déjà vu all over again
 

Tom,

I read and lost the post where you said you used the Lucas Oil Stabilizer,
and found it to be a great additive. 15 yrs ago I used to use Slick 50, and
thought I got better gas mileage and Slick 50 said it protected better than
regular oil. Unfortunately, it also clogged up engine.

You are obviously smarter than the average person. You obviously are very
mechanically inclined. Didn't that report make you wonder if the additive
was protecting the engine and components when the engine was running at high
RPM?


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 03:55:55 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 16:24:47 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:



What kind of mileage did you get with that engine?

When it was running that is. :)

I've never manually calculated mileage to date, but based on the truck
computer readings, mileage is roughly as follows:

Highway driving, up to 65 mph, unloaded and not towing: 18-19 mpg.
Highway driving 65-75 mph, unloaded and not towing: 17-18 mpg.

I don't think I've ever driven the truck at 65 mph on the highway.
It's mostly around 55 to 60. Not that I can't, I just don't like to.

General around town driving: 16 mpg

That's the area where I have some complaints about the 7.3. I average
around the same, but that's an average. It can be less than that.

Highway towing 5000 lbs: 15-15.5 mpg.
Highway towing - 12,500 lbs. (Fifth wheel) 10.8-11.3 mpg

Ah - I don't have a 5th wheel and I don"t own a boat/trailer
combination with that kind of weight. Maybe the Halman, but I figured
that at 3,800 all told.

I don't have a heavy foot and rarely "tromp on it".

My kids won't drive with me because I take my time getting where I
need to go. I have a '92 Escort that I bought for gas price reasons
for just around town and I don't think that car has EVER gone over 50
mph - I literally bought it from the proverbial little old lady who
only drove it to the grocery store and church. :)

I've noticed that since winter arrived the mileage has dropped by 1 or 2
mpg. I understand that this is due to the winter blend of diesel fuel
used
around here that contains anti-gelling additives and also lowers the
amount
of btu's in the fuel.

Kerosene.

The technicians that worked on the truck last month in Georgia told me
that
the 6.0L can put out another 100 horsepower with a performance chip. I'll
never bother with it since when it runs it has all the power I need.

I have the whole Edge package sans the GPS, but with the backup
camera. I also changed the waste gate controller and I now use the
FRAM Air Hog filters.

http://tinyurl.com/7qbfz

I'm telling you - this is quite an improvement over normal
performance.

Later,

Tom

déjà vu all over again
 

"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
ink.net...
Skipper wrote:

Bert Robbins wrote:


Consumer Reports is a joke. They just do cursory evaluations of the
vehicles.


They're even worse with their boat reports. Many of the reports stoop to
the misleading superficial levels of a Chucky boat review.

--
Skipper

Dave,

I can't remember a boar report in CR. When did you see the last one?

Dan

Scupper's been mixing gin with his prescription meds again.

déjà vu all over again
 

"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
nk.net...
Harry Krause wrote:

Dan Krueger wrote:

Skipper wrote:

Bert Robbins wrote:


Consumer Reports is a joke. They just do cursory evaluations of the
vehicles.


They're even worse with their boat reports. Many of the reports stoop
to
the misleading superficial levels of a Chucky boat review.

--
Skipper


Dave,

I can't remember a boar report in CR. When did you see the last one?

Dan



The last time he flicked off the mechanical safety on his S&W
double-action wheelgun.



Boar, boat. Quick typing, sorry!

Dan

Did you say you had a recipe for wild boar?

déjà vu all over again
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 21:03:09 -0700, "RG" wrote:

Actually 14,040 pounds weighed on a certified scale, including 720 pounds
of
tongue weight. Boat and trailer, light on fuel. CGVW 21,240 pounds. I
can
email you a picture of the rig if you give me an address.

Not necessary - I believe you based on the description.


Oh, I wasn't thinking that. It's just that it's such a cool looking rig.
The boat really dwarfs the truck. Not easy to do with these big trucks.

déjà vu all over again :Subaru
 

wrote in message
oups.com...

Wayne.B wrote:
On 12 Dec 2005 07:09:33 -0800, wrote:

My little V40 contiues to scoot along without a hitch or hiccup. I'm
not sure what we'll replace her Subaru with, but it would be a Volvo
XC70 if we found the right deal on the right car and it's unlikely to
be another Subaru unless they have done something about
front seat comfort in the last few years.

======================================

I've never owned a Volvo but have rented a few and always found the
front seats to be among the most comfortable I've ever seen.
Unfortunately their self perpetuated reputation for reliability
doesn't seem to stand up under scrutiny however.

With a Volvo, you put up with a lot of minor nuisances (many are
electrical in nature), but
with proper maintenance and a little luck it's possible to get huge
longevity from the basic power train.

The Japanese cars, in general, are a little more reliable than a Volvo-
but are less likely to
do 200-300k without an engine overhaul (as Volvos often do), and less
sturdy in a catastrophic accident.


I dunno about that Japanese engine thing, Chuck. I had a 1982 Tercel. At
160k or 180k miles or so, my mechanic thought it would be interesting to
check compression. The numbers were perfectly even and within spec across
all 4 cylinders. He thought his measuring thing was screwed up, so he tried
another. Same results. No nasty engine problems of any other sort, either.
No ooze around gaskets, nothing. Unfortunately, some drunk a-hole decided to
total the car, so I never found out how far it could go. I suspect that if
the motor was going to need a total overhaul, it would've shown SOME signs
of age by that point.

déjà vu all over again :Subaru
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"FREDO" wrote in message
.. .
Subaru's are designed to crumple in order to absorb impact. Also, they
are designed to push the engine and transmission downward under the
passenger compartment in a frontal crash via a "Pitching Stopper" to
lessen the possibility of the engine coming into the passenger
compartment. They consistently receive 5 star ratings from the U.S.
government in crash testing.

Saw that happen back in the 1970s with an Eldorado. The engine vacated
its compartment completely, and crushed & burned the driver. Not pretty.


Reminds me of a recall on GM cars back in the late 60's or early 70's.
Seems a whole bunch of Chevys, Buicks, Olds, etc. were shipped with faulty
engine mounts that, when they failed, would allow the engine to drop
between the frame and hit the ground.

The fix was, believe it or not, a steel cable around one of the exhaust
manifolds with the other end bolted somewhere in the engine compartment.
The mounts still failed, but the engine oil pan would not hit the
pavement.

Eisboch


I had a Bobcat wagon (Mercury's Pinto equivalent). I'd still like to meet
the moron who designed the threaded ring that held the stick shift onto the
transmission. The ring was plastic. 4" to the right was the exhaust pipe.
One day, I downshifted from 3rd to 2nd in traffic and the shifter popped out
of the tranny. Luckily, I was 2 blocks from work, so I carefully ran 2 red
lights in 2nd gear and parked the thing. The heat from the exhaust had
melted the threads on the ring. The dealer said they'd never heard of such a
thing. My father managed to change their way of thinking because his company
did all its fleet business with them. They fixed it, but it happened two
more times. A mechanic friend and I finally modified the thing. Accessing it
involved removing the console. Unfortunately, the console screws were 6"
below the rim of the carpet. We had to remove the front seats to remove the
carpet.

Pass the ammo!

déjà vu all over again
 

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Dan J.S." wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
To those that read my "trip to hell" back in November where I spend 5
days in a hotel room in Georgia while they fixed my super duty Ford
350 .....

I just got back from my final trip to Florida - picked up the Scout
(another story) and started the trip back to MA. Got to Norfork and
visited Eisboch Jr. and his very pregnant wife, then headed north
towing the Scout. Got as far as Fredricksburg, VA and the new, heavy
duty diesel Ford 350 died again.

After all kinds of debates and decisions, I ended up hiring the tow
company to transport the dead Ford, with a 20' Scout in tow, all the
way from VA to MA.

We dropped off the boat in my driveway, then continued to Plymouth, MA
and dropped off the dead Ford in the dealer's lot. Gonna be a bit of
excitement down there on Monday when they open.

Eisboch (back from the last trip to hell)




FORD - Found On Road Dead

FORD = First On Race Day


It's silly to point to situations where cars are maintained by expert
mechanics and constantly tweaked.

Lyle's '68 Stang never lost in the local 1/4 mile on Route 1.


Indicative of nothing relative to other cars.

déjà vu all over again :Subaru
 

On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 14:31:52 GMT, "Doug Kanter" wrote:


wrote in message
roups.com...

Wayne.B wrote:
On 12 Dec 2005 07:09:33 -0800, wrote:

My little V40 contiues to scoot along without a hitch or hiccup. I'm
not sure what we'll replace her Subaru with, but it would be a Volvo
XC70 if we found the right deal on the right car and it's unlikely to
be another Subaru unless they have done something about
front seat comfort in the last few years.

======================================

I've never owned a Volvo but have rented a few and always found the
front seats to be among the most comfortable I've ever seen.
Unfortunately their self perpetuated reputation for reliability
doesn't seem to stand up under scrutiny however.

With a Volvo, you put up with a lot of minor nuisances (many are
electrical in nature), but
with proper maintenance and a little luck it's possible to get huge
longevity from the basic power train.

The Japanese cars, in general, are a little more reliable than a Volvo-
but are less likely to
do 200-300k without an engine overhaul (as Volvos often do), and less
sturdy in a catastrophic accident.


I dunno about that Japanese engine thing, Chuck. I had a 1982 Tercel. At
160k or 180k miles or so, my mechanic thought it would be interesting to
check compression. The numbers were perfectly even and within spec across
all 4 cylinders. He thought his measuring thing was screwed up, so he tried
another. Same results. No nasty engine problems of any other sort, either.
No ooze around gaskets, nothing. Unfortunately, some drunk a-hole decided to
total the car, so I never found out how far it could go. I suspect that if
the motor was going to need a total overhaul, it would've shown SOME signs
of age by that point.


Yesterday I was 'bragging' about my GMC pickup. It was in the shop for a new clutch, but had been of
great service for the past ten years and 113,000 miles.

This morning, Ronnie, my mechanic guy, called to wish me Merry Christmas and let me know what else
they found wrong with the truck. So far, the list includes:

Clutch needs replacement
Intake manifold gasket leaking water
Left rear spring has a broken leaf
Brake master cylinder leaking
Power steering pump leaking

I sure wish I hadn't already done all my Christmas shopping!
--
John Herring

Hope your Christmas is Spectacular,
and your New Year even Better!

déjà vu all over again :Subaru
 

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 14:31:52 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


wrote in message
groups.com...

Wayne.B wrote:
On 12 Dec 2005 07:09:33 -0800, wrote:

My little V40 contiues to scoot along without a hitch or hiccup. I'm
not sure what we'll replace her Subaru with, but it would be a Volvo
XC70 if we found the right deal on the right car and it's unlikely to
be another Subaru unless they have done something about
front seat comfort in the last few years.

======================================

I've never owned a Volvo but have rented a few and always found the
front seats to be among the most comfortable I've ever seen.
Unfortunately their self perpetuated reputation for reliability
doesn't seem to stand up under scrutiny however.

With a Volvo, you put up with a lot of minor nuisances (many are
electrical in nature), but
with proper maintenance and a little luck it's possible to get huge
longevity from the basic power train.

The Japanese cars, in general, are a little more reliable than a Volvo-
but are less likely to
do 200-300k without an engine overhaul (as Volvos often do), and less
sturdy in a catastrophic accident.


I dunno about that Japanese engine thing, Chuck. I had a 1982 Tercel. At
160k or 180k miles or so, my mechanic thought it would be interesting to
check compression. The numbers were perfectly even and within spec across
all 4 cylinders. He thought his measuring thing was screwed up, so he
tried
another. Same results. No nasty engine problems of any other sort, either.
No ooze around gaskets, nothing. Unfortunately, some drunk a-hole decided
to
total the car, so I never found out how far it could go. I suspect that if
the motor was going to need a total overhaul, it would've shown SOME signs
of age by that point.


Yesterday I was 'bragging' about my GMC pickup. It was in the shop for a
new clutch, but had been of
great service for the past ten years and 113,000 miles.

This morning, Ronnie, my mechanic guy, called to wish me Merry Christmas
and let me know what else
they found wrong with the truck. So far, the list includes:

Clutch needs replacement
Intake manifold gasket leaking water
Left rear spring has a broken leaf
Brake master cylinder leaking
Power steering pump leaking

I sure wish I hadn't already done all my Christmas shopping!
--
John Herring

My condolences.

déjà vu all over again
 

Do I understand you correctly, in your opinion, Lucas Oil Stabilizer is a
godsend for those using low RPM diesels, but you are not sure of higher RPM
gas engines.


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 08:44:42 -0500, "Lord Reginald Smithers" The
fastest and most accurate Gun in the World wrote:

Tom,

I read and lost the post where you said you used the Lucas Oil Stabilizer,
and found it to be a great additive. 15 yrs ago I used to use Slick 50,
and
thought I got better gas mileage and Slick 50 said it protected better
than
regular oil. Unfortunately, it also clogged up engine.

You are obviously smarter than the average person. You obviously are very
mechanically inclined. Didn't that report make you wonder if the additive
was protecting the engine and components when the engine was running at
high
RPM?

I've never turned over 2k on that truck since I've owned it. In
cruise mode, it runs somewhere around 1.4/1.5K so comparatively
speaking, it's not running high rpm. We're also talking rear end
gears here which are an entirely different animal than engine oil.

I know guys who mix Marvel Mystery Oil in their gas at 200/1 too -
never been convinced that works either. :)