seems like a good time to get a P71

John Brown wrote: It takes less petroleum crude to make 100 gallons of fuel than it takes to make 1 quart of conventional oil. (IIRC, it may be 78:.25)

really? can I get a source on that?

edited

A 33 gallon barrel of oil will make:

http://www.gravmag.com/oil3.html said:19½ gallons of gasoline, 9 gallons of fuel oil, 4 gallons of jet fuel, and 11 gallons of other products, including lubricants, kerosene, asphalt, and petrochemical feedstocks to make plastics. That adds up to more than 42 gallons because of something called "refinery gain" - the processing and chemical changes increase the volume.

I cannot find it but I remember that of the remaining 11 gallons from the barrel only 1-2 QUARTS are useable for motor oil, of which they make 2-4 QUARTS of motor oil, Esther based oils use less than 10% of the crude when compared to petroleum based oils mostly in the additive package.

One of the board scientists will adjust the numbers as needed.

I found this while looking for the other link that had the breakdown of refined motor oil quarts vs gasoline gallons per 33 gallons of base crude:

http://www.calsci.com/motorcycleinfo/Oils1.html

neat information.

http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/usedoil/index.htm

That website ^^^ said:One gallon of used motor oil provides the same 2.5 quarts of lubricating oil as 42 gallons of crude oil.

What was the 07 test rig? So what if you uncork the exhaust, change the timing, and the fueling on the 2007?

Can't do that.. then it's non emissions legal. If you do those mods it may go up a few MPG. certainly not over 20. It's only a shortbed 2wd single cab. New motor is greedy for fuel.

Hell my 2005 test rig gets 14.5 mpg everywhere... uphill, downhill, loaded, not.

http://www.cumminsforum.com/forum/89-93-performance-parts-discussion/24642-mpg.html

can't find any charts that I can publish in a public forum. but look at the BSFC curves for a 89-93 5.9 and then the bsfc curve for the 6.7... Do the math.

And my comment around gears, was more at the number of them, not final drive.....

http://www.dieselpowermag.com/tech/general/0708dp_1997_dodge_ram_3500_dualie_cummins/index.html

John, I think your math might be wrong wrong. A bit of research suggests up to 50% return on crude when using making gasoline. That suggests I "use" about 750L of crude(375L/gas) per oil change. Research also suggest that there is only about 1.2% return on crude oil when making oil. That sounds terrible, but I only use 4L of motor oil for every 375L of gasoline. AND the motor oil is made with crude that the gasoline has already been distilled out of.

Nathan

ignorant wrote: What was the 07 test rig? So what if you uncork the exhaust, change the timing, and the fueling on the 2007? Can't do that.. then it's non emissions legal. If you do those mods it may go up a few MPG. certainly not over 20. It's only a shortbed 2wd single cab. New motor is greedy for fuel. Hell my 2005 test rig gets 14.5 mpg everywhere... uphill, downhill, loaded, not. http://www.cumminsforum.com/forum/89-93-performance-parts-discussion/24642-mpg.html can't find any charts that I can publish in a public forum. but look at the BSFC curves for a 89-93 5.9 and then the bsfc curve for the 6.7... Do the math. And my comment around gears, was more at the number of them, not final drive..... http://www.dieselpowermag.com/tech/general/0708dp_1997_dodge_ram_3500_dualie_cummins/index.html

The truck in the last link is identical to mine except two years newer with more power stock. It's a 2nd gen, not 1st Gen, with quite a bit more power than a 1st gen.
I don't think cummins makes their bsfc curves public, but if they do I'd like to see them for 89-93 5.9 12v, 94-98 5.9 12v, and 98.5-02 5.9 24v.
The original argument (between us) was whether or not they have to be detuned to get better MPG and my point is they don't. In fact with my truck it was just the opposite. I'd be happy to compare the mileage of my modified 2nd Gen 2WD one ton dually (600 TQ to the wheels) to a stock 1st gen 2wd 1 ton dually (400 TQ at the crank), which would be a comparison very similar to the one in your original post. The difference would not be "tons" and I actually think mine might come out on top. In regards to the newest trucks....well they have even more emissions choking them, larger motors, more weight, higher tow limits,etc, so it's no surprise their MPG is down. Of course that seems to be the norm and relates to a lot of different markets, not just diesel trucks Back to the original thread...I'd like to have a nice P71 to play around with as well. Or maybe a 9C1 caprice. I still miss my 96 Impala SS.

I had a EPA graph that stated that for every barrel of crude you would get roughly 20 gallons of gasoline and about 2.5 quarts of oil. I can't find it. I was researching the fact that re-refining oil would help us save MORE motor oil.

My math before was way wrong you make 100 gallons of gasoline to 3 gallons of motor oil out of 5 barrels or oil... basically 5 barrels feed three cars for a fill up and an oil change.

Either way you cut it if you extend your service intervals from 3000 to 6000 miles you save 2x as much MOTOR OIL. If you unload your mixed 15mpg car and drive a mixed 30mpg you will again save 2x as much fuel. Esther synthetics save more motor oil.

njansenv wrote: John, I think your math might be wrong wrong. A bit of research suggests up to 50% return on crude when using making gasoline. That suggests I "use" about 750L of crude(375L/gas) per oil change. Research also suggest that there is only about 1.2% return on crude oil when making oil. That sounds terrible, but I only use 4L of motor oil for every 375L of gasoline. AND the motor oil is made with crude that the gasoline has already been distilled out of. Nathan

The amount of gasoline produced also depends on the refineries "cracking" method.

dude it's not wether or not they have have to be detuned for more mileage.. its the simple fact that if you detuned yours.. it would get much better mileage.. I can't publish bsfc curves. But if you were to come to work.. I'd show you.

If 30mpg isnt good then my E30 is a gas pig for getting that...

moms impreza is worse for 26-28mpg

my mustang is a giant HOG for 18-20mpg (oh well, it is only driven to and from auto-x right now)

my exploder is an elephant for 16mpg (ok, i cant argue that one.. its parked and utility use only as soon as i weld the exhaust on the E30)

what NON-FWD vehicles get over 30mpg's in the grassroots realm? starlet.. and what else?

granted my dislike of FWD excludes alot of economy, lets see a list for this one!

I really do want to see a list, but I dont think EVERYONE here thinks that the geo metro is the only vehicle that should exist! (im not meaning any insult on metro enthusiasts, but there are cars that are ALOT more fun)

I think it's going to be harder to find one vehicle to do all duties. I love fire breathing race cars, but driving one everyday is going to be prohibitively expensive soon. i think owning 2 cars may be the way to do it.

I agree. I have the (new to me) 1991 Deathscort for 30mpg commuting, and I will eventually (when these extra little bills get paid down) get back into the saddle with something that is V8 powered, rear wheel drive and 4 doors.

I am dreaming of an Audi A4 quattro with the OEM engine and trans removed and front drive bits gutted with a small light V8 (think Lexus).

Stupid yet practical.

Apexcarver wrote: what NON-FWD vehicles get over 30mpg's in the grassroots realm? starlet.. and what else?

Oh, I think you aleady know the answer to this question.

Josh wrote:

Apexcarver wrote: what NON-FWD vehicles get over 30mpg's in the grassroots realm? starlet.. and what else?

Oh, I think you aleady know the answer to this question.

I don't. The 3 miata's I've owned have had a hard time getting over 30. My wife's 2007 would get 26 mixed, 29 Hwy. Our 2nd gen 2001 was worse on the highway with around 28 Hwy, and my modified turbo 1st gen got about 28 also. This is all at 65, if I cruised in any of them at 75-80 you could subtract 3mpg from those numbers. Miata's are not very fuel efficient. Considering their low weight, low power, and small size, and for the older ones tiny tire sizes, they really should get well over 30. But my experience has been that they struggle to get 30. So I wonder why there aren't a lot of RWD cars that get good gas mileage? Good being consistently over 30. Like my old mazda 3 that got a consistent 33 combined, 36 hwy. Why can't they just make that car RWD and still get the same mileage?

I bet that part of the mileage drop is in tune for the emissions requirement.

nocones wrote:

Josh wrote:

Apexcarver wrote: what NON-FWD vehicles get over 30mpg's in the grassroots realm? starlet.. and what else?

Oh, I think you aleady know the answer to this question.

I don't. The 3 miata's I've owned have had a hard time getting over 30. *snip*

this is exactly what i mean, the fun non FWD options that have good economy just dont exist. there may well be a handful of obscure ones, but finding anything that fits this description is very hard.

is a miata and the 325e E30 about as good as it gets there?

(this could make a good article, fun used cars that get good economy. (aka excuses to buy a small sportscar))

Apexcarver wrote: (this could make a good article, fun used cars that get good economy. (aka excuses to buy a small sportscar))

already done as a cover article.

non fwd will be hard to have as good as economy as fwd. fwd is more efficent at transfering power. It dosen't have to turn 90 deg.

It's lighter weight as well

The gearing in my neon R/T kills the MPG. In 5th, it runs 3k rpm at 60mph. It just breaks 30mpg mixed (25% city, 75% HW, and hills). I need to fix the cruise, and I'm looking at swaping out the trans for a more pedestian version.

That's your driving. My wife regularly exceeded 35mpg in our R/T.

But she drove it downhill all the time, with a tailwind...

Here's one. They've got "$3995 /make offer" in the listing.

It doesn't say anywhere that it's specifically a P71. The speedometer does have the "certified calibrated" sticker but I'm not sure. What say you GRM'ers?! Offer $3500 or hold out for an '03? I have decided I need it to be black.

anyways, here's the link http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=014&category=6227&sspagename=STORE%3APROMOBOX%3ANEWLIST&viewitem=&item=330249189478#LIST

doh. just realized "p71" is in the vin. I'm a dork.

tempted to shoot an offer. doesn't look like it's done any real work in it's life.
again, should I wait for an '03 ya think fellas?

Do it! That's a good price on a nice low-miles one with no "speed holes"!

How is it to find a P71 that was Gov. fleet use and not used as a cop car? That would seam to be a great find.

Probably a FBI or SS car. Lots of them are out there, a lot of companies will buy base interiors from LX cars at salvage yards to replace the buckets. When I worked at the salvage yard we would sell both seats (F,R) for $400 to one of the auction houses.