Fuel efficient engine swaps??? - Page 3

**broncnaz** · 04/30/10, 01:07 AM

I've got a 4.0 in my 03 ranger with 4.11 gears and 30 in tires gets about 21 mpg on the hiway. Its rated at about 210 hp. But is no wheres near as torquey as my bronco. Doubt it would see any mileage improvement once planted in the bronco. I currently get 17mpg with the bronco.
Most of the small engines need to rev to make there big power numbers. They make good power for a light weight car but stick one in a heavy bronco wind resistant and the power is gone unless your on the pedal where they wont see and good mileage numbers.

**broncnaz** · 04/30/10, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpalmer

Yup, I am running a stock 5.3L out of an '02 Suburban, weight is close to 5k, lifted way up there, & still rock over 20MPG on the freeway with around 375HP on tap. Flame suit on as usual guys.

I'll flame you how is a 375hp 5.3L stock? maybe 275-320hp but not 375.

2kuwl · 04/30/10, 05:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ratch

Ford is putting an ecoboost v6 in the 2011 mustang, 3.8 or 3.9L 305h.p., supposed to get 30 mpg.
Hmm.. I wonder how hard it would be to wire.....

Here is an article where they put one in a 34 Ford. http://www.caranddriver.com/news/car...rod-auto_shows

I'm sure it isn't cheap, but it sounds like it would be the perfect daily driver engine.

Devin · 04/30/10, 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by red71sport

What? better mileage out of a Bronco. Carful now, I think it's law in most states that every single part of owning a Bronco HAS to be expensive. Even @ 10MPG, it's still a Bronco, and still LOOKS better than anything else on the road. Build the yota conversion, and post a lot of pics. If it's cool let us know.

Devin,
I don't know you, but I just spend 5 min. starring at you engine. Nice!

What is the scuba tank looking thing in the bottom left corner? Nitrous tank?

Thanks for the comments. The tank is for my on board air setup.

jpalmer · 04/30/10, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broncnaz

I'll flame you how is a 375hp 5.3L stock? maybe 275-320hp but not 375.

No problem, glad to explain, probably a mis-understanding of what "stock" means to me. Stock 5.3L Flex Fuel (bigger injectors) is 315HP, I have all emissions removed, intake, headers, exhaust, & a custom tune. That is still a stock motor to me.

**broncnaz** · 04/30/10, 08:16 AM

Well then its not exactly stock now is it? Even if you consider it stock its not.

**sstlaure** · 04/30/10, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ratch

Ford is putting an ecoboost v6 in the 2011 mustang, 3.8 or 3.9L 305h.p., supposed to get 30 mpg.
Hmm.. I wonder how hard it would be to wire.....

That engine isn't boosted - It's naturally aspirated. The new V6 for the Mustang is awesome. 300hp and rated at 31mpg highway.

I picked up a commuter car - 2002 Focus SVT - on the highway I'm getting 32-34mpg, city is around 27-29mpg. Only cost me $6400 and it's a fun little ride perfect for driving to/from work. (I drive ~24,000/year)

I'd rather keep the Bronco fun than efficient.

**sstlaure** · 04/30/10, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2kuwl

Here is an article where they put one in a 34 Ford. http://www.caranddriver.com/news/car...rod-auto_shows

I'm sure it isn't cheap, but it sounds like it would be the perfect daily driver engine.

That's the Ecoboost motor from the Taurus SHO (365hp) It gets around 23mpg highway in a Taurus.

**t.lay** · 04/30/10, 08:47 AM

Cost of the conversion would come into play but how about a 3.0 powerstroke diesel? They're in the brazilian rangers (international motor here). Probably easier and definitely cheaper to get your hands on a 4bt. There's also the liberty turbo diesel and the mercedes greasers too. My guess is that you can buy a lot of gas for the cost of the conversion. If you really want to save gas, get a weekday commuter - little old honda or similar - pick it up for 1000 - gets about 45 mpg and don't worry about the EB. On a 100 mile weekly commute - at 12 mpg you will use 417 gallons of fuel or about $1250. At 45 mpg you'll use about 111 gals or $333 ($3/gal). I've got a 40 mile daily commute - it doesn't take long for a commuter/beater car to pay for itself.

**blubuckaroo** · 04/30/10, 01:26 PM

I don't think you can just pull a motor out of a more efficient car, transplant it in a Bronco, and expect it to have anywhere near the mileage of the doner. Weight and aerodynamics kill the mileage. Also, the Bronco drivetrain is made for a lot of abuse but has too much drag to be economical. Just compare the difference in size of Ford 9" bearings and gears to those from a late model 1/2ton pickup. The old parts are huge and have a lot more drag.

**HoosierDaddy** · 05/15/10, 08:32 PM

Bottom line , get a Volkswagen TDI.
I tend to believe , from all that I have read here and from plenty of other sources over the years , our current motors are about peaked as far as making them efficent.
So ... build the motor to deliver a smooth torque curve and be as efficent as possible ( properly sized and designed headers, heads , intakes , cam , gears , short & skinny tires , no lift ...etc ) put your Mustang EFI on top , and you are pretty much at the top of what a gas motor will do for economy ... and you will probably still be under or just at 20 MPG in most cases.
Switch to a diesel and things start looking better , especially when you start running numbers like TLay and I do , 40 miles each way daily. But still a far cry from the 30 - 40 - 45 mpg numbers modern diesels encased in slippery silohettes are getting.

No matter what , fuel efficency is going to be tied to aerodynamics in a big way with these broncos.

If you REALLY want to get technical , there is an incredible post here , written by (iirc) an aerospace engineer or something like that. Tons of math and other solid info. that pretty lays it out that the number one thing we can do to increase fuel efficency is decrease the Broncos coefficent of friction.
In which case , you no longer have a boxy old truck , so you might as well pony up for the used VW TDI.
Found a short version : http://classicbroncos.com/forums/sho...nt+drag&page=2

**Dave** · 05/16/10, 07:04 PM

IMO aerodynamic drag of the EB has been somewhat overstated. Its definitly not a showpiece of aerodynamic efficiency but when you compare it with many other vehicles such as the CJs etc, its not that much more of a box than many vehicles getting in the high teens and low 20s. I'm not saying that the EB will ever be a good candidate for a high speed daily driver but much of the pain seems to be comming fron guys getting 8 to 10 mpg. I put about 100K on a stock 73 Bronco (302 - C4) back in the 70s and got about 16 mpg on the highway. Also keep in mind that if you are seeing lousy milage on the trails and around town (below 40 mph), aerodynamic drag is not the culprit. Attention to weight and a smartly designed power train can go a long way toward less pain at the pump. I'm hoping to see about 18 mpg at 55-60 on my 70 conversion.

mavereq · 05/16/10, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broncnaz

Well then its not exactly stock now is it? Even if you consider it stock its not.

the longblock is stock and he isn't throwing boost or nitrous at it. i wouldn't call him a liar for calling it stock.