I just did the mod, truck seems to have a little more grunt!
I did notice there is a new whistle at hiway speeds, coming from the intake, not a big deal.
__________________ 2008 Tundra CrewMax Limited 4x4 5.7, White w/ oak leather, Moonroof, NAV, Factory 20's, XM.
2006 Nissan Murano SE Black, Loaded, Black leather, 20" Dubs
2005 Corvette C6 (#581) Coupe 6 spd Black, Loaded, Black Leather, Navigation, XM, Onstar, HUD, F55 Magnetic ride, Z51 Brakes/calipers/sway-bars, Route 66 Exhaust, Intake, Custom Tune, 160 stat. Only 2 runs at the track...12.4s @116mph
Just returned from my work commute, averaged both ways it came out to 19.2MPG. The same as before removing the screen and doing the battery disconnect. The only difference in the drive was the need to pass a semi truck and a Honda Insight going up a 6% grade. Funny thing is the semi ended up passing the Insight just after I passed both of them. Hybrid drivers are a damn menace on the roads.
So there might have been a little bit of a gain in fuel economy considering the extra fuel burned for a spurt up to 90MPH and still having the same average fuel economy. I'll do another trip or two and report more.
have you checked the fuel economy the old way by taking gallons put in / miles driven? Dont think the computer readout is 100% reliable.
I've done this mod already, and too have noticed an increase, but not near 19. When checking the old way I get about 15.7. But I dont baby the pedal either.
__________________ CBTMA Member, 2008 Tundra DC, SR 5, Salsa Red Pearl, 5.7, Running Boards, Bed Liner, TRD Package,White LED Lights in Interior, Alpine SPS -1752 Speakers, Extang Tonneau
Pulled HC filter out but comments by some about the possibility of messing up the MAF with an oiled air filter got me thinking...would seem to be slightly higher risk using a K&N without the HC filter as a protective barrier to the MAF.
Is there more "potential" with a K&N air filter and the HC filter in place or regular stock filter without the HC filter... or am I just overanalyzing and worrying needlessly?
I've had this truck almost a year now and I've done the battery disconnect thing several times hoping for better gas mileage but it's never gotten better. The only way for me to get better gas mileage is to drive it with a light foot, which s%$#@! I'm filling up 2-3 times/week now, OUCH!!!!!!
__________________
2007 Black Dbl Cab 4x4 SR5. Mods: 2.5 RevTek front only lift, 33/12.5/18 Toyo MT's, 18x9 KMC XD Black Hoss's, VOLANT CAI, NEW!! Doug Thorley headers and Magnaflow dual exhaust
I believe the cheif reason why we get such poor milage is due to the added ethenol to the gas. it has been proven to drop up to 6 mpg. In my case, using the gas today with 10% eth, reduced my 2000 Cad, and my 1990 Merc Sable from 18 city to 12.5 city. My 2007 Tundra LTD, dble cab 5.7L gets between 12.5 and 13.5 in city driving depending on how many lights I get stopped at. I get almost 20.5 on the hwy as long as there are small hills and little headwind. Otherwise, I've seen it drop to 18 if those are present. Of course, if I was driving in the mountains, milage would be worce. Pulling my 3200 lb trailer and encountering small hills and little headwind I got 16.5mpg, otherwise I got 14.5
Since removing the carbon filter I've seen maybe a .5 mpg increase, more like .2-.3 mpg. I have my driving style down to a science, so there is no bias based on differing driving styles before/after carbon filter removal.
have you checked the fuel economy the old way by taking gallons put in / miles driven? Dont think the computer readout is 100% reliable.
I've done this mod already, and too have noticed an increase, but not near 19. When checking the old way I get about 15.7. But I dont baby the pedal either.
I check fuel economy by hand on fill ups vs. miles run on that tank. My computer is just about spot on most of the time, with an average variance of .10-.12MPG +/-.
I was getting at or near 19MPG before the mod on summer gas with no ethanol, and about 17.5-18MPG on winter gas.
I drive 65MPH on my commute (speed limit) set the cruise control, and often times do not have to hit the brakes or speed up to pass anyone until I reach the town I work out of (24 miles one way). I find that smooth driving makes a huge difference on mileage potential. If you are slowing down then speeding up, you are wasting fuel. If you run all the way up to a stop (when you know you are going to have to stop) you are wasting fuel. If you accelerate hard every chance you get (I do sometimes too) you are wasting fuel. Go the speed limit drive in the right hand lane and relax, you will get the best fuel economy your vehicle can deliver. If you want to drive in the fast lane and play the speed up, slow down game then you are going to pay to play. It's that simple.
For some folks their time is worth more than the extra fuel they will burn driving over the speed limit, tailgating, passing other cars, running up to stops, and drag racing away from every light. That minute or two they save on a trip (real time savings or not) is worth it to them to get only 14MPG. To me it's not, but then again I get called 1.5 hours before I have to be at work, so I can drive the speed limit and relax on the way there.
Pulled HC filter out but comments by some about the possibility of messing up the MAF with an oiled air filter got me thinking...would seem to be slightly higher risk using a K&N without the HC filter as a protective barrier to the MAF.
Is there more "potential" with a K&N air filter and the HC filter in place or regular stock filter without the HC filter... or am I just overanalyzing and worrying needlessly?
Thanks
Jim
The HC filter is upstream of the oiled filter, so it wouldn't provide any protection between the filter and the MAF sensor anyway.
PS - It seems that there is little to no proof of a properly oiled filter causing any damage to a MAF sensor. I know that this is manufacturer info, but it's worth a read: LINK to K&N atricle.
__________________
. 2007 TUNDRA 5.7L SR5 TRD 4x2 Double Cab, Salsa Red Pearl
TRD CAI, Corsa Sport Side Exit Dual Tip Exhaust, Stebel 300Hz Air Horn, OEM Tundra Mud Mats, Black powder-coated side-step bars, Ventshades, Line-X, TRD Sway Bar, Blacked headlights surround, White LED guage and dash lights, Viper 771VXR Remote Start / Alarm, Carriage Works black billet grille with logo remount (awaiting install).
Last edited by HotWheelsUMD; 06-27-2008 at 01:24 PM.
Reason: spelling
I've had this truck almost a year now and I've done the battery disconnect thing several times hoping for better gas mileage but it's never gotten better. The only way for me to get better gas mileage is to drive it with a light foot, which s%$#@! I'm filling up 2-3 times/week now, OUCH!!!!!!
How much to your wheels and tires weigh vs. stock wheels and tires? Is your truck lifted.
I can promise you your tires are way heavier than stock, and if you are lifted that won't help either. If you want better fuel economy ditch the mud tires and wheels, go back to the stockers, and if you are lifted ditch that too.
Otherwise enjoy your truck for what it does do well in it's modified form, and forgive it's associated costs in fuel.
You guy that are getting high mpg must not have aftermarket tires and 4x4. I drove my truck all highway on a 300 mile stretch at 65mph with cruise control and the avg was 15.7. I would give anything for 19.8!
I have an '07 Dbl Cab, 4WD, longbed, 5.7L with a shell on it -otherwise it's stock. Got 18.6 mpg on the highway the other day (230 mile trip). These trucks are fairly well tuned from the factory - why wouldn't they be? I'd bet I've seen more people on here with intake/exhaust mods that get worse mileage after the mods, then those that are reporting better mileage. Of course it all depends on for what reason one's doing the mods. Pound for pound, rotational weight is the worst weight you can have.
Re: 19.8mpg after HC removed!
CBTMA Member, 2008 Tundra DC, SR 5, Salsa Red Pearl, 5.7, Running Boards, Bed Liner, TRD Package,White LED Lights in Interior, Alpine SPS -1752 Speakers, Extang Tonneau
Linear Mode
