More crank sensor mileage results.......

[Sarge]

More interesting results from the ROKK tech crank position sensor I installed the day before I left on an extended RV tow vacation. So far I have traveled about 1500 miles. The sensor has performed as I had hoped. The only testing that I have been able to conduct so far is with 12,000 pounds of RV hooked up. Also thrown in the mix is the EZ that I am running along with the ROKK tech sensor.



So far, I have been pleased with the results. Since the addition of the sensor, my towing MPG is up at least 1 MPG. My usual numbers towing with this rig were 7. 5 to 8. 5 per gallon, depending on terrain. The truck always pulled strong, especially with the EZ, but the MPG has not been spectacular. I accepted this due to the fact that I have a seriously heavy truck, with LOTS of rolling resistance. The first tank with the new sensor installed, pulling a strech of I-8, E/B towards El Centro has always been a killer. Some 4 to 5 mile long 6% to 7% grades humble many trucks. The Ram used to get in the low 7 MPG range with the 5ver in tow. (Note that I am in the 20K to 21K range with the fiver hooked up. )



The first tow resulted in 8. 5 MPG under the same conditions. About the last 75 miles of this section, I switched the EZ From the lowest setting to the mid level position (tow position). I saw no real detectable power increase, but the EGT's did jump.



On the next leg of the trip I switched the EZ to the lowest setting and set the cruise on 65 MPH, A/C on, and rolled through the Arizona desert at 111 degrees on the overhead. 300 miles later I checked the MPG at the next destination. I was elated to see 9. 5 MPG for the tank!! The terrain was rolling, and finished at 4600 feet in Sierra Vista, Arizona. The truck pulled hard, never missed a beat, and the EGT's were respectable. On some of the longer grades, I would see EGT's between 1300 and 1400 degrees. (This is with the cruise still on)



Always wanting more, I disconnected the EZ for the next leg of the trip. I wanted to see if the MPG would increase if the EZ was not pumping extra fuel into the rail, although I expected a decrease in power. The next leg of the trip was similar to the last. 295 miles, rolling desert, cruise set on 65 MPH, A/C on, and about 100 degrees. I noticed a obivious lack of power on take off with the fiver attached, and on a significant grade I had to downshift to 5th instead of pulling in 6th as I would have prior. The EGT's were noticibly lower though, as much as 200 degrees in most conditions.



The real surprise came when I refueled 301 miles later. The caculator showed that the MPG was exactly the same! 9. 5 MPG at the fill up the next morning. The power lost with the EZ disconnected was obivious. However, the MPG did not increase with the EZ not pumping in the extra fuel. My conclusion is that the ROKK tech sensor installed was definitely worth the investment. The power and fuel mileage promise was delivered. With or without the EZ, the sensor is worth the bucks. With the new sensor, I have realized about a 1 MPG increase in fuel economy. That translates into about 3 gallons of fuel saved per fill up. At the prices of fuel these days, thats about 7 to 8 dollars a fill. The power is nice, and the investment is small. I shoud more than pay for the investment on this trip.



I do have to say that I have no connection to ROKK tech. I just wanted to pass on a good BOMB to the members, that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. Paul at ROKK tech is very helpful, and responds quickly to questions. Take care, Sarge



One thing I forgot to mention. If you do purchase a new sensor, it will not come with an "O" ring on it like the current one. That is because you don't use it on the new install. The instructions were not real clear on that part. Other than that, it's simple.

 

[Sarge]

As a follow up I reconnected the EZ the next morning and drove another 260 miles. The MPG came in at 9. 2. However, I did hit some good grades, and pushed the cummins pretty hard. Big Red pulled all the grades at 65 mph+. I guess that goes to prove that if you got it, your going to use it!!

 

[slomodiesel]

hey Sarge,

does the "ROKK teck crank position sensor" adjust the timing? i have a friend that i work with that isn't interested in any more power, but just wants to improve the milage. I've been serching for a box that only adjusts the timing or one that adjusts the timing on low level. i told him that i read somewhere that just advancing the timing would help mileage and add about 30 hp.

thanks,

SLOMO

 

[nickleinonen]

hey Sarge,

does the "ROKK teck crank position sensor" adjust the timing? i have a friend that i work with that isn't interested in any more power, but just wants to improve the milage. I've been serching for a box that only adjusts the timing or one that adjusts the timing on low level. i told him that i read somewhere that just advancing the timing would help mileage and add about 30 hp.

thanks,

SLOMO

it advances the timing mechanically by about 2°. you can do the same for free by modifing the tone wheel behind the damper... file/grind the CCW side of the dowel hole and that will allow you to rotate the tone wheel clockwise a good bit [about 2. 5°-3° before the 4 mounting bolts touch the holes in the tone wheel]

 

[Sarge]

Yes it does adjust the timing as Nick says, and I have heard about the mod that Nick talks about as well. However, I chose to buy another sensor in case I wanted to undo the mod as some time. The sensor is pretty reasonable, and you can save yours to reinstall if you wanted to. Or, you can send them yours and they will modify it and send it back. Either way you go, this has worked out to be a simple mod that does increase the mpg. As posted above I have tested it hard the last week, and it has performed. For the money it's a good investment.

 

[COSEng]

Where are these sensors sold?



Can they (should they) be used with chips

that also advance timing??? Thoughts?



Carl

 

[F-15I Ra'am]

Where are these sensors sold?



Can they (should they) be used with chips

that also advance timing??? Thoughts?



Carl

www.rokktech.com

 

[Sarge]

Where are these sensors sold?



Can they (should they) be used with chips

that also advance timing??? Thoughts?



Carl

The box I use from Edge is not a timing box, so I don't know if that would matter or not. The sensor makes about a 2 degree advance on the crank, according to Paul at ROKK tech. This is where the additional MPG and torque comes from. Maybe DLeno on the board would be able to answer that question for you.

 

[AndyMan]

Where are these sensors sold?

Can they (should they) be used with chips
that also advance timing??? Thoughts?

Carl

so far it looks like EZ and all Quad boxes...

http://www.rokktech.com/_mgxroot/page_10442.html

 

[COSEng]

I had seen that Quad was listed.



I am just curious if a litte timing advance is good... . Is more better?

How much is too much?



DLeno has suggessted there is 30hp available from timing. I am assuming

the Quad chips advance to take advantage of most of this 30 HP. Does

advancing futher help fuel economy? At what point is the timing advanced

too far. What are the disadvantages? Increased EGT's???



I find this very interesting, but don't have the knowelege I need to

answer my own questions.



Thanks,

Carl

 

[AndyMan]

I know hot 12 Valves like 16* of timing. Not sure that I've heard what people have decided HPCR's like.

 

[Sarge]

Too much timing will result in engine knock. It would be easy to tell, and very appearent.

 

[JTurk]

Just installed the sensor Wed. night. I have a Quad XZT, which helped to fill in the bottom end. The sensor seems to help that part some more. (Now almost as good as my old '96 w/Banks PowerPack). Anyway, today I filled up in town and in the 21 miles home it looks like about . 5 MPG increase. But, while watching the console, there seems to be more mileage increase at 70 than at 55. Before the sensor my best mileage point was at about 55. Will be putting the TT (29'er) on day after tomorrow for the real test!

Jay

 

[Mrudolph]

My mileage has gone up approx 3. 3 mpg so far (1 tank) mostly in town, I can now start in third gear that previously took lots of throttle and slipping of the clutch, exhaust temps at 55 have dropped from just under 600 degrees to a hair under 500. I leave for a trip tuesday morning and will see what the highway mileage looks like. So far this is the second best purchase, my current truck is #1. .

 

[JohnnyH]

I have a silly question. If the sensor does all these things, why dosent cummins do this from the factory. I'm assuming emmisions, and I have to emmision test my truck in NY.

 

[nickleinonen]

I have a silly question. If the sensor does all these things, why dosent cummins do this from the factory. I'm assuming emmisions, and I have to emmision test my truck in NY.

you got it right. it is for emissions the engine timing is retarted from optimal performace timing. . it won't effect your emission testing really. they test for particulate emissions in the testing. the timing bump won't really effect that.

 

[Tony T.]

Could this also be the reason on totally stock trucks that maybe the difference in mileage advantage from one truck to the other is maybe the timing is slightly advanced or slightly retarded from factory settings causing some people to get better mileage than others. Or is it just simply driving habits and enviroment.



Tony

 

[JTurk]

Because the sensor is a stock sensor that has had one side machined out to allow for offsetting, all you have to do for emissions testing is loosten the mounting screw, slide the sensor to the stock position, and tighten. After passing the test, reverse the process.

 

[Vaughn MacKenzie]

The less-than optimal timing is to reduce NOx emissions. NOx is formed at high combustion temps, so injection is delayed to a point where less peak cylinder pressure will result when combustion occurs. It is an engineering challenge to keep NOx in check and still get decent fuel economy and maintain PM emissions.



What I would like to know is how bad NOx really is. I think it forms Ozone in the higher atmosphere? Is it a carcinogen (suspected or proven?).



Vaughn

 

[Matt400]

What I would like to know is how bad NOx really is. I think it forms Ozone in the higher atmosphere?

Yes, but one thing I always wonder is the trade off significant enough?

By that I mean, if you lower NOx "X" amount with 2 degrees retarded timing yet you have to burn more fuel to go the same distance you also emit a certain amount of NOx as that added fuel is used so is the trade off really there for the atmosphere?