# Can't Hold Speed...sometimes



## TexasHunts (Jul 31, 2005)

Ok.....I know I'm near the top of my towing capability. But a new TV isn't in the cards right now.

Just got back from a long trip and I was having trouble holding my speed. First off, I tow in 3 gr in towing mode. On flat terrain, I'd get speed to about 70 in 2nd. It'd gr up to 3rd. Gas pedal is pressed just to the point of not gring down. Speed would slow to about 62 and gr down for the climb back to about 70. this was 5-15 minute cycles depending on circumstances. I had a good head wind heading down there and a cross wind coming back.

Other times I can hum right along w/o any problems. I'm a bit confused but in the end I basically think I'm too close to my max or at it.

Is there anything I can do such as install some performance items like chips, exhaust etc. to help out?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## 7heaven (Jun 4, 2005)

Do you really want to two consistently at 70 mph? What if you just stick to 60-62 mph?


----------



## campmg (Dec 24, 2005)

What engine and gears do you have in the Burb? You're pulling a large trailer.

Most would say to tow at 60 - 62 anyway. 70 is pretty fast and some states have lower posted limits when towing. For example CA is 55.


----------



## Morrowmd (Feb 22, 2005)

I don't know your exact setup but it sounds like you have the 5.3L engine and either 3:42 or 3:73 rear end.

Your best bet might be getting a 4:10 rear end installed in your Burb. That should get you a little more towing capacity.

If your goal is to cruise along at 70mph, you probably need a 3/4 ton truck with a big block or diesel engine.

Good luck and happy Outbacking!


----------



## PDX_Doug (Nov 16, 2004)

TexasHunts,

I know it's Texas - wide open spaces and all - but I'm with 7heaven and campmg, you might just try towing a little slower. As a practical matter, due to aerodynamic loading, the power - and fuel burn - required to tow at that speed is way out of porportion to the added benefit those extra MPH are getting you. From a safety standpoint, well...

As far as mods to your TV, in order to get enough of a power increase to really make a difference, you are probably looking at some form of supercharging. At which point, a new TV might be in the cards!









Happy Trails,
Doug


----------



## Highlander96 (Mar 1, 2005)

If you are mashing the gas to keep 70 it make sense that the gears are searching.









You mention speeds, but how many RPM are you turning? I allow a constant pressure on the gas and the transmission makes the decision where to shift. I have noticed that if I try to "Hammer Down" the gears will search and not hold constant.........

Like someone else said........Are you sure you want to two that fast??????????

Happy Outbacking!

Tim

BTW....Tell us more about your truck. i.e. Engine size and gear set


----------



## GoVols (Oct 7, 2005)

Just this week I can attest to the powerful force that a headwind has on towing capability. We left for FLA a week ago, driving into a typical 8-10 mph southern breeze generated by one of those "Bermuda Highs". I felt like I was dragging a large parachute!

I couldn't do anything about the breeze, and my gas mileage suffered: around 7.4 mpg. I was in 2nd gear often on the hills, barely being able to keep 50 mph.

Coming back home yesterday, I was just driving too fast in retrospect. I had no problem keeping 70 mph on the flats. I guess I was in a hurry to get the long drive over with. Gas mileage wasn't as bad, but still less than 10. On the hills I didn't press as hard, keeping the truck out of 2nd gear if possible and still maintaining a safe interstate speed.

You mentioned 70 mph in 2nd gear. Really? My Chevy is turning nearly 4000 rpm in 2nd gear at 50 mph. Can't imagine doing 70 in 2nd?


----------



## Ghosty (Jan 17, 2005)

70??


----------



## nascarcamper (Jan 27, 2005)

I'm guilty of towing too fast myself. I questioned the safety of towing mine back from the keys. It hurts the mileage terribly but as you all know if you're on the interstate and you're not running at least 75 you're getting blown away by the tractor trailers.


----------



## TexasHunts (Jul 31, 2005)

Thanks everyone....I'll try to hit everyone's questions back...

In 2nd @ 70 mph I think I remember around 4500 rpms. I didn't look at it specifically to remember it.

Current engine and gear ratio? I don't recall off hand and I'm at work. (DW's car) I'll have to check tonight and post. However, the rpm's and speed from above suggests a low gear ratio.

As far as the speed we all drive goes, respectfully, we all have our own reasons for driving the speeds we do. I prefer to dirve 65- 70 in most cases and these are some of the issues I'm running into trying to accomplish that.

Thanks for your thoughts..

I'm going to look into $'s to swap out the gears.


----------



## NJMikeC (Mar 29, 2006)

Your opening sentence said it all. Too much trailer, too little truck. 29' is way into 3/4 ton territory and way past 5.3L Chevy territory. As others have correctly noted , why 70? The faster you go the more the aerodynamic horsepower hurts you.

I forget the exact formula but it includes drag coefficient, frontal area and speed. You have the latter 2 working against you in great measure up to the point that the drag coefficient doesn't even matter.

I can add one thing. If you persist in operating that truck at those speeds you will be in your new TV quicker then you know.


----------



## campmg (Dec 24, 2005)

nascarcamper said:


> I'm guilty of towing too fast myself. I questioned the safety of towing mine back from the keys. It hurts the mileage terribly but as you all know if you're on the interstate and you're not running at least 75 you're getting blown away by the tractor trailers.
> [snapback]125419[/snapback]​


You don't have to keep up with the semi's. They're professional drivers getting paid to deliver a load. You on the other hand are on vacation and should be enjoying yourselves. I can usually go slow on my trip out but fight the urge to speed it up to get home quicker. Rather be safe than sorry.


----------



## stapless (Feb 20, 2005)

if your 'burb has the 5.3 engine, then your experience is the same as mine was with my truck. a really strong headwind can limit you to 50 - 55 mph. the 6.0 in DW's 3/4 ton 'burb solved it very nicely. can go 62 in overdrive with the cruise control on







!!

i also agree, 70 MPH is pushing it







. I rarely go much over 60. safer for my family and all those around you.

remember, wind resistence goes up exponentially as you go faster. going from 10 - 20 MPH is much less of an increase in wind resistance vs. going from 60 - 70.

stay safe!!

scott


----------



## GoVols (Oct 7, 2005)

After this week's long trip, I have figured out my truck will "naturally" tow our 26RS around 60-65 mph. It has no problems towing at 70 in 3rd gear, but gas mileage suffers. All bets are off with a head wind.

I'm settling into a decision to tow 60 to 65 mph, keeping above 60 so as to allow Tow/Haul to shift into OD.

I will also try to do long trips on the interstates on Sundays too, since there are very few trucks on the roads on Sunday.

I will also add that with my Equalizer setup, the OB is a breeze to tow, like it is not even back there! The semis going past is the only thing to cause me to "tighten my grip" on the wheel.


----------



## tdvffjohn (Mar 10, 2005)

I also have no problem towing 70 mph ......weather, volume, road and traffic conditions permitting. I also believe you should drive at whatever speed you can relax while doing. If you are white knuckled and nerveous, you should drive at a slower speed. I have pulled most every size and trailer size made and we all have a different skill level.


----------



## Grunt0311 (Aug 23, 2005)

I think what it really comes down to is that you realize that your trailer is too much for your TV. And, by not being able to keep a steady speed, your TV is also telling you it is too much. No disrespect intended, but I think in order to solve the problem, you need to either get a bigger TV, or drive a little slower.

Just my 2 cents!

Bill


----------



## 1stTimeAround (Sep 22, 2004)

Aaahhhh, seems like only yesterday that many of us were rationalizing our new TV!! This is how the fever starts!









I gotta go 70 MPH, monthly payment be da*%ed!!









If you want to tow, with ease, and a piece of mind, I would recommend a 3/4 ton of some type and certainly take a look into the diesel market. I have been thoroughly satisfied with my diesel, both as a TV and a daily commuter, since purchasing it because I would have been over my limits.

The one thing that concerns me more than even the speed issue, is the proximity to your weight limits. Many on the board know that 99% of the reason I have two new trucks is because the first new one plus the camper was within 20 lbs of my GCVWR, empty!!!









Maybe decreasing the amount of stuff your taking, or slowing your speed are the short term fixes for the issue at hand.

I learned from someone on this board that when camping, your vacation doesn't start when you get there, it starts when you get in the truck to go. With that said, sit back, relax and enjoy the journey!









Good luck with your decision!

Jason


----------



## Humpty (Apr 20, 2005)

TexasHunts:

I know that feeling all to well. My 5.3L - 3:73 combo will not hold that speed either will pulling our 28BHS.

Best bet would probably be to go the 4:10 gear ratio.

If you do that, let us know. A bunch of us have that on the wish list.


----------



## wolfwood (Sep 19, 2005)

TexasHunts said:


> As far as the speed we all drive goes, respectfully, we all have our own reasons for driving the speeds we do. I prefer to dirve 65- 70 in most cases and these are some of the issues I'm running into trying to accomplish that.
> [snapback]125423[/snapback]​


I agree, the speed we all drive is a personal preference and, when driving my car, both I and my car prefer 65-75 (the Stateys, on the other hand, have a different opinion







)

However, whether or not I would "prefer" to tow at that speed has little to do with whether or not my TV can handle it well - not to mention the increased risk that I know we would be at (that would be - me, my family, and everyone else on the road around me.) We have a 25RSS with a Hensley Arrow hitch & Prodigy b/c(AWESOME pieces of engineering!) and our Toyota 4Runner (Sport / V8) handles 60 through the White Mtns (that's ALOT of climbing up and drops down on the other side) in 3rd gear at 3000rpm max with the TT in tow....and we get an avg 12mpg rather than the 8 at the higher speed. That combination, plus the added safety, is enough to convince me that the (perhaps) 1/2 hr of driving time that going faster might save, is enough to convince us that our "preference" is not necessarily the wisest measure.


----------



## cookie9933 (Feb 26, 2005)

Below is a spreadsheet that contains formulas to calculate horsepower needed under various conditions. The bold numbers are the variables that are entered. In your case, assuming 500 feet elevation (maximum), 2% grade (maximum), 10 mph headwind (maximum), 13,500 GCWR and driving at 70 mph, it requires about 310 horsepower. That is about all your 5.3 liter Suburban has. Under those conditions, you are flogging your engine for all it's worth. Any greater headwind or elevation or grade and you won't be able to maintain 70 mph.

Advise you get more truck, or else slow down some.

*HORSEPOWER ESTIMATOR*

Enter the following information: 
Maximum Height (in inches)	*121* Enter the height of the tallest vehicle
Maximum Width (in inches)	*96* Enter the width of the widest vehicle
Minimum Ground Clearance (in inches)	*14* Enter the ground clearance for the vehicle that sits the closest to the ground
Desired speed (mph)	*70*
Anticipated headwind (mph)	*10* Note: Tailwind does not help like headwinds hurt.
Anticipated grade (steepness) of the road	*2%* For level ground, enter 0
Total combined weight (in pounds, tow vehicle and trailer) *13,500*

Elevation (in feet) *500* 
Elevation factor	*2%* 0% for turbo-charged or super-charged diesel engines, 2% for gas and non turbo-charged or super-charged diesel engines.

DO NOT ENTER BELOW THIS LINE

Horsepower needed to combat: 
Rolling resistance	43.83	(Speed x combined weight x (6.75 + (0.074 x Speed))) / 375,000
Air resistance	165.57	(Frontal area x Speed x Speed x Speed x drag coefficient) / 375
Grade resistance	57.60	(Speed x %Grade x combined weight) / 37,500
Elevation	-2.67	(Elevation / 1000) * Elevation factor

*310.12	Total horsepower required*.

Bill


----------



## W4DRR (May 17, 2005)

cookie9933 said:


> Below is a spreadsheet that contains formulas to calculate horsepower needed under various conditions. The bold numbers are the variables that are entered. In your case, assuming 500 feet elevation (maximum), 2% grade (maximum), 10 mph headwind (maximum), 13,500 GCWR and driving at 70 mph, it requires about 310 horsepower. That is about all your 5.3 liter Suburban has. Under those conditions, you are flogging your engine for all it's worth. Any greater headwind or elevation or grade and you won't be able to maintain 70 mph.
> 
> Advise you get more truck, or else slow down some.
> 
> ...


_"And you can't be changin' the laws of Physics."_


----------



## wolfwood (Sep 19, 2005)

Cookie9933 - that's cool!


----------



## TexasHunts (Jul 31, 2005)

That is cool Cookie9933....not to mention eye opening.

Good food for thought.

Thanks


----------



## 3LEES (Feb 18, 2006)

W4DRR said:


> cookie9933 said:
> 
> 
> > Below is a spreadsheet that contains formulas to calculate horsepower needed under various conditions.Â The bold numbers are the variables that are entered.Â In your case, assuming 500 feet elevation (maximum), 2% grade (maximum), 10 mph headwind (maximum), 13,500 GCWR and driving at 70 mph, it requires about 310 horsepower.Â That is about all your 5.3 liter Suburban has.Â Under those conditions, you are flogging your engine for all it's worth. Any greater headwind or elevation or grade and you won't be able to maintain 70 mph.
> ...


I canna do it Captain, the dilithium crystals are gone!


----------



## cookie9933 (Feb 26, 2005)

For contrast, here is the horsepower needed to run at 60 mph. All other variables left the same.

*HORSEPOWER ESTIMATOR*

Enter the following information: 
Maximum Height (in inches)	*121* Enter the height of the tallest vehicle
Maximum Width (in inches)	*96* Enter the width of the widest vehicle
Minimum Ground Clearance (in inches)	*14* Enter the ground clearance for the vehicle that sits the closest to the ground
Desired speed (mph)	*60* 
Anticipated headwind (mph)	*10* Note: Tailwind does not help like headwinds hurt.
Anticipated grade (steepness) of the road	*2%* For level ground, enter 0
Total combined weight (in pounds, tow vehicle and trailer) *13,500 *

Elevation (in feet) *500 * 
Elevation factor	*2%* 0% for turbo-charged or super-charged diesel engines, 2% for gas and non turbo-charged or super-charged diesel engines.

DO NOT ENTER BELOW THIS LINE 
Horsepower needed to combat: 
Rolling resistance	36.11	(Speed x combined weight x (6.75 + (0.074 x Speed))) / 375,000
Air resistance	110.92	(Frontal area x Speed x Speed x Speed x drag coefficient) / 375
Grade resistance	50.40	(Speed x %Grade x combined weight) / 37,500
Elevation	-1.97	(Elevation / 1000) * Elevation factor
*229.32	Total horsepower required.*

With your engine making about 80 less horsepower, it'll be happier.

Bill


----------



## W4DRR (May 17, 2005)

Just out of curiosity, what are you using for the drag coefficient? Since it is not published by Outback, is it just a SWAG? (That's Scientific Wild-A** Guess for the non-technical types). Since the frontal area is curved, it is not as bad as a flat surface.
But this is right....it is all about physics. No magic. It boils down to so much energy (HP) to pull so much weight with a certain wind drag at a certain speed.
And as I quoted Scotty in a previous post...."You can't change the laws of physics."

Bob


----------



## Doxie-Doglover (Apr 19, 2006)

ok, here goes, at the risk of making you mad(for which I apologize but I just can't not say what's on my mind), here is my concern about your need for speed when towing THOUSANDS OF POUNDS behind you that will ultimately have control when you lose control (law of physics)...........here it is:

DW
DS (10)
DS (8)
DD (4)
Dog (Mini Aussie)

there, I said it and know it's said with kindness and caring....Tawnya


----------



## Grunt0311 (Aug 23, 2005)

Doxie-Doglover said:


> ok, here goes, at the risk of making you mad(for which I apologize but I just can't not say what's on my mind), here is my concern about your need for speed when towing THOUSANDS OF POUNDS behind you that will ultimately have control when you lose control (law of physics)...........here it is:
> 
> DW
> DS (10)
> ...


Well said Tawnya









Bill


----------



## tdvffjohn (Mar 10, 2005)

As I said, weather, road conditions, volume and traffic dictate speed and safety . If I drove a tractor trailer with a gross of 75,000 lbs 40 hrs a week at 65 -70, going 60 all day with 15,000 lb gross tt and camper ...............

99 % of problems happen from people around you no matter what your speed is and yes you can argue that the extra speed will contribute if you are in an accident. Taken into acct I was in a head on collision in Brooklyn NY and I was coasting to a red light at 20 mph and had a car slide in front of me. If I was doing 50 mph , he would have missed me.







as I would have been further down the road.


----------



## TexasHunts (Jul 31, 2005)

Doxie, not mad at you. I am a bit surprised though. I know you said it out of concern but to hear someone on this board suggest or imply that I don't care about my family as much as you is disappointing.

There are many factors and variables to any and all accidents and speed is just one of them. No, I can't change physics. I can't change the physics of a another car hitting me, causing an accident in front of me or the semi sucking me into his lane while he drives by at 80mph. I've always felt that it is safer for me, my family and others sharing the road with me to drive at a speed that is comporable to others around me and dictated by the conditions I'm driving in. Going too slow is just as potentially disruptive and likely to cause an accident as driving too fast. I use good judgement to determine how I drive.

Thank you for your input. I don't say the above out of anger but concern that you misunderstand me.

cookie, WOW, that's quite a big difference. Didn't realize. Thanks

Thanks everyone, you've given me alot to think about to solve my towing problem.


----------



## campmg (Dec 24, 2005)

All I can say is that I'm impressed with the members of this forum. The posts in this thread show care for each other, are mature, well written, and not flaming toward each other. This afterall is the purpose by exchanging thoughts with each other.


----------



## PDX_Doug (Nov 16, 2004)

campmg said:


> All I can say is that I'm impressed with the members of this forum. The posts in this thread show care for each other, are mature, well written, and not flaming toward each other. This afterall is the purpose by exchanging thoughts with each other.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree campmg! I think that is what keeps a lot of us coming back to the forum. It is a thin line between maintaining respect and politcal correctness (the future death of our society, I'm convinced) and being able to give honest, informed and sometimes blunt perspectives/opinions. It never ceases to amaze me how well we - on a daily basis - traverse that tightrope. Congratulations to all of us!









Bob's point about the previous equation (coefficient of drag, etc.) is well taken. There are several variables there that we can not accurately provide. What the formula does show, regardless of the accuracy of the numbers input, is the significant increases in power required to gain just a little bit more speed. The higher the speed, the greater this disparity becomes.

I remember reading years ago about the development of the Blue Flame land speed record car. The main fuselage of the car was a very small radius cylinder (basically a missle on it's side) just barely big enough around for the driver to squeeze into. When asked why they did not make it a little bigger to better accomodate the driver, it was noted that at the near supersonic speed the car would be traveling, every additional inch of diameter would require something along the lines of an additional 2,000 horsepower to over come the added aerodynamic drag! An extreme example for sure, but illustrative as well.









Happy Trails,
Doug


----------



## Morrowmd (Feb 22, 2005)

cookie9933 said:


> For contrast, here is the horsepower needed to run at 60 mph. All other variables left the same.
> 
> Horsepower needed to combat:
> Rolling resistance	36.11	(Speed x combined weight x (6.75 + (0.074 x Speed))) / 375,000
> ...


Great info, Bill.

I might add that a happy engine usually lives a long productive life.









-Matt


----------



## W4DRR (May 17, 2005)

PDX_Doug said:


> campmg said:
> 
> 
> > All I can say is that I'm impressed with the members of this forum.Â The posts in this thread show care for each other, are mature, well written, and not flaming toward each other.Â This afterall is the purpose by exchanging thoughts with each other.Â
> ...


And if I'm not mistaken, according to the formula given, the speed is CUBED when calculating Air Resistance. In other words, a doubling of speed would be 8 times the drag.

Unless, of course, your Outback is on a conveyor belt, travelling backward.


----------



## HTQM (May 31, 2006)

Another note;

Even though your TV is an '05, I learned it doesn't take long to rack up a lot of miles in Texas. Tune-ups aren't limited to just oil, plugs and wires; the sensors need tlc as well. Not sure if the owners manual gives the change mileage for Oxygen sensors, MAF (mass air flow even though thats a Ford term I think), speed density etc.. Question would be, does the TV run as good as it used to? does it seem to have good days and bad? Worked on a '00 V8 camaro a week or so ago, no "codes" from the computer but it wasn't up to it's ole self. $5 worth of MAF spray and minimul work to remove and reinstall the MAF later... ran like a scalded dog (his words) The dirt that made it past the filter stuck to the sensor, not bad enough to get an error code but greatly effected the computer inputs. Same can happen to o2 sensors etc... 
Good indicator is how it acts in deferent air temps and humidity, if the computer isn't reading these slight changes correctly then it can't make the appropriate injector pulse, timing etc.. changes. Thus a weak power feel and "hunting"transmission looking for the right gear to do what your asking.

I'm not a certified mechanic but I did stay in Holiday Inn Express and my $.01 (DW took the other penny away from me).

Best-o-luck
Dave


----------



## tdvffjohn (Mar 10, 2005)

So I wuld assume this was ' A penny for your thoughts'


----------



## TexasHunts (Jul 31, 2005)

HTQM said:


> I'm not a certified mechanic but I did stay in Holiday Inn Express and my $.01 (DW took the other penny away from me).
> 
> [snapback]125816[/snapback]​


here ya go ...........$.01

Now you can give $.02.









Good point on maintenance. And yes, it's real easy to put on alot of miles here.


----------



## HTQM (May 31, 2006)

I discovered the Texas mileage when I was stationed in Corpus, in-laws in El Paso and Grand-n-laws a little south-east of Houston. I've crossed three states in less time than it took to get to El Paso.

The MAF (again a Ford term I think) I cleaned was an aftermarket that the guy had put on a couple of years earlier... late '04 I think he said. Not sure about the set up on yours, some run a speed density sensor that can't be cleaned but does the same thing. I could hear the defrence in the idle when we were done, not to mention the throttle response. It's worth the $5 for the cleaner spray. Not trying to insult if you already know what/where it is; following the air "hose" from the filter to the intake (throttle body) there will be a hard plastic peice the same diameter as the air hose, approximately three inches wide... that is "if" it's the same type of mass air flow. Twon hose clamps and a wiring connection later it comes out.

The deference in the type of air "thickness" intake metering depends on the motor package that comes on the vehicle. Mass air flow is a lot more accurate and produces more HP but more expensive. Absence of that sensor adds a couple more cheaper ones that are less accurate but do the job.

Just my two cents (thanks for the loan, don't let the DW know)

Dave

PS. Does this sensor apply to deisels? Thats our next TV and know nothing about them... time to go to a Holiday Inn Express again.


----------



## TexasHunts (Jul 31, 2005)

Dave, The only engines I can work on are pre '86 Jeep CJ 258 6 cylinders. anything newer is a frying pan as far as I'm concerned.

In your sig is ...."Hypertech, Magnaflow exhaust, K&N FIPK"

Hypertech is computer programing mods that improve power or torque??
Magnaflow is self explainatory
K&N is an upgrade in the air filtration?

Did you see improvements with these changes?

Thanks


----------



## Sluggo54 (Jun 15, 2005)

"I forget the exact formula but it includes drag coefficient, frontal area and speed. You have the latter 2 working against you in great measure up to the point that the drag coefficient doesn't even matter."

My TV can quite happily pull my 5'er at speeds extra-legal in any state. I don't do that, because:

a. I ain't in a hurry.

b. 70 rather than 60 loses over 3 mpg, minimum, flat land no wind. No big thing for weekend camping runs, but that isn't what we do.

c. I am just more comfortable at 60, and so is DW, DDg, and all the physics of trailer interacting with crosswinds, semi's, frost heaves, etc.

d. I don't hold up traffic - if on a busy two lane posted 65, 65 it is. No real big deal.

e. I have enough time in semi's to know that while some drivers are a$$e$, most just want to get there, get offloaded, and head home for some time with kids and momma. On a four-lane, you are not disrupting them by driving 60 in a 75. They would rather you not be out there overdriving your equipment in a white-knuckled fog. That is good for nobody.

f. Don't make themistake of comparing your TV and your TT with a Peterbilt and a Dorsey. They are built specifically for hauling, with their own weight, 80,000 lbs down the interstate at the speed limit. No matter how cool your pickup and outback, both are compromises - they are not optimized for high-speed towing.

g. I ain't in a hurry.

In beautiful Sioux Falls for a couple days, then wandering westward. At 60.

Slug


----------



## cookie9933 (Feb 26, 2005)

Sluggo54 said:


> g. I ain't in a hurry.
> 
> In beautiful Sioux Falls for a couple days, then wandering westward. At 60.
> 
> ...


Sluggo,

Been to Sioux Falls many times over the years. Lots of fond memories. I'm not a town/city kind of guy, but if I *had *to live in town, Sioux Falls would get strong consideration. Have fun.

Bill


----------



## HTQM (May 31, 2006)

Texashunts,

Had a 72 CJ with the factory V8, now have 92 YJ (DW's toy). Hopped up and raced a 79 Rustang.. I now where your coming from when computer controlled motors are concerened.

The Magnaflow made a huge low end torque deference, added 2 mpg. This purchase was soley based on price. Magnaflow, Gibson, Flowmaster and Borla all have comparible flow numbers. Ebay is the place to buy, saved me $300 over buying it local. There is a sound volume (db) deference.

Installed the FIPK before I did the research, added 5 additional mpg BUT... my engine temp and high end where effected dramatically. To the point that the magnaflow stainless tip has blued. Had I researched I would have found out the Ford 5.4 three valve doesn't play well with the FIPK, the Airaid on the other hand is highly recommended. I know the "mod" I have to do to make the FIPK "look" just like the Airid.

Hypertech... It's going to take a long walk off a short peir. I can't break the rear tires lose on wet pavement and the mileage dropped back down below the OEM, mpg was figured using the 86 octane setting which is supposed to give you the increased mpg. Shifting was greatly improved and that is about the only good thing I can say. As soon as Superchip makes one for the '05 Exp I'm buying. Agian, though, research. I knew the superchip was better going in but they still don't have one due to the "roll control". The trip to Maryland was sans Hypertech and 6mpg, slow excelleration but steady run at 70 mph (everyone on the site, please don't kill me). The trip back was with Hypertech and 8mpg BUT... We came back down highway 17 with cruise set at 60 mph. Better takeoff power and shifting but I know the speed did the trick for the mpg.

These things do work for horepower. As you noticed though, research, research research.... Google is a great thing. The Airaid is slightly more for the Ford than FIPK but what I'm about to spend on a "mod" will make them even. Gibson exhaust sounds better to me but is more expensive and the flow numbers almost match. Superchip is a better programmer depending on TV manufacturer, best advice here is finding someone with each and compare notes.

To be very honest, I'm not a Chevy man. Hard core Ford my whole life. I'll help my shipmates fix anything to save them money, most vehicles are basically the same and my Uncle always said "If they can put it together, we can take it apart". A motor is a motor, "suck, bang blow", anything that "smoothes" that process will improve the output.

Hope this helps
Dave

PS, Already researched the next TV: F250 4x4 crewcab deisel.. Banks all the way. Banks six gun to be exact.


----------



## mountainlady56 (Feb 13, 2006)

TexasHunts said:


> Doxie, not mad at you.Â I am a bit surprised though.Â I know you said it out of concern but to hear someone on this board suggest or imply that I don't care about my family as much as you is disappointing.Â
> 
> There are many factors and variables to any and all accidents and speed is justÂ one of them.Â No, I can't change physics.Â I can't change the physics of a another car hitting me, causing an accident in front of me or the semi sucking me into his lane while he drives by at 80mph.Â I've always felt that it is safer for me, my family and others sharing the road with me to drive at a speed that is comporable to others around me and dictated by the conditions I'm driving in.Â Going too slow is just as potentially disruptive and likely to cause an accident as driving too fast.Â I use good judgement to determine how I drive.
> 
> ...


TexasHunts,
Keep in mind that Tawnya is just trying to remind you that getting there faster is not as important as the safety of you and your family, nor is keeping up with the semi. I did the same thing, when I first bought my TT, because I am, by nature, a speed demon. If the sign says 65, I'm gonna go 74!! If it says 70, I'm gonna go 79!! That is........until I started towing my TT!!
I've had a TT since 9/05, had to trade up from a GMC Sierra 1500 5.3L ext. cab with HD towing pkg., because, in all honesty, it just was NOT built to pull a 27RSDS without straining and wearing out ME and my transmission. Believe me, this was pretty disappointing after double-checking with both the TT dealer AND the car dealership I purchased my truck from, that the truck would handle the TT. Lost MEGABUCKS on that deal, not to mention my GMC was decked out!!
A tip about the semis.....(and I learned it from this site...it WORKS!)....give them plenty of space between you and them. Get as far as you safely can, in your lane, away from them, as the suction kinda forms in between, if not. 
I don't see where you mentioned sway bars in your posts. Do you have them?
I use the friction sway control, on my rig, and it does fine.....others go with different types.
I agree that going too slow can be "disruptive" to the traffic flow, but if you stay in the slow lane, which is where most of us stay in multi-lane traffic, except to pass, there's no problem.
Please don't take offense to any suggestions anyone makes to you. I've found that these are all good-hearted people with only YOUR best interest at heart, when they give suggestions. 
We've had posts of several tragic accidents, one hitting very close to home with one of the moderators (Jolly_Mon). Most of these accidents were caused by excessive speed, towing too big a TT with too small a TV, etc. 
Being a 50 yr. old divorced (x2, last one 9 yrs. ago) mom of 2, I found it pretty hard to take advice from a bunch of guys, when I first joined. But, guess what???
Now, I'm able to GIVE advice, as you will, too, in the future!!
Best of luck!
Darlene action


----------



## Doxie-Doglover (Apr 19, 2006)

sgalady said:


> TexasHunts said:
> 
> 
> > Doxie, not mad at you.Â I am a bit surprised though.Â I know you said it out of concern but to hear someone on this board suggest or imply that I don't care about my family as much as you is disappointing.Â
> ...


very well put by Darlene, we all care about each other. I Didn't imply you didn't care about your family, if you didn't, you wouldn't have posted to begin with. For most of us, "fast" driving and towing is a oxymoron. I am sure you whole heartedly have you families best interest at heart as we all do. Having to drive slower than normal and being in the right lane is a given, part of towing,granted, not at all times, but I believe is the common practice. Your choices fit you as ours fit us. The higher the speed you are traveling will require more time and space to react if you should need to. It's as simple as that. Beleive me, being the passenger at 55 mph when everyone is going on by, is no fun-I hate it, I have no patience. My husband is 31 years law enforcement and fully understands the time and space needed just towing and that more speed requires more time and space. 
If I offended you, I apologize, it wasn't my intentions by any means. 
I would have responded sooner, but I am still not getting response notifications.
Happy Outbacking and Have A Great Summer. Tawnya


----------



## N7OQ (Jun 10, 2006)

Ok well I myself am happy at 60mph but living here in Calif. it is hard to stay at that speed when everything passing you is going 80+++ We have a law that says trailers and Semi can only go 55. I really think that 55 is a little to slow but 80+ is to fast for even cars. Now it might be ok in Montana or Texas but we have way to many cars and trucks here in Calif. to be running these speeds. I use to commute 100 miles every day on hwy 99 (blood Ally) and even going 70 I got passed like I was standing still. We get really bad fog in the winter but do you think that would slow them down? NO! So I don't know that the answer is, go fast or slow.

BTW I keep seeing DW DS DD I know that the 2nd letter is but what does that frist D stand for?


----------



## Doxie-Doglover (Apr 19, 2006)

Verstelle said:


> Ok well I myself am happy at 60mph but living here in Calif. it is hard to stay at that speed when everything passing you is going 80+++ We have a law that says trailers and Semi can only go 55. I really think that 55 is a little to slow but 80+ is to fast for even cars. Now it might be ok in Montana or Texas but we have way to many cars and trucks here in Calif. to be running these speeds. I use to commute 100 miles every day on hwy 99 (blood Ally) and even going 70 I got passed like I was standing still. We get really bad fog in the winter but do you think that would slow them down? NO! So I don't know that the answer is, go fast or slow.
> 
> BTW I keep seeing DW DS DD I know that the 2nd letter is but what does that frist D stand for?
> [snapback]126784[/snapback]​


I think itS darling?????


----------



## mountainlady56 (Feb 13, 2006)

I thought it was devoted.
Darlene action


----------



## stapless (Feb 20, 2005)

sgalady said:


> I thought it was devoted.
> Darlene action
> [snapback]127059[/snapback]​


aaaaaaaaah, the mystery of the 'D'. means something different to all of us.

scott


----------



## Doxie-Doglover (Apr 19, 2006)

yep! when I first joined forum, I was sure it was D**n, but Rick said probably darling. I have other names for him sometimes but they aren't allowed on the forum!


----------



## PDX_Doug (Nov 16, 2004)

You mean it's not Dumba**?









Happy Trails,
Doug


----------



## Doxie-Doglover (Apr 19, 2006)

LMAO!


----------



## HootBob (Apr 26, 2004)

Nice one Doug









Don


----------

