I don't think you have a chance of getting mileage numbers you want. The numerous things contributing to the problem are so much bigger than the opportunities to improve it. I'm not even sure you could even recover the cost of many of those changes. Just driving slightly slower might give the best return.
But I would agree with changing to the full synthetics where possible, using the lightest possible in the engine like 0W-30.
You could test the mechanical fan by removing it for a trip, but I'll bet the difference is not even easily measurable. Changing the hubs must make some improvement, but enough to pay for the parts also?
I'll bet the Mercedes has many dozens of small design details that add up to good mileage, stuff that's not even on Suzuki's radar.
__________________
2004 Grand Vitara 2.0 TD 5-spd manual
-Superwinch hubs
Don't under estimate the fan change. On my last 4WD the power increase was about the same as fitting extractors - ie. really noticeable. Anything driven directly off the front of the engine really sucks power and uses more fuel. (I also got some of the best economy figures I'd seen for that vehicle type -with slightly oversize tyres.)
The route you drive daily and your driving habits will be the biggest factor for economy. My daily drive is around 18km and it's all stop start traffic and a steep hill. When | lived else where I got 1l/100km better economy (driving a 1.0l turbo car- the difference would probably be greater with the v6.)
I'm a little skeptical as well that pumping in the $'s and man hours in mods will help much (if any). I'd love to see some before and after numbers to confirm though.
As far as the stock intake design...it appears well engineered with cold air attributes and is plumbed to an area pretty much protected from any off-roading type debris / water too (if that is one's thing) ingesting.
See this thread for a rather good discussion on the subject of doing the after market cone filter mod...
Jeff,
What kind of mileage do you get now? I would've thought with your roof rack and the snorkel your mileage would drop.
Sasquatch,
One thing you could try is manually downshifting on the uphills(I assume you have long steady grades), to 3rd gear, instead of lugging in 4th or maybe shifting in and out of the torque converter lockup.
I've read that engines with a large valve area are not very efficient at low rpm, bigger throttle openings. Also in 3rd gear the torque converter is more efficient that in 4th at the same speed. These engines were designed for high rpm, even in the 626 I think it turned around 2800 rpm at 70mph. My 4 banger has even less torque than the V6 and I have decided that I will shift at 4000 to 4500rpm when getting up to speed on the highway, I get up to cruising speed faster and I use smaller throttle openings to do it. There is nothing happening with this engine at 2000rpm no matter how much fuel is dumped in there so why would I drive at that rpm when I'm trying to get going?
An example of the benefits of not lugging is my parents bought a 28' trailer and a 2003 F150 5.4L auto to tow it, the F150 has a tow package but the rear end ratio is to low, so at 65mph its turning like 1800rpm. On a flat with no head wind the tranny will lock but you are using a lot of pedal, he found that he got better mileage by shifting it into 3rd gear(2400rpm) and leaving it there for any type of headwind or grade.
I'm a little skeptical as well that pumping in the $'s and man hours in mods will help much (if any). I'd love to see some before and after numbers to confirm though.
As far as the stock intake design...it appears well engineered with cold air attributes and is plumbed to an area pretty much protected from any off-roading type debris / water too (if that is one's thing) ingesting.
See this thread for a rather good discussion on the subject of doing the after market cone filter mod...
I would never consider the cone filter. I was just referring to a K&N to replace the stock filter. Just dont over oil them and you will be fine.
I think I have narrowed my planned mods down to two, not including changing all the gear lubes over to synthetic, doing the SeaFoam cleaning, etc. Those are going to an electric fan and manual hubs. If I only increase 1.2mpg with the hubs, at the current fuel price, it will pay for itself in 8 months. I can live with that. It will also lessen front end wear over time.
The cooling fan mod. I will measure the radiator and search the junk yards for a nice fan/shroud unit that will fit. I then need to build a small circuit that will turn on the fan with both temperature and ac clutch inputs. That will be pretty easy to do. With such a low HP motor, getting that fan off the front of the motor has to have some decent affect. I know I am trading mechanical load from the crank to electrical load via the alternator, but when the fan is not needed, there will be no drag what so ever.
Our mileage sits very steady at 21.4-21.8 mpg. I am shooting for 25.
The first thing I did last night when we got home was Seafoam the intake. Sucked a can in through a vacuum port just after the throttle body. Kept the engine going by feathering the throttle. When the can was near empty I dropped the throttle and let it die.
30 minutes later I killed started the car and fogged the county. Did make a difference in the smoothness of the motor as well as it seemed to be a bit more peppy this morning on the way into work. Will be doing the oil treatment just before the next oil change. That involves dumping a can in the oil 100 miles before an oil change and let it really clean out the rings/etc. I use it regularly in the fuel tank along with only using Chevron fuel with Techron keeps the injectors happy.
Some of the suggestions so far have been geared towards performance, not the same thing as better fuel economy. In particular at part throttle intake restrictions from the filter and intake tract are of zero consequence as the throttle itself is far more restrictive, as it needs to be to control power output. This aspect of conventional spark ignition engine design has about the same level of technological sophistication as a campfire.
Also mentioned was a cool air intake. That's great for power but you actually might find warm air provides better fuel economy. As mentioned, if you could advance the timing and lean out the fuel/air ratio you could make a big difference - but you can't do either easily on this computer controlled fuel injection with 3-way cat and O2 sensor.
You could try and obtain a fuel consumption map with partial throttle data and work out where the most economical RPM/load regions are. But since you have an automatic that's not much use either. All you can really do is make sure the torque converter is locked whenever possible.
The reduction in friction and ancillary losses makes good sense for small returns but improving the aerodynamics might actually work the best. And unfortunately that's the one subject most typical automotive tinkerers usually don't know much about.
Regarding cooling fans, my diesel version has three as standard, two on the back, one on front. There is no mechanical fan - but that's because the Peugeot engine was originally designed for east-west orientation in a front wheel drive vehicle and so there is no fitting for one.
__________________
2004 Grand Vitara 2.0 TD 5-spd manual
-Superwinch hubs
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.
Linear Mode
