Attention: TDR Forum Junkies As an RV hauler of 8 years. My main goals are off course to make a living, so fuel economy and engine/truck longivity are my main concerns. Two weeks ago I put my new 2011 6. 7 duelly to work on this job. The previous 8 years I have used 2003 trucks. The 1st one I got 930,000 miles out of it. The 2nd one I still have and am going to sell it soon. It has 470. 000 on it. This new truck I have just topped 6,000. I had always said, "I will never put a chip on a truck because it always asks the injectors and various other engine components to do something they weren't designed to do, causing premature failures. " Now the EPA has completly changed the ball game and is pushing me to eat my words. I know the 3 things an engine needs, clean air, clean fuel, clean oil. They want to force me to pump dirty soot exhaust into my clean air engine intake and use 4$ diesel to burn off the soot in a short life costly particulate filter. I remember the 60s and 70s, there was smog and polluted air and the EPA did a good job on reducing this as now we don't have that, but In my opinion they have now gone off the deep end into extreme measure. Just over 2 weeks ago I did the unthinkable, I installed a mini max for a day and drove around town just to get used to it. Then I went the ultiment step and removed all the EGR and DPF using the mini max to erase the 6-8 codes that poped up. It all worked with no problems. I also installed an exhaust probe pre-turbo. The EGR cooler has some very well hidden bolts that I finally found and had to remove the cooler 1st to get a wrench on another 15mm bolt at the front that was inaccessable. Had to drop the crossmember to get the down pipe out but H&S provided excelent instructions for the whole procedure. In the most recent issue of TDR I read a study by Robert Patton that I had only gained maybe . 5MPG by taking this step. That is by using the Mini max on stock settings and that is what I intended to do. At the same time I am left wondering why my 2011 6. 7 gets 3-6 MPG less that my 2003?
Yesterday, I had an awaking moment, a change of thinking. Lets get to the results part.
So I'm coming home Yesterday in Missouri on I-55 and the road is just flat-flat, no wind, no pulling a load, and I thought this would be the perfect time to see if a mild setting might make a difference on fuel economy. I was almost convinced it wouldn't. Cruise set on 71MPH, MPG reading of 16. 4, I reset it, still reads 16. 4. So on the fly I bumped the mini max to a mild setting, I watch the bar graph rise to 18+, I reset it and yes there it is at 18. 4. I said, " No way, I don't believe this!" So I did this numerious times to verify to myself what I saw, allowing a minute each time. Wow it was like magic, each time I watched the bar graph rise and then fall as I switched settings. I also tried hot and wildest settings but they gave me the same results as mild so I decided mild would do. Then I observed the engine guages and what they read when I did this. The fuel rail preasure and boost remaned the same, only the pyrometer tempature went up 50 degrees and would drop 50 degrees as I switched settings. This was very exciting for me as I thought the fuel rail preasure would be the one raising. (perhaps it would be if I was pulling a hill). I conclude from this that I am using the same amount of power in both settings, but the mild setting is producing a more efficient burn of the fuel, not by raising the fuel rail preasure but it is perhaps doing this by injection timing, injection pulse, width ,and duration or even perhaps number of pulses per event. I do remember reading that cummins stock injection events are focused on pleasing the EPA and sacraficing economy to do this. So I futher conclude that Mini-max focuses on 1st getting the most efficent burn from a drop of diesel then maybe it will raise the fuel rail preasure for more power or in hotter settings. I decided to do a futher economy test. From the southern tip of Illinios, Cairo to Chicago, 360 miles I would run a mild setting with cruise set on 65. 5MPH, verifyed by my GPS. I knew the best I could hope for on stock settings would be tops of 18. 0 MPG. On my 2003 truck I could get 20-21MPG. So I did this test, not using air conditioning, temp was 60s, no wind, then side wind, then slight tail wind. All in all for this test I will just say the wind was neutral. So 360 miles later what MPG reading did I have? (not hand calculated) 21. 0 MPG on a 2011 6. 7... This is quiet pleasing for me. ( I admit if someone else told me this, I probably would not beleive it) So I know what setting I will be using from now on coming home empty. I don't know yet if I will use this or stock setting for pulling trailers, it will depend on the size of the trailer and conditions. I have my defuel pyro set at 1200 degrees. I think that might be completly safe for longivity. The Mini-Max is worth it for me so far. How about some stage 1 injectors?
Yesterday, I had an awaking moment, a change of thinking. Lets get to the results part.
So I'm coming home Yesterday in Missouri on I-55 and the road is just flat-flat, no wind, no pulling a load, and I thought this would be the perfect time to see if a mild setting might make a difference on fuel economy. I was almost convinced it wouldn't. Cruise set on 71MPH, MPG reading of 16. 4, I reset it, still reads 16. 4. So on the fly I bumped the mini max to a mild setting, I watch the bar graph rise to 18+, I reset it and yes there it is at 18. 4. I said, " No way, I don't believe this!" So I did this numerious times to verify to myself what I saw, allowing a minute each time. Wow it was like magic, each time I watched the bar graph rise and then fall as I switched settings. I also tried hot and wildest settings but they gave me the same results as mild so I decided mild would do. Then I observed the engine guages and what they read when I did this. The fuel rail preasure and boost remaned the same, only the pyrometer tempature went up 50 degrees and would drop 50 degrees as I switched settings. This was very exciting for me as I thought the fuel rail preasure would be the one raising. (perhaps it would be if I was pulling a hill). I conclude from this that I am using the same amount of power in both settings, but the mild setting is producing a more efficient burn of the fuel, not by raising the fuel rail preasure but it is perhaps doing this by injection timing, injection pulse, width ,and duration or even perhaps number of pulses per event. I do remember reading that cummins stock injection events are focused on pleasing the EPA and sacraficing economy to do this. So I futher conclude that Mini-max focuses on 1st getting the most efficent burn from a drop of diesel then maybe it will raise the fuel rail preasure for more power or in hotter settings. I decided to do a futher economy test. From the southern tip of Illinios, Cairo to Chicago, 360 miles I would run a mild setting with cruise set on 65. 5MPH, verifyed by my GPS. I knew the best I could hope for on stock settings would be tops of 18. 0 MPG. On my 2003 truck I could get 20-21MPG. So I did this test, not using air conditioning, temp was 60s, no wind, then side wind, then slight tail wind. All in all for this test I will just say the wind was neutral. So 360 miles later what MPG reading did I have? (not hand calculated) 21. 0 MPG on a 2011 6. 7... This is quiet pleasing for me. ( I admit if someone else told me this, I probably would not beleive it) So I know what setting I will be using from now on coming home empty. I don't know yet if I will use this or stock setting for pulling trailers, it will depend on the size of the trailer and conditions. I have my defuel pyro set at 1200 degrees. I think that might be completly safe for longivity. The Mini-Max is worth it for me so far. How about some stage 1 injectors?
</O
