Re: Re: RE: Defending 3.9L (WAS "Found 3 mpg")

From: andy levy (andy-dml@levyclan.us)
Date: Thu Apr 29 2004 - 00:12:57 EDT


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 4/28/2004 9:28 PM, Bill Day wrote:

| Well whats so heavy about a ram vs a durango? The durango does have more
| body then the ram,

The Dak-based Durangos may have more enclosed area, but they're shorter
and narrower. While it's not a really solid comparison, my father's '04
QC 2500 (w/ HEMI) came in at about 6200 pounds IIRC, while his Durango
(w/ 360) is a little under 5000. Both 4x4s. A 1500 will be lighter than
the 2500, but not 1500 pounds lighter.

| It all reverts back to what they put in the gearing and what the final
tire
| diameter is of the vehicle being tested. Just because you run 35's,
doesnt
| mean you have to get 5 mpg, there is always something to help you, change
| the gears to 5.xx and at least go back to double digits maybe high teens.

Aerodynamics will *kill* your gas mileage once you start putting bigger
tires on. You can reclaim some via gears, but you can't entirely
compensate for it.

- --
- -andy

http://home.twcny.rr.com/andylevy/dakota - andy-dml@levyclan.us
- --------------------------------------------
"Whatever Adam does, do the opposite and you'll be fine"
        -Bob Tom
- --------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFAkIDJxPJNBidNgHkRAo78AJ9OGhtOnGoXaCTEWons62sdu515FwCffU1U
TAV+cLT6JNlP7FjgJ4hnQ3M=
=gDSt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat May 01 2004 - 12:00:18 EDT