Grumpy Bears 2015 Silverado 2WD

Grumpy Bear · July 9, 2019

About a mile west of Illinois 26 on the north side of Princeton. That's Rex behind the wheel . A covered bridge is rare in this state. Pretty day and we didn't waste it. He's actually a pretty good driver.

Got Pepper scaled today. Weight with Rex and myself and about 23 gallons of fuel. A case of oil and other consumables. A few tools behind the seat and accessories. Bench wet weight was closer to 4500#. I need put Rex on a diet.

Hood now sealed. Add that to the roof. Found two chips in front drivers side fender...clean through the bra no less! Another in the B pillar near the rear window. How did that get there? Making a list to repair all at the same time. These are tiny little things so far. Like the ball in a ball point pen size.

Edited July 9, 2019 by Grumpy Bear

Grumpy Bear · July 13, 2019

Rex and I did a 300 mile loop yesterday that included the Illinois side of the Mississippi Lock and Dam 13 complex and the back water slough that creates. Now there's some fish' n! We saw a rather rare white Pelican in a graceful soar over the river.

One of the few really pretty days we've had recently. Low to mid 80's and 40% humidity. Light winds of about 5 mph mainly from the west south west. A real windows down trolling the Illinois River Roads sort of day. The day included the Mississippi, Kishwaukee, the Rock and the Illinois River watersheds and their tributaries.

Traveling Ill 72 west about 50 mph we cut across the Rock and Kish 90 miles to the upper Mississippi and ambled down Ill 84. Pretty drive. Stopped in Cordova home of the World Series of Drag Racing. One of the track I use to race at in my youth finally intersecting I-80 we took that east to US Rt 6. Once a main artery of the US highway system it is now littered with the dead and dying towns IKE's Interstate system left behind in history. Their well kept appearance a testament to those that live in those towns. Headed south along Ill 26 at Princeton to I-180 following the Hennepin Canal Parkway to Illinois River Road Ill 71 east to nearly Oglesby were I-39 took us north stopping for gas before crossing back over the Illinois river. That segment netted a nice 31.6 mpg and now with a wind shift to a more southerly origin we floated on that 5 mph breeze home, roughly 80 miles at nearly 33 mpg with air now on at 55 mph. 173 water, 195 oil and 155 transmission. Purrrrrrrrrrfect.

The winters slump is fully in the rearview mirror now never dropping below her lifetime average. The 36 point moving average early in the year now standing at last years late season peak which was boosted by a crazy good September run in 2018. What was last years anomaly has become a pretty much turnkey event this summer. The error bars on this chart stand at two standard deviations. This entire summer is running north of the one sigma mark signaling a major centerline shift upward. It will take a long time to reflect that in her life time average in consideration of the nearly 100,000 miles of history. Big service coming up at the next interval. Time to start making that list, eh?

Edited July 15, 2019 by Grumpy Bear

AtlasFBG2 · July 24, 2019

Grumpy Bear

Here is my oil analysis of my 4.3 v6 using 20 weight oil. Thought I would share it with you since we both used 20 weight oil.

I know you posted your results in another thread but they no longer show up.

This is a mix of 3 quarts of 0w20 and 3 quarts of 5w20 Walmart Supertech Full Synthetic. No make up oil was added. Used E85 fuel the entire oil change. Currently I am using the same mix of oil but going to use 87 octane E10 fuel this time. Doubt I will see and difference but never know.

Grumpy Bear · July 24, 2019

Tonneau Cover and MPG

It is 175 miles from my home to Dad's along a route I know better than my own hand. Made this trip hundreds of times. Dozens in Pepper. I fill up when I arrive.

434 miles / 14.566 gallons = 29.8 mpg and first tank below the 36 MVA in months.

( The Scan Gauge showed 14.58 gallons so pretty darn accurate)

When I left for the day the Scan Gauge was showing a 30.4 mpg average over the previous 259 miles and thus so had used 8.519 gallons of fuel.

Subtracting the former from the latter leaves:

175 miles / 6.046 gallons = 28.94 mpg. That raised eyebrows as it is more than 2 standard deviations (2Sd) below the mean, a signal something is clearly amiss.

Return trip metered 175 miles / 5.6 gallons = 31.25 mpg. Back within 'normal' probabilities. (Inside 1 Sd)

Running conditions: 12-15 mph NNW wind. 75 - 85 F Temperatures. Clear skies. Direction of travel east to west going and west to east returning. Pretty much a dead cross wind all day. (under 5 degrees from right angle) Travel time per direction 3 hours 56 minutes. 125 miles US 30/Ill 251 & 72 and 50 miles I-88 for the connection.

The difference between the two runs was the soft Lund Tonneau cover was rolled up for the trip there as I had a push mower in the bed. Closed as usual for the return.

I'm sure guys will nit pick this to death pointing to 'test errors' or 'sample size' but the fact remains that the result fell outside the the 2 Sd range. Actually 2.6+ Sd outside the last 26 tank trend so the sample isn't that small. Let's put it this way. If this were to happen on a production line the line would come to a halt until the cause was corrected. In this case covering the bed back up.

It may mean nothing to anyone else but I don't need a A/B, B/A, A/B, B/A test to know than a hole drilled in the bottom of the bucket lets the water out every time.

I'm saying the cover made a 5% difference in a 12 - 15 mph crosswind. Ya'll can say as you please.

Edited July 24, 2019 by Grumpy Bear

Grumpy Bear · July 24, 2019

11 hours ago, AtlasFBG2 said:

Grumpy Bear

Here is my oil analysis of my 4.3 v6 using 20 weight oil. Thought I would share it with you since we both used 20 weight oil.

I know you posted your results in another thread but they no longer show up.

This is a mix of 3 quarts of 0w20 and 3 quarts of 5w20 Walmart Supertech Full Synthetic. No make up oil was added. Used E85 fuel the entire oil change. Currently I am using the same mix of oil but going to use 87 octane E10 fuel this time. Doubt I will see and difference but never know.

unit 391 test 1.pdf

Hope that opens.

Grumpy Bear · July 25, 2019

Correction:

I miscalculated the tonneau cover values by including the partial tank as a data point instead of the reference point. It should have been referenced to the data set not part of the set. What effect does that have? A large one!

Last 25 tank average was 30.6 MPG. Limits were 30.1 to 31.7 mpg. Calculation of 3 standard deviations (3 sigma) then is 1.5 units above or below the average giving a lower control limit of 29.1 mpg. The 175 miles traveled with the tonneau open was, again, 28.94 or MORE THAN 3 sigma. What does that mean?

99.73% of all data points will fall inside 3X sigma thus this point has a probability of 1 in 370 of being part of the 'normal' distribution. That would be one tank in 144,300 miles or once every 5 years. Yea, it's an outlier and condition driven not a statistical anomaly. The cover is effective in cross winds.

So why 25 tanks? That is the total number of tanks representative of the current equipment set up and season.

Edited July 25, 2019 by Grumpy Bear
additional content

Grumpy Bear · July 31, 2019

Hotter. More A/C usage. Allot more wind. Nice 5.1% gain over 2018. All considered? Good month even though last month was a bit better by a fraction.

For the octane crowd I have concluded that experiment. 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92 & 93 all tested both with and without 10% ethanol. Several tanks per level. There is a $1 spread, give or take, in my area between 87 and 93 E10 and an additional 30/40 cents for E-0. While KR does drop with increased Octane MPG numbers are unaffected. I could make a case for a few tenths of a mpg for E-0 v E-10 if it were not for the fact that fill variations have a greater impact on calculated results than the 9% alcohol content. I noted no difference in drive-ability, ease of start, power on the on ramps...nor any other metric normally given homage for this test.

The only difference I could establish with certainty was it cost me a buck a gallon to do this test and gave nothing tangible in return. Long time readers will remember early on I tried some various octane boosters and arrived at the same conclusion. Biggest impacts for the month and in order was the tonneau cover followed by A/C usage and finally wind.

KR started worst case with 87 E-10 at @ 9* and 93 ending with about 2.5* on 7% grades. Audible difference, zip, nada, nothing.

Few hundred miles to the next service. Collecting bits and supplies.

36 fill-up average now stands at 30.07 mpg and for the first time over 30 mpg. I average about 14,000 miles for 36 fills. A bit more than a 25 mile DIC number. Lifetime now stands at 27.46 and rising.

Tip O' the hat to Becks Phillips 66 in Oglesby, Illinois. What a fuel stop should be. 91 E-0 available that wont bankrupt you and some pretty fair coffee too. Normally one of the lowest prices for E-10 87. E-10 89 & 93 also. Very clean. Dog friendly. Flat lot with lots of room. Accurate pumps. Although it is 75 miles away from base it's my regular stop in that area. Off I-39, First exit south of the Illinois River. Just east of Mick D's.

AtlasFBG2 · August 3, 2019

Ever consider trying a couple tanks of E85 to see what you could get?

Ran my last oil change on only E85 and got a average of 16 mpg over 7460 miles. That was 23 tanks. Cost was $0.14 mile.

This oil change I am only using 87 octane E10 and so far getting 20.7 average over 3 tanks. Cost so far $0.13 mile.

Using Fuelly .com to track. http://www.fuelly.com/driver/atlasfbg2

Edited August 3, 2019 by AtlasFBG2

Grumpy Bear · August 4, 2019

1 hour ago, AtlasFBG2 said:

Ever consider trying a couple tanks of E85 to see what you could get?

Ran my last oil change on only E85 and got a average of 16 mpg over 7460 miles. That was 23 tanks. Cost was $0.14 mile.

This oil change I am only using 87 octane E10 and so far getting 20.7 average over 3 tanks. Cost so far $0.13 mile.

Using Fuelly .com to track. http://www.fuelly.com/driver/atlasfbg2

20.7 / 16 = 1.294. Lowest local E-85 is running $2.13/ gallon. E-10 87 is $2.70 or 1.268. I would need 1.30 to make that cost effective. This is actually the closest I've seen it in three years so it's a maybe. This summer's 36 tank average has been 30.07 mpg range and based on todays 87 cost that's $2.70 / 30.07 = 9 cents a mile. Before Illinois latest gas tax increase that number was 7 cents a mile. I'm pretty good with that.

I have checked in from time to time to learn the exact alcohol content of the stations storage tank and found that consistently they have it priced to be a dead wash in exchange for 87 E-10. Having found out that increased octane did absolutely nothing measurable either statistically nor tactile I don't currently see a need to investigate that avenue. Maybe in the future. I'll keep an eye on it.

That said IF one had the actual need for at least 92 (R+M)/2 fuel which trades here $3.35 that would be wonderful. That would, in my case be a cost for premium E-10 of 11.1 cents a mile so a I could get a 2 cent a mile improvement in $/mile. Of course if I had a need for a fuel in the 99 to 108 range....no brainer.

Thanks for asking!!

swathdiver · August 4, 2019

Marty and a fella on the Tahoe-Yukon forum, Gary, both have Direct Injection engines and have shown that octane rating and to a lesser extend, fuel brand, has little to no effect on fuel economy. Amazing to me as I've been proving to myself for thirty plus years that higher octane gasoline yields increased fuel economy and brands definitely play a role as well.

Once that revelation came to mind, I thought back to my previous diesel powered vehicles and can say that those engines were not affected by different brands either, it was all #2 if memory serves, up and down the east coast.

flyingfool · August 14, 2019

On 4/10/2019 at 1:31 PM, Grumpy Bear said:

Next project is oil filtration. The below link will do the explanation. This one is K&P Engineering not Scotts. I went with the original after bludgeoning the poor fellow at the other end of the customer service line to tears until I was assured that I was giving up nothing meaningful. The I ran across this link and then felt bad for the guy I beat up. Maybe.....

https://xladv.com/articles/what39s-the-real-difference-between-paper-and-stainless-steel-oil-filters-r59/?pagecommentundefined=1

PF63E along side for size reference. This one will actually flows about 7 times more fluid which means lower back pressure and almost non existent bypass situations even at -25F and even though it has a 4 psi blow off. PF63E has a 22 psi relief and uses it.

Pump flows with the pump flows. It's positive displacement. It might even buy me enough space for a sandwich plate for a cooler or bypass filtration system. One step at a time. Several finishes are available from K&P. I chose anodized. Bought a second screen and a lifetime supply of gaskets.

Here is what I really know. The absolute single pass size. 35 um ABSOULUTE single pass rating. Something you can't pry out of the other manufactures. WIX adverts 21 nominal with a 50% rating at 6 micron and a 95% capture at 20 micron. They 'say' a 21 micron absolute number (multi-pass) but...as you will find in the link there is absolute and then there is ABSOLUTE. When I tire of the lies and deceit I move on...this is me moving on. There is a reason for this I may or may not state sometime in the future. I'm in research mode for now.

you should try a frantz filter= 1/10 micron rating

Grumpy Bear · August 15, 2019

20 hours ago, flyingfool said:

you should try a Frantz filter= 1/10 micron rating

Yes I considered the Frantz and a few others and bought the AMSOIL unit and sandwich plate from Glow Shift...and...it all sits in boxes in the shop. I saw some Blackstone solids reports on oil before and after such filtration. It is indeed impressive. Fact is such filters clean the oil to a degree than NEW OIL can not compete with.

After being impressed I had an moment of pause. How clean is clean enough? Obviously new oil that can protect a motor well past a million miles is certainly clean enough. Filters such as the AC-Delco PF63E are also capable of producing million mile motors when properly serviced. Fact is first million mile light duty gas motor I ever saw used a canister filter. (Pre 1960)

https://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/28436/story-automotive-filters-engines

Quote above link: "What makes today’s filters better than those of the past is the filter media itself. Early designs incorporated steel wool, wire meshes, metal screens and more to keep the particles from entering the system. The next iteration of the media was in the form of bulk cotton or various woven fabrics, like linen.

When disposable filters became popular in the 1960s, cellulose and paper were used to minimize production costs. Although cellulose and paper filters still can be purchased today, a better technology exists: synthetic media". End Quote

I lingered on "a better technology". Is that true? Depends on the goal. If you cleaning oil of the sake of clean oil then yes it's better. Next question...will that 'better technology' improve engine life in a practical manor? I doubt it and for a host of reasons. In fact it may just shorten it's life. The earlier designs promoted nearly instant oil pressure. High filtration efficiency filters delay that. In fact given cold oil and a tight filter you are on bypass. Given a filters flow bypass washes the solids collected on the outer pleats right into the main oil galley. As the filter ends it's service life the filters pressure differential increases and in motors whose primary pressure control is in the pump relief valve than means oil that was to go to the motor is dumped to the pan. Low oil volume. Not a problem with the newer pumps that regulate at the end of the circuit except in that case when the filter reaches end of life it's on bypass almost continuously.

Point is, given the plethora of issues motors still manage very high mileage so again....how clean is clean enough? Yes I know the Frantz is a bypass system that has no impact on primary circuit pressures and very little impact on flow but....does it need to be this clean? I can find no evidence simply in the fact that history itself says NO. And yes I've see the GM 5 micron killer particulate reports and even promoted them myself for quite some months. Then how did we get million mile service before?

Detergents and dispersants

This K & P is tighter than any early design wool or screen (30 micron) and has enough filter area to NEVER be on bypass. Instant oil pressure measure at circuit end. I use an ester based oil with great natural solvency and a robust dispersant package. I keep her cool as the other side of the pillow and change oil at a rate most consider wasteful. About 4 TBN. I also have a guide. A 5.7 Hemi who has been on this filter since new and now has a quarter million trouble free on the clock.

flyingfool · August 15, 2019

i also use a model called motorgaurd, its used as an air drier for compressed air systems , but they started in the 70's as a bipass oil filter. i get them cheap, probably about $80 vs the pricey Frantz , and toilet paper is so damn efficient at filtering tranny fluid an motor oil. filters are cheap , i use industrial grade 1000 ply hard as a rock TP

Edited August 15, 2019 by flyingfool

Doublebase · August 19, 2019

Haven't checked on this thread in a while, what's you're mileage at now, grumpy? Have you gotten to 100,000 yet?

I'm currently at 34,000, but once September rolls around I'll be doing my 100 mile a day commute (I'm a teacher). I've only put 2,200 miles on the truck this summer, but she's ready to roll again! Just did a wash and wax, touched up a few paint chips, reconditioned the interior...should be do for an oil change and rotation in the middle of September, then an undercoating treatment in November. Year two of my Silverado ownership is set to roll.

Oh and I'll be adding new tires in November too, should be at 40,000 miles by then and the stock Bridgestones are getting a little too thin for winters around here.

Edited August 19, 2019 by Doublebase

Grumpy Bear · August 19, 2019

1 hour ago, Doublebase said:

Haven't checked on this thread in a while, what's you're mileage at now, grumpy? Have you gotten to 100,000 yet?

Hello Mike! 99,800 miles on her now. She's been sitting in the drive last three weeks waiting on me. I've been driven to distraction these last few weeks. Have six months work all needs doing NOW and a body that is being uncooperative. Back strain.

I've collected the bits and pieces to do the BIG service and pecking away at the little things. Interior detail today....I hope. Finished the underhood detail just before I strained my back so a light dusting there. Exterior looks great still. No dents or scrapes. Paint looks very good. A few pin point chips to repair. Front bumper is an issue I've not yet decided a cure for. Interior looks like it's never been driven yet. For the most part she looks, drives and runs better than she did the day I picked her up. I've very pleased with this truck. Think she's a keeper.

Edited August 19, 2019 by Grumpy Bear