tank. I have some fuel to run out to make it manageable. Looking at a day’s work or so. When I get her back a good detailing and some paint correction. Two small chips. Winter kill.

 

35,562 miles. That’s what I put on her in 2017. Used 1328 gallons of R+M/2 87 fuel for a year average of 26.77 mpg. Just a shade higher than the lifetime average.  So far this year I’m driving about 11% more. This winter was a bit harder on her than last.

 

Instead of the tank by tank  chart I'm going to post the averages chart for a while to track trending. I pay most attention to the 24 tank averages. 

 

 

Edited May 31, 2018 by Grumpy Bear
Error correction

[Grumpy Bear]

65,000 Mile Service

 

Lots to do in addition to normal service.

 

Complete interior detailing. Leaking bottle of Quick Detailer behind the driver’s seat did me the service of remaining within the confines of the rubber flooring. Mustard package in the glove box leaked. Nothing damaged in either case, just an annoyance. Orange oil leaves a nice clean sent. Cuts wax well.

 

Cursory exterior cleanup which I do before each service. Under hood will need some work later. Cosmetic only.  

 

Tire inspection. It’s getting easier to spot slight variations in tread depth as well as some minor difference across the tread. Shoulders more worn than center ribs by a bit over 1/32. Out of round under 1/64. No cupping. No feathering. No abnormal patterns at all. Just the result of normal imperfect manufacturing and a non-flat tread design plus the lingering remnants of the initial factory sloppy alignment. Now 5,000 miles over the manufactures warranty. Wearing at a rate of .018” per 10,000 miles with a .094” throwaway (or first wear bar to reveil) and currently at a nominal .196” this summer is looking good. Still great braking and wet weather performance. Rotation only. This set is going to go a bit longer than I anticipated.

 

Cabin filter. NAPA SFI 2230129. Something I skipped at the last service. It needed it and the pattern evolving is a need to do this every 20,000 miles.

 

Had a NAPA coupon so used it on the cabin filter and a brace of oil filters. The new 22 psig relief valve version of the WIX in NAPA Gold 100255 along with six quarts of Red Line 0W20, also a change from past specification. 38% left on OLM this go and zero oil used for this 5,000 mile interval.

 

Ran the gas tank down to the low level alarm to help ease the removal of the gas tank. Learned the alarm comes in at 24 gallons consumed. As you can never get 26 gallons in a 26 gallon tank so it cuts it pretty thin. When my gauge is on E, believe it. BTW this tank from full to alarm delivered a stunning 726.9 miles for 30.4 mpg. It chimes when the alarm is tripped and gives a dash message. Didn’t know that. Nice.

 

Rear springs R&R to remove bushings and repacked with grease. Rear shock N2 pressure checked and reset to 200 psig. Lowing the charge pressure 50 psig. Springs ‘clicked’ in wet weather or humidity over 80%. Otherwise quite as a church mouse. Will report on effectiveness at a later date.

 

Front coil-over R&R and 750 # springs exchanged for 13” 600 # King replacements at zero base ring preload. N2 pressure checked and reset to 200 psig. Lowering charge 50 psig. Again these modifications are more about geometry than ride. Aim is centering the shock in its travel. Hitting the rebound limiters on occasion such as on speed tables. Can’t tune a shock with no rebound travel. Upper ball joints are fine. Limiters are effective.

 

Alignment. I specified a tenth less driver’s side castor and now running a factory centered alignment call out.  

 

I’ll have measurements and driving impressions in a later post.  

 

P.S. While the tank was out the Evap. system was checked over. All good.

  

Edited June 8, 2018 by Grumpy Bear
Post Script.

[Grumpy Bear]

Measures and Impressions. 

 

Found out that the low fuel level light officially comes on at 23.9 gallon used after filling the tank and back calculations complete. 

 

We have a new stance. A 1/2" rake with the nose down. This is a drop of a bit more than one inch. Measure between the spring perches on the bench was 10.75". Old loaded length was 10.125" New loaded length is 9.75 inches. Old spindle center to fender lip distance was 22.75 inches. New distance is 22.00". The difference between the change in coil length versus the change in spindle to fender height gives a Leverage Ratio of exactly 2.00:1. We are now 77% compression and 23% rebound by stroke length. 

 

Ground to fender measurements 36.125" front nominal 36.625" rear. (about 3/16 difference between sides) The difference for the math freaks is between these readings and spindle center readings is I've adopted a 5 psig lower tire pressure.

 

The truck which one reader described as Lifted in the front. Dropped in the back and Level is now officially lowered from factory in all four corners. Ever so slight in the front but  lower non the less. 50 psig lower N2 pressures had no effect on ride height. 

 

The alignment is exactly the same as last time but we will check and adjust in about 2500 miles. 

 

Raining today and I still have a 'pop' in the front rear spring perches. I'll ride it out for awhile as it seemed to do it new only on wet days. 

 

Impressions: Although there is a change in coil rate of 150 pounds/inch each front corner and a pneumatic change of 50 pounds/inch in all four corners there seems to be little visceral difference in roll or pitch. That's some in control valving. However bump compliance is an equal step better than  the step between stock and the initial King/Deaver/Sulastic modifications. It is by no means 'boat-ish' but it is light years better than factory. Initially it was harsh and out of control. First round of modifications made it VERY firm and in control. Control remains with this second round of adjustments but ride compliance is a full step improved. Yes by my bad lumbar spring and shock dyno

 

We moved the bumpers and wipers back to static base positions so total travel and bump stop positions can be evaluated. Rebound stops spruced up so contact can be confirmed if suspected. I'll quit when we are nearer mid shaft and using about 90% of all travel at the speeds and on the roads she travels. So...we have more work to do. I also have a problem to solve before much more can be done. Piggyback Reservoir shocks these are out back and never intended to be used at my spec ride height. There is no mounting position that can be done that will not spoil the shock if I go even an inch lower. I need them fitted for remote reservoirs. Ben as at a race and will be for about the next week. We also have the exchange price to hammer out on the springs. Not everything is nuts and bolts. 

 

 

Edited June 9, 2018 by Grumpy Bear

[Grumpy Bear]

Post Script

 

I missed an item in each of the last two post. 

 

Under Service I missed headlight aim. An inch drop at the front axle is a big move. Big enough that the high beams are about perfect after adding a smidge more elevation to the passenger side. More to equal them out. Low beams don't punch out as far as I would like (use to) but you can't move one without the other. Think I can fix that with a bit whiter bulb at the next change. I'd worry more if I lived somewhere like Kansas where primary highway speeds are 15 mph above Illinois. People often out drive their lights. Didn't get a single flash in my 30 mile rural test loop. A first. 

 

Under Impressions it's actually more of an observation at this point. Current trip average mpg display use to take 25 to 30 miles to reach a peak number. That in fact was an improvement after the switch from 5W30 to 5W20 and moving to a POA/Ester blend over the Group III I started with. Use to take 60 to 80 miles. The switch to 0W20 has me there in about 12 to 15 miles. Exactly the effect I was after. Reduction of the cold start viscosity and lower over all viscosity slope makes the motor act as if it's fully warmed up much earlier. Hot oil pressure and peak oil temperatures seem unaffected by this move. As usual it will take a few thousand miles to measure the effect if there is one to measure. For now it's an 'impression'. One not strong enough to be an opinion and certainly not positive knowledge. 

 

  

[Grumpy Bear]

Fluke? Pattern? 

 

The last 5 hand calculated tanks representing 1800 miles are in the white box and average 29.4 mpg. I thought the previous 11 tanks whose low was 27.9 was notable but this? Weather has been warm since the blue line broke the lifetime average line (yellow). We deleted the trans stat at that last tank below the 24 tank moving average (red), when we had our last cold spell here.  

 

This has been building in three distinct jumps. That group that hovers around the lifetime average line. The next bump to the mid 28 mpg range and now this.

 

I've been making tweaks but I can't put an absolute cause and effect to this. Which could be the result of 'adaptive learning'...maybe. Seems the better the handle I get on temperature and viscosity the tighter the grouping gets. 

 

It also seems that there is a lag of several tanks between possible cause and likely effect thus my reasoning for some sort of trans or engine management system 'learning' phase. No light switch correlation to be found. These last 16 tanks are covering that last 5,849 miles. Fluke? Pattern? 

 

There is certainly nothing in the trucks history display in this graph like it. Three tanks was a longest streak previously and this sort of lack of data noise??? 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 10, 2018 by Grumpy Bear

[Grumpy Bear]

Installed a set of H11 Sylvania Silverstar bulbs in the low position. The claim is a brighter whiter light with greater punch out. They kept their promise. They also solved a problem I found with the factory adjusting system. When I had the low beam right the high beam could be used to hunt coons. When I had the high beam right the low beam was 100 feet in front of the truck. Not nearly far enough for highway speeds. Not even my highway speeds. These Silverstar get out there far enough that when the high beam is on point the low beam will wash out passing traffics high beams when their 150 feet beyond me and yet well below eye line for both coming and going traffic. Both truck and car traffic no longer see if they can clip the front fender coming back in.  They give me some room now.

 

Even had a chance to experiment a bit in fog tonight. I'm impressed. A product that works. By the way the bulbs say Osram on the plug as did the factory OEM bulbs. Interesting. No I did not go top of the heap bypassing both the Osram Night Breaker and the Silverstar Ultra. I have no need for aircraft landing lamp type power. 

 

Got return authorization from Filthy Motorsports for the spring return. I won't have to eat the whole thing. Cool. I asked about refitting the rear shocks for piggy backs and it look like a more cost effective resolution is just buy a new set. I'll have to think on that for a while. I might just work with the valving and shock oil and leave the ride height alone. It's low enough. 

 

It is possible I might have my first light switch type cause and effect to the fuel efficiency graphs but I'll let it play out for a half dozen tanks to remove doubt and assure accuracy of statement. Well into my second tank since the oil viscosity change it is noticeable. 

[Black02Silverado]

Sylvania Silverstars are great at lighting up the night but with my experience in my 2002 and in my daughters Cruze and when I had my 91 Jetta diesel, they just don't last.  I went through two sets before I called it quits on purchasing them.  To expensive.  Although I did buy one more set, but only because I got them for $9 on clearance at Walmart.  

[Grumpy Bear]

1 hour ago, Black02Silverado said:

Sylvania Silverstars are great at lighting up the night but with my experience in my 2002 and in my daughters Cruze and when I had my 91 Jetta diesel, they just don't last.  I went through two sets before I called it quits on purchasing them.  To expensive.  Although I did buy one more set, but only because I got them for $9 on clearance at Walmart.  

And...…...Did you find a bulb you found equivalent in performance that lasted longer? That' would be good info. I have no need to toss money away so if you have something else, ring out brother. 

Edited June 13, 2018 by Grumpy Bear

[Black02Silverado]

54 minutes ago, Grumpy Bear said:

And...…...Did you find a bulb you found equivalent in performance that lasted longer? That' would be good info. I have no need to toss money away so if you have something else, ring out brother. 

I have read that the GE Nighthawks are equivalent to the Silverstars and last.  I just have not gotten any to try.