something else you might want to think about is catapiller used dual turbos on their smaller on road semi diesel engines. they put a small one off the exhaust manifold and fed it into a larger turbo. the small turbo spools quickly and that turned the large turbo for higher boost and less heat. just a thought since you probably have the other turbo still In your shop
I put a 4bt cummins in a regular cab ranger 2wd 5speed. I started with 3.73 gears and switched to 3.08 with no change in mpg. I got 30-31 mpg each tank, didn't mater short or long trip. I later pulled that engine and put it in my 91 thunderbird 5speed. That has 3.73 gears and gets mid 30s mpg and had a few tanks of driving really good at 40mpg. I have a bunch of videos on my channel of these. Good job on the swap.
@@generalprinciple5921 i have cars, trucks, and suvs but i was mostly getting at that you probably won't get much better mpg out of a ranger than you are, even with a gear change.
@@generalprinciple5921 yeah they are pretty good. I have 5 4bt's, a 4b, and a 6bt. I wounded a 4bt pretty good, it is repairable but ive had it on the healing stand for a few years.
It's a pickup truck. You shouldn't even think in acceleration. Those looking for adrenaline go get a Camaro. That rig of yours is able to climb a mountain with all that load you mentioned. I can live with that. Nice job! Thanks for the update.
This series of videos was very impressive, thanks! The Kubota engine grabbed my attention because I've got a Kubota M9000 tractor that has been an awesome machine for us. I believe ours has a 3.3L 4cyl turbo. I have certainly driven something slower than your Kubota Ranger, an International Loadstar - LOL
Love the truck. I think you will get another couple mpg out of the lower gear but honestly, 30 mpg in a ranger is pretty good. Bonus if its reliable too. Thanks for sharing!
General Principle thanks for the heads up. Let us know how it goes. I cant look at a ranger now without thinking about slapping a diesel in there. Lol. Good luck with the swap.
I bought my '96 Ranger, (2.3L, 5 speed) in Pensacola on a Saturday morning and needed to start a job in Baton Rouge on Monday. It came with 14" rims on it, and a set of 15" rims in the bed. Between both sets, I had three good tires, two of them were 15", so I went to Wal-Mart and bought two more 15" tires and on the road I went. It never seemed to have any power (torque). I had to downshift to go up hill. Something wasn't right. I found two things on a Ranger forum that did help some. One had to do with putting some cable ties on the throttle cable under the accelerator pedal to take up slack because the cable had stretched. The other had to do with gear ratios. My truck, like yours, has a 3.73 differential gear in it. But there was not much I was willing to do about that, especially while I was on the road. What I did was buy 3 cheap 14" tires and slapped them on the other 3 rims and then swapped positions with the 15" rims. What a difference that made! Instant acceleration and torque was "found". Rather than changing out a perfect working rear axle, why not try some 14" tires? It worked for me.
Oh btw, that was about 9 years ago and the odometer had been broken at 172k miles for who knows how long when I bought it. I averaged about 20k miles a year on that Ranger for about 6 of those years until I upgraded to an '08 Mercury with a working air conditioner. I estimate it has over 325k miles and still going.
I'm running a 3.45 geared 8.8 in my 4x4 ranger behind the Kubota. The sweetspot is 70 mph with mine and it will actually run with a 3.0. K03 turbo with the pump timing shims removed and the fuel screw out 1.5 turns. EGTs never go over 1100
Hello GP ! Great content ! You should try a swap with Mercedes 3.0L diesel , they put them in Jeep Grand Cherokees in 07-08 , no DPF or DEF , good engine will fit in almost anything ! Great job 👍
At least the acceleration won't hurt your neck😀. Gear change should help milage but not your acceleration. Maybe a Gear Vendors overdrive? Only if they weren't so expensive. Very nice swap. Looks like a factory install! Thanks for sharing.
Enjoyed following your videos. Just a recommendation, if you end up swapping a vw tdi use a Ahu or preferably an alh but steer away from the bew they are total junk. I daily an alh w 5-speed currently and average anywhere from 47-52 mpg depending on how I drive it and do lots of 75-80mph cruising out here in east Texas.
thats a real nice truck ya got there. im planning on doing a swap on my 91. it has the anemic 2.3 in it and ive been deciding between a 300 straight six and an om167 turbo out of a mercedes car
Totally jealous, 32mpg isn't that bad for a truck. I had a Nissan hardbody when i was a teenager that i wanted to diesel swap. At the time a cummins 4bt was going to be my choice but they are big, heavy and will shake your teeth out. Ive seen people doing the Volkswagen swaps and they seem really legit. If i won the lottery though i would look at that new R2.8 cummins.
Are you worried about the power going to a higher gear yet? Make it take off a little slower than it does but will definitely help the top end. You could just put some taller tires on the back and that would be about the same as a gear change. Definitely gonna kill what power you have either way though.
32mpg? Well if it makes you feel any better, that's 37.3mpg in Canadian gallons! Lol! Love the diesel ranger, being no electronics and idi, you can run furnace oil, veggie oil, diesel, hyd oil, anything that will burn. I've ran numerous 6.9 and 7.3 fords and am currently running a 8.2turbo in my bus. I got a free 45gal drum of hyd oil and mixed it 50/50 with furnace oil, cheap fuel! Can't do that with a fancy ass electronic diesel! HA!
Don't worry, I drove a friends older Volkswagen Beetle from the sixties and that was SLOW. And when in the my Kenworth pulling a load, it ain't no Ferrari, so you are doing great. Your son needs to drive your Ranger to school when he is old enough because he did put time into it.
I appreciate all the videos and your time. Contemplating doing this swap and I am mainly interested in reliability and MPG. Have you done anything to it since your last update a year ago (4-1-2020)?
Reliability on these engine’s is usually great but I’m over boosting this one for sure. I’ve blown the head gasket and I’m stalled on all my projects because I’m move my household and shop to Alabama. I need to check the drive pressure on the turbo when I’m up and running again. I was getting 32-33 mpg now to be fair I may do a vw1.9tdi next.
@@generalprinciple5921 I want one hela badly, I had a 99 ranger I got in 2013 with 46k miles and sold it in 2018 with 75k miles, but it saw every dirt trail and back road in my area lol, sometimes it's not the miles but the road XD
I haven’t watched all your videos but what kind of boost numbers and EGt are you seeing? is it a IDI or DI? What rpm are you shifting at? We have built many Kubota swapped vehicles and I think you have a lot of tuning to still do. I feel there is a lot more in this. Have you adjusted the IP timing? Sorry for all the questions
Just watched another of your videos and saw your motor is an IDI. They are about 15% less efficient and less power over a DI. Are you running an intercooler? With the k03 turbo from the Passat you should be able to see 20-25 psi. Here is a customer of mine who just got his XJ on the road! Nice work on the Transmission adapter. Not an easy piece to build. th-cam.com/video/eqquH2sKw9Q/w-d-xo.html
SPMachining I do not have an intercooler right now. As far as the timing, I did pull out the thinnest (1) shim but have not checked it at the delivery valve as of yet. Mostly because I don’t have any specs. Right now I am at 10-13 psi. I will check out the video that you linked. Mostly my mileage is my biggest disappointment. I was hoping for closer to 40mpg. Any insite on IP timing would be great.
You should probably remove all the shims. have you added a Gov spring to raise RPM? 33-35 is probably the best you will see with a IDI. If it was a DI you could hit 40
Dropping the rear ratio 3 sizes would be to far. For 1 you have to deal with carrier cutoffs which I don't know what cutoffs ford uses but some others are if it came above around 3.55 meaning if it came 3.73 you cant go below 3.55 and if it came say 3.08 it cant go above 3.55. When dropping from 3.73 to 3.08/3.24 with such a low power engine your going to feel like it cannot even get out of its way above 3rd gear and though you will have the top speed capability above 80mph it will feel even more like a turd the whole time in day to day driving. Also dropping the rear ratio on an under-powered engine your giving up all your hauling capacity meaning if you throw 700lbs at it it may then not even build speed above 60mph. You shouldn't be looking to make a truck run over 80mph IMHO. What you can do for better power and mileage is reduce tire width (look for some skinny meaty bias ply military tires), rim size/weight, and reduces over all rotational mass of the wheels. Reducing rotational masses like wheels and driveshaft (aluminum) will have the greatest affect. Then move to the truck reducing all the weight you can from it. Look at things like the radiator size of the original engine versus the ranger one. Find one lighter holding enough but not to much capacity just any and everything you can to reduce the load including reducing aero restrictions. Everything will be a give and a take. You may not want to reduce the aero drag or radiator but be willing to drill 2-3 inch holes all over the truck to reduce mass. It is all up to you how you go about it. Maybe the truck has power windows and locks and you can swap doors to manual versions reducing some weight and strip the wiring harness down a few lbs. Something like a round/square tube bumper over a factory one acting like box blade scraper. Maybe a custom aluminum flat bed if it fits your needs. Plastic skid/aero/diffuser plates are yet another option if you have reduced enough weight you could use some to reduce drag. Rolling coal costs fuel so tune the engine proper will help mileage. If it was me I would do all those mods possible and be looking at 4.10 gears to get some pep in it's step not caring about anything above 70mph knowing that even at governed speed on a tiny diesel the engines rotational speed is much lower than its gas brothers thus it can endure many many miles more at its max rpms. Thx for the video it was inspirational I hope my son and me can have the kind of bond you and yours does. He is 3 and I am 38 but feeling 48 physically.
@@BrokeWrench That depends on the ply and load being carried. Those efficiency tests are AG based off road testing under a full working load. Unlikely this Ranger fits that criteria. But I will show you my tire choice and you can find one better suited in your radial version. My pick is 30.5 inches tall, 6inches wide(likely 1 inch or more narrower than stock size), carries 2000lbs, and weighs 28lbs. I wouldn't cruise it at 80mph but it will last every bit of 70k miles or more and comes in at $138 plus tax.. You need to meet that criteria as close as possible and it be a M/S or A/T in LT not passenger car rated repeat not passenger car rated. That includes any "P" numerical tire size it has to be LT numerical size. www.jegs.com/i/Coker+Tire/257/59132/10002/-1?msclkid=1f9903270fdd14d9ad805dc98c67538f&BSC%20-%20NB%20Top%20Sellers&Wheels%20%26%20Tires
Also a added benefit to the content creator is the taller tire will reduce his RPM at speed increasing his efficiency slightly but since it is narrower wont rub/scrub like most over sized tires would. Those taller tires usually come with more weight but as you can see mines average 3lbs lighter per tire versus even the smallest LT size specific to his vehicle. To break the price hurdle you will see so many go to passenger tires with all season treads but those don't hold up to the mileage claims of the manufacturer and usually end up with a disappointed customer when they wear off the paltry 9/32nds of tread in 40k miles verses the rate 55-60k claimed. Same thing with say a 04 grand Cherokee with D rated passenger tires from Goodyear fully factory replacements but 1/3 of the tread depth of a nice E rated 10ply A/T tire. And don't get me started on proper pressure values based on load. Everyone thinks max is 44psi so we go 44psi on D rated don't even care what the load is or the wear patterns/footprint under load.
@@masterdebater8757 a quick read through a few pages and a couple google searches pulled up these. The general consensus is that radials have less rolling resistance resulting in less heat generated and better fuel efficiency. Their steel belt construction results in heavier and more expensive but more puncture resistant tire construction. I saw mentioned on one site that your tire requires an intertube, that would be a point against it in the efficiency department. Its difficult to find tires as narrow as yours as most modern tire designs dont suffer the rounding/bulging that bias plys are famous for, though that might actually make up for a bit of its inherent efficiency, and over inflating them will also help that. To quote a great man "any suspension will work of you dont let it". The baja stz is discontinued and I didn't look into its successor the deenan or something like that, but one guy said he used them for 138,000 kilometers In the end the lighter mass and narrow tires being overinflated would likely make the truck feel more powerful and improve its fuel efficiency a bit at the cost of a significant reduction of traction, and it should be able to handle highway speeds at in that condition www.forconstructionpros.com/equipment/fleet-maintenance/tires/article/10307455/pros-and-cons-of-radial-vs-biasply-tires-in-construction www.trucktrend.com/how-to/wheels-tires/1607-bias-versus-radial-trailer-tires www.productreview.com.au/listings/mickey-thompson-baja-stz
something else you might want to think about is catapiller used dual turbos on their smaller on road semi diesel engines. they put a small one off the exhaust manifold and fed it into a larger turbo. the small turbo spools quickly and that turned the large turbo for higher boost and less heat. just a thought since you probably have the other turbo still In your shop
I put a 4bt cummins in a regular cab ranger 2wd 5speed. I started with 3.73 gears and switched to 3.08 with no change in mpg. I got 30-31 mpg each tank, didn't mater short or long trip. I later pulled that engine and put it in my 91 thunderbird 5speed. That has 3.73 gears and gets mid 30s mpg and had a few tanks of driving really good at 40mpg. I have a bunch of videos on my channel of these. Good job on the swap.
I think that’s cool!!! I just really need trucks most all the time.
@@generalprinciple5921 i have cars, trucks, and suvs but i was mostly getting at that you probably won't get much better mpg out of a ranger than you are, even with a gear change.
I love those B series Cummins engines! I have 3. You almost can’t kill them!
@@generalprinciple5921 yeah they are pretty good. I have 5 4bt's, a 4b, and a 6bt. I wounded a 4bt pretty good, it is repairable but ive had it on the healing stand for a few years.
Those engines are obnoxiously loud. They are good engines, but Not fit for today's expectations.
In Trinidad West Indies where I live, the highway speed limit is 100kmh= 62.5mph !!
It's a pickup truck. You shouldn't even think in acceleration. Those looking for adrenaline go get a Camaro. That rig of yours is able to climb a mountain with all that load you mentioned. I can live with that. Nice job! Thanks for the update.
Jose Martinez thanks! I’m not looking for ultimate power. I just want to merge and keep up with traffic safely.
Found your old video of the swap and noticed you have an update, I love it, thinking about doing this with a Suzuki samurai.
hayden york that would be an awesome build or a Volkswagen diesel. Good luck!
This series of videos was very impressive, thanks! The Kubota engine grabbed my attention because I've got a Kubota M9000 tractor that has been an awesome machine for us. I believe ours has a 3.3L 4cyl turbo. I have certainly driven something slower than your Kubota Ranger, an International Loadstar - LOL
Keith fink had an old load Star with a 345 I understand!
Keep the updates coming .. good channel.. to the point.. good humor lol
Steve Mick thanks
Love the truck. I think you will get another couple mpg out of the lower gear but honestly, 30 mpg in a ranger is pretty good. Bonus if its reliable too. Thanks for sharing!
roverdad junk yard 3.27 gear are coming.
General Principle thanks for the heads up. Let us know how it goes. I cant look at a ranger now without thinking about slapping a diesel in there. Lol. Good luck with the swap.
I bought my '96 Ranger, (2.3L, 5 speed) in Pensacola on a Saturday morning and needed to start a job in Baton Rouge on Monday. It came with 14" rims on it, and a set of 15" rims in the bed. Between both sets, I had three good tires, two of them were 15", so I went to Wal-Mart and bought two more 15" tires and on the road I went.
It never seemed to have any power (torque). I had to downshift to go up hill. Something wasn't right. I found two things on a Ranger forum that did help some. One had to do with putting some cable ties on the throttle cable under the accelerator pedal to take up slack because the cable had stretched.
The other had to do with gear ratios. My truck, like yours, has a 3.73 differential gear in it. But there was not much I was willing to do about that, especially while I was on the road. What I did was buy 3 cheap 14" tires and slapped them on the other 3 rims and then swapped positions with the 15" rims. What a difference that made! Instant acceleration and torque was "found".
Rather than changing out a perfect working rear axle, why not try some 14" tires? It worked for me.
Oh btw, that was about 9 years ago and the odometer had been broken at 172k miles for who knows how long when I bought it. I averaged about 20k miles a year on that Ranger for about 6 of those years until I upgraded to an '08 Mercury with a working air conditioner. I estimate it has over 325k miles and still going.
I'm running a 3.45 geared 8.8 in my 4x4 ranger behind the Kubota. The sweetspot is 70 mph with mine and it will actually run with a 3.0. K03 turbo with the pump timing shims removed and the fuel screw out 1.5 turns. EGTs never go over 1100
Hello GP ! Great content ! You should try a swap with Mercedes 3.0L diesel , they put them in Jeep Grand Cherokees in 07-08 , no DPF or DEF , good engine will fit in almost anything ! Great job 👍
It’ll be a while but I’d like to do a Cummins 4bt or vw 1.9l .
At least the acceleration won't hurt your neck😀. Gear change should help milage but not your acceleration. Maybe a Gear Vendors overdrive? Only if they weren't so expensive. Very nice swap. Looks like a factory install! Thanks for sharing.
Weeeell I don’t know about factory but thanks.
Enjoyed following your videos. Just a recommendation, if you end up swapping a vw tdi use a Ahu or preferably an alh but steer away from the bew they are total junk. I daily an alh w 5-speed currently and average anywhere from 47-52 mpg depending on how I drive it and do lots of 75-80mph cruising out here in east Texas.
Will do thanks!
Add an intercooler with metal boost pipes in addition to the gears. You might have some big boost leaks with that setup
I couldn’t agree more thank you!
TDI ALH motors are indestructible. Mine went to 340k no rebuild. Just don't run biodiesel, it screws up the injector pump.
That’s one way to stop getting speeding tickets
thats a real nice truck ya got there. im planning on doing a swap on my 91. it has the anemic 2.3 in it and ive been deciding between a 300 straight six and an om167 turbo out of a mercedes car
My buddy did a 617 and gets mid 20s. I love those 300 six cylinders.built a pretty serious street strip one once for a friend
@@generalprinciple5921 yeah, I was leaning towards the 617 instead of the 300 so I don't have to notch the core support.
Totally jealous, 32mpg isn't that bad for a truck. I had a Nissan hardbody when i was a teenager that i wanted to diesel swap. At the time a cummins 4bt was going to be my choice but they are big, heavy and will shake your teeth out. Ive seen people doing the Volkswagen swaps and they seem really legit. If i won the lottery though i would look at that new R2.8 cummins.
chefdan87 yeah that 2.8 is a good one but I still prefer mechanical injection. I’m old school
runs nicely
Those Rangers were GREAT little trucks. Ford's new Ranger is a joke.
Are you worried about the power going to a higher gear yet? Make it take off a little slower than it does but will definitely help the top end. You could just put some taller tires on the back and that would be about the same as a gear change. Definitely gonna kill what power you have either way though.
Matthew Lotz well. I have a new set of tires on it and a new set of gears from the junk yard won’t cost me much. Haven’t done it yet though
32mpg? Well if it makes you feel any better, that's 37.3mpg in Canadian gallons! Lol! Love the diesel ranger, being no electronics and idi, you can run furnace oil, veggie oil, diesel, hyd oil, anything that will burn. I've ran numerous 6.9 and 7.3 fords and am currently running a 8.2turbo in my bus. I got a free 45gal drum of hyd oil and mixed it 50/50 with furnace oil, cheap fuel! Can't do that with a fancy ass electronic diesel! HA!
I run some wvo and hydraulic oil from time to time.
Don't worry, I drove a friends older Volkswagen Beetle from the sixties and that was SLOW. And when in the my Kenworth pulling a load, it ain't no Ferrari, so you are doing great. Your son needs to drive your Ranger to school when he is old enough because he did put time into it.
He just might . Thx.
I appreciate all the videos and your time. Contemplating doing this swap and I am mainly interested in reliability and MPG. Have you done anything to it since your last update a year ago (4-1-2020)?
Reliability on these engine’s is usually great but I’m over boosting this one for sure. I’ve blown the head gasket and I’m stalled on all my projects because I’m move my household and shop to Alabama. I need to check the drive pressure on the turbo when I’m up and running again. I was getting 32-33 mpg now to be fair I may do a vw1.9tdi next.
No just tires. But I’m going to be bringing it back soon.
Nice
the first gen ford ranger had 2 diesels, the perkins got about 60second to the 60mph mark, so its better than that!
Yeah I remember those! I knew a guy that drove the wheels off one.
@@generalprinciple5921 I want one hela badly, I had a 99 ranger I got in 2013 with 46k miles and sold it in 2018 with 75k miles, but it saw every dirt trail and back road in my area lol, sometimes it's not the miles but the road XD
Discover Your World I understand that
thats not bad for having the all the wieght on it. and youd think thats not alot wieght for a load but for that little of a truck it is
Logan Hinc no it’s not too bad, just always looking for more
Your the best! Maybe.
Trying to get an idea of curb weight? Long bed and 4x4?
@@DemonicBA I can’t remember the exact weight but I remember it being about the same as a Jetta.
Good job!
pryan05 p thank you
I haven’t watched all your videos but what kind of boost numbers and EGt are you seeing?
is it a IDI or DI?
What rpm are you shifting at?
We have built many Kubota swapped vehicles and I think you have a lot of tuning to still do.
I feel there is a lot more in this.
Have you adjusted the IP timing?
Sorry for all the questions
Just watched another of your videos and saw your motor is an IDI. They are about 15% less efficient and less power over a DI.
Are you running an intercooler? With the k03 turbo from the Passat you should be able to see 20-25 psi.
Here is a customer of mine who just got his XJ on the road!
Nice work on the Transmission adapter. Not an easy piece to build.
th-cam.com/video/eqquH2sKw9Q/w-d-xo.html
SPMachining I do not have an intercooler right now. As far as the timing, I did pull out the thinnest (1) shim but have not checked it at the delivery valve as of yet. Mostly because I don’t have any specs. Right now I am at 10-13 psi. I will check out the video that you linked. Mostly my mileage is my biggest disappointment. I was hoping for closer to 40mpg. Any insite on IP timing would be great.
SPMachining I haven’t hooked up my tach. I only drive a 1/4 throttle most of the time, however revving to wide open doesn’t get me anymore boost
You should probably remove all the shims. have you added a Gov spring to raise RPM?
33-35 is probably the best you will see with a IDI. If it was a DI you could hit 40
Also a intercooler and locking the wastegate shut will net you more power and efficiency
Dropping the rear ratio 3 sizes would be to far. For 1 you have to deal with carrier cutoffs which I don't know what cutoffs ford uses but some others are if it came above around 3.55 meaning if it came 3.73 you cant go below 3.55 and if it came say 3.08 it cant go above 3.55. When dropping from 3.73 to 3.08/3.24 with such a low power engine your going to feel like it cannot even get out of its way above 3rd gear and though you will have the top speed capability above 80mph it will feel even more like a turd the whole time in day to day driving. Also dropping the rear ratio on an under-powered engine your giving up all your hauling capacity meaning if you throw 700lbs at it it may then not even build speed above 60mph. You shouldn't be looking to make a truck run over 80mph IMHO. What you can do for better power and mileage is reduce tire width (look for some skinny meaty bias ply military tires), rim size/weight, and reduces over all rotational mass of the wheels. Reducing rotational masses like wheels and driveshaft (aluminum) will have the greatest affect. Then move to the truck reducing all the weight you can from it. Look at things like the radiator size of the original engine versus the ranger one. Find one lighter holding enough but not to much capacity just any and everything you can to reduce the load including reducing aero restrictions. Everything will be a give and a take. You may not want to reduce the aero drag or radiator but be willing to drill 2-3 inch holes all over the truck to reduce mass. It is all up to you how you go about it. Maybe the truck has power windows and locks and you can swap doors to manual versions reducing some weight and strip the wiring harness down a few lbs. Something like a round/square tube bumper over a factory one acting like box blade scraper. Maybe a custom aluminum flat bed if it fits your needs. Plastic skid/aero/diffuser plates are yet another option if you have reduced enough weight you could use some to reduce drag. Rolling coal costs fuel so tune the engine proper will help mileage. If it was me I would do all those mods possible and be looking at 4.10 gears to get some pep in it's step not caring about anything above 70mph knowing that even at governed speed on a tiny diesel the engines rotational speed is much lower than its gas brothers thus it can endure many many miles more at its max rpms. Thx for the video it was inspirational I hope my son and me can have the kind of bond you and yours does. He is 3 and I am 38 but feeling 48 physically.
Bias play tires are inherently less efficient than radials. They are good for grip but bad for efficiency because they are less stiff
@@BrokeWrench That depends on the ply and load being carried. Those efficiency tests are AG based off road testing under a full working load. Unlikely this Ranger fits that criteria. But I will show you my tire choice and you can find one better suited in your radial version. My pick is 30.5 inches tall, 6inches wide(likely 1 inch or more narrower than stock size), carries 2000lbs, and weighs 28lbs. I wouldn't cruise it at 80mph but it will last every bit of 70k miles or more and comes in at $138 plus tax.. You need to meet that criteria as close as possible and it be a M/S or A/T in LT not passenger car rated repeat not passenger car rated. That includes any "P" numerical tire size it has to be LT numerical size. www.jegs.com/i/Coker+Tire/257/59132/10002/-1?msclkid=1f9903270fdd14d9ad805dc98c67538f&BSC%20-%20NB%20Top%20Sellers&Wheels%20%26%20Tires
Also a added benefit to the content creator is the taller tire will reduce his RPM at speed increasing his efficiency slightly but since it is narrower wont rub/scrub like most over sized tires would. Those taller tires usually come with more weight but as you can see mines average 3lbs lighter per tire versus even the smallest LT size specific to his vehicle. To break the price hurdle you will see so many go to passenger tires with all season treads but those don't hold up to the mileage claims of the manufacturer and usually end up with a disappointed customer when they wear off the paltry 9/32nds of tread in 40k miles verses the rate 55-60k claimed. Same thing with say a 04 grand Cherokee with D rated passenger tires from Goodyear fully factory replacements but 1/3 of the tread depth of a nice E rated 10ply A/T tire. And don't get me started on proper pressure values based on load. Everyone thinks max is 44psi so we go 44psi on D rated don't even care what the load is or the wear patterns/footprint under load.
@@masterdebater8757 a quick read through a few pages and a couple google searches pulled up these.
The general consensus is that radials have less rolling resistance resulting in less heat generated and better fuel efficiency. Their steel belt construction results in heavier and more expensive but more puncture resistant tire construction. I saw mentioned on one site that your tire requires an intertube, that would be a point against it in the efficiency department. Its difficult to find tires as narrow as yours as most modern tire designs dont suffer the rounding/bulging that bias plys are famous for, though that might actually make up for a bit of its inherent efficiency, and over inflating them will also help that. To quote a great man "any suspension will work of you dont let it".
The baja stz is discontinued and I didn't look into its successor the deenan or something like that, but one guy said he used them for 138,000 kilometers
In the end the lighter mass and narrow tires being overinflated would likely make the truck feel more powerful and improve its fuel efficiency a bit at the cost of a significant reduction of traction, and it should be able to handle highway speeds at in that condition
www.forconstructionpros.com/equipment/fleet-maintenance/tires/article/10307455/pros-and-cons-of-radial-vs-biasply-tires-in-construction
www.trucktrend.com/how-to/wheels-tires/1607-bias-versus-radial-trailer-tires
www.productreview.com.au/listings/mickey-thompson-baja-stz
Are you running an intercooler on your turbo?
Not yet but plan to
Get the gears in it, it will improve.
Soon
I mostly go 30 and rarely do 50......... and this guy is complaining about 55 ?
Outside of a residential zone you wont find a speed limit below 55. I'd complain it I hadnt stuck a tiny diesel in a truck lol
Let me know, i might have a headache rack and tool box for ya.
AMC guy thanks. I’ve already got a tool box in it.👍🏼