brian2sun
Elite Member
Alright, here it goes..
I live in the mountains, adder. I know what works to get get good mpgs and what doesn't. What I was explaining is common, basic knowledge for us that live around here since most of us deal with driving up a 17 mile road that goes up ~6K ft. elev during our daily commutes. You can argue till the cows come home, but I know what's cheaper for me. Have you ever regeared? Do you live where it's not flat? I'm starting to feel like I'm trying to convince you that the world is round instead of flat. I thought everyone knew that more throttle = more gas consumed. And that far outweighs whatever the higher rpms are at the time.
I know for a fact that going up the mountain in 4th gear at 3/4 throttle sucks almost twice as much gas as 3rd gear and 1/4 throttle because I've measured it before - My statements are not based on what an article says. I can also get ~33 mpgs going down that same mountain, coasting in D... But I pull 2500+ rpms the entire 17 miles. How do I get 33 mpgs going downhill while pulling those kinds of rpms? Because momentum (and gravity in this case) is turning the engine. The fuel is just keeping it from stalling out. On a flat road, you have less momentum, but it's still doing the majority of the work for the motor once it's up to speed.
The rolling tires make the engine roll faster, but it doesn't need more fuel for that! That's why my rpms are higher than before my gears, but my mpgs improved. Why is that so hard to believe? And of course momentum applies at any speed! But what does that have to do my statements? It's simple - the more momentum, the less the engine has to work. If we can't agree on that, it might be the for the same reason that we can't agree on the definition of the word "anecdotally" either. I think it means:
Pertaining to knowledge based on isolated observations and not yet verified by controlled scientific studies.
Since I've had my gears for years, I don't consider my argument or my experience based on "isolated observations" - I drive my truck everyday! And I do believe my own measurements of fuel consumption to support my argument can be considered "scientific studies" in this case also. My experience from regearing also supports my agument and so do the numbers from the scan gauge.
For the record, I don't notice my 4.88 gears much at startup (as you mentioned would probably be the time that gears would show most of their benefits). On the contrary, I notice my gears mostly when I'm already up to speed, especially going up the mountain. My tranny used to shift between 2nd and 3rd gears about 20 or 30 times going up that 17 mile road. Now I turn O/D off and I go up in 3rd the whole way with power in reserve - and I get MUCH better mpgs. If your argument was correct, I would see the opposite effect.
But all that aside.. My mpgs are about to go to crap because I just ordered 35s!
I live in the mountains, adder. I know what works to get get good mpgs and what doesn't. What I was explaining is common, basic knowledge for us that live around here since most of us deal with driving up a 17 mile road that goes up ~6K ft. elev during our daily commutes. You can argue till the cows come home, but I know what's cheaper for me. Have you ever regeared? Do you live where it's not flat? I'm starting to feel like I'm trying to convince you that the world is round instead of flat. I thought everyone knew that more throttle = more gas consumed. And that far outweighs whatever the higher rpms are at the time.
I know for a fact that going up the mountain in 4th gear at 3/4 throttle sucks almost twice as much gas as 3rd gear and 1/4 throttle because I've measured it before - My statements are not based on what an article says. I can also get ~33 mpgs going down that same mountain, coasting in D... But I pull 2500+ rpms the entire 17 miles. How do I get 33 mpgs going downhill while pulling those kinds of rpms? Because momentum (and gravity in this case) is turning the engine. The fuel is just keeping it from stalling out. On a flat road, you have less momentum, but it's still doing the majority of the work for the motor once it's up to speed.
The rolling tires make the engine roll faster, but it doesn't need more fuel for that! That's why my rpms are higher than before my gears, but my mpgs improved. Why is that so hard to believe? And of course momentum applies at any speed! But what does that have to do my statements? It's simple - the more momentum, the less the engine has to work. If we can't agree on that, it might be the for the same reason that we can't agree on the definition of the word "anecdotally" either. I think it means:
Pertaining to knowledge based on isolated observations and not yet verified by controlled scientific studies.
Since I've had my gears for years, I don't consider my argument or my experience based on "isolated observations" - I drive my truck everyday! And I do believe my own measurements of fuel consumption to support my argument can be considered "scientific studies" in this case also. My experience from regearing also supports my agument and so do the numbers from the scan gauge.
For the record, I don't notice my 4.88 gears much at startup (as you mentioned would probably be the time that gears would show most of their benefits). On the contrary, I notice my gears mostly when I'm already up to speed, especially going up the mountain. My tranny used to shift between 2nd and 3rd gears about 20 or 30 times going up that 17 mile road. Now I turn O/D off and I go up in 3rd the whole way with power in reserve - and I get MUCH better mpgs. If your argument was correct, I would see the opposite effect.
But all that aside.. My mpgs are about to go to crap because I just ordered 35s!
Last edited:
