Air box mod

[Frenchy]

I have tried the 89 and 93 in the past not full tanks mixed with a 1/4 tank or so of 87, don't recall what the mpg's were off hand but they were not what i posted above, ( the current fill up is 17gl's of regular)
Since getting this truck the mpg's were disappointing, ( as most know) maybe that's on me thinking this small motor should provide high mpg's i guess i was a little naive on this subject, but i loved the look and capability of the truck so i accepted it for what it is while still trying to tweak the weak points..

Assuming you are on the east Coast since you have 93 available I would consider mid grade as well. That said for full benefits I would run it for a few tanks in a row. That will.help.with the overall results.

As for great fuel mileage, a truck still has its limitations. Only a car will do best.

Sponsored

 

[Racket]

Definitely a good way of thinking there. Even though many think the aftermarket air filters are the way to go, you still get best filtration with the OEM Air filters. Personally instead of the air box modification like the OP did I would say go with the Velocotec(or however it's spelled) for a 2WD truck or go with a Snorkel with a 4WD Truck especially if going OffRoad regularly. Both would help provide a positive pressure on the intake and in turn would help with the MPG.

The Velossatech Big Mouth (at least in theory) emulates driving at lower altitude. The thread (s) on it are pretty well debated but the opening into the airbox itself isn't changed.

 

[Frenchy]

The Velossatech Big Mouth (at least in theory) emulates driving at lower altitude. The thread (s) on it are pretty well debated but the opening into the airbox itself isn't changed.

I won't argue that the inlet is still the same, but with a positive pressure you still get a benefit. Even if the driving is done at high altitude you still have a chance for improvement

 

[MarioCart]

I'm going to guess that you never had the truck at sea level or high altitude? I have done both and I can tell you it is noticeable regardless where you are. It's not a 100 HP difference noticeable. It is noticeable enough to tell the truck preforms better regardless even if you don't have a load.

yes I have, and no it wasn't noticeable. At the time I wasn't looking for it, which is the best time to gauge performance changes. If you try and convince yourself of something, its easier to fool yourself at the same time.
I'm not one to accept anecdotal opinions as I prefer facts. Not sure if anyone has done dyno tests the same day, same fuel same truck at differing altitudes as you describe, so I am likely SOL on my needs.

 

[JohnnyO]

Assuming you are on the east Coast since you have 93 available I would consider mid grade as well. That said for full benefits I would run it for a few tanks in a row. That will.help.with the overall results.

As for great fuel mileage, a truck still has its limitations. Only a car will do best.

Early on I ran several tanks of everything, three in a row of 87, 89, 93, and E15 88, and tracked the mileage. Averaged 1.5 mpg better with 89 over 87 so it doesn't really cost any more to run 89. Saw no improvement with 93 over 89 although it seemed to run smoother according to the butt dyno.
Got 0.5-1.0 mpg better with E15 88 over 87 and it's the cheapest gas around here so most of the time that's what I run and if I can't get E15 then I get 89.

 

[Frenchy]

Early on I ran several tanks of everything, three in a row of 87, 89, 93, and E15 88, and tracked the mileage. Averaged 1.5 mpg better with 89 over 87 so it doesn't really cost any more to run 89. Saw no improvement with 93 over 89 although it seemed to run smoother according to the butt dyno.
Got 0.5-1.0 mpg better with E15 88 over 87 and it's the cheapest gas around here so most of the time that's what I run and if I can't get E15 then I get 89.

I will definitely agree with the smoother acceleration with higher octane since the ignition timing is able to be advanced. I will also agree with the general increase of MPG you mentioned.

With that said we are talking about MPG, not DPM

 

[Racket]

I won't argue that the inlet is still the same, but with a positive pressure you still get a benefit. Even if the driving is done at high altitude you still have a chance for improvement

Keeping this line if thought I'd point out you can't get 93 octane at the higher elevations. I believe above a certain height above sea level the highest is 91 octane.

It's why I was so jazzed having access to 94 octane E30 in South Florida. It didn't hurt my MPGs much when I drove appropriately but the power was obviously much more on tap. The cost was near that of mid grade 89 octane (10% ethanol) maybe below? 88 (15% ethanol) was super duper cheap but the performance was barely better than regular 87 octane at 10%.

(Excuse the old pic - I might get nostalgic for pre-2021 gas prices)

For us Flatlanders blender pumps rock. Just wish they were more common.

 

[Frenchy]

Keeping this line if thought I'd point out you can't get 93 octane at the higher elevations. I believe above a certain height above sea level the highest is 91 octane.

It's why I was so jazzed having access to 94 octane E30 in South Florida. It didn't hurt my MPGs much when I drove appropriately but the power was obviously much more on tap. The cost was near that of mid grade 89 octane (10% ethanol) maybe below?

For us Flatlanders blender pumps rock. Just wish they were more common.

It will depend on the state you go to for what you can get for different octanes available. Here I'm Colorado Regular Fuel is considered 85 and Mid Grade is 87(trust me I hate it). If not mistaken if I head east by one or two states I could to 93 for premium, but can't remember right off

 

[Racket]

It will depend on the state you go to for what you can get for different octanes available. Here I'm Colorado Regular Fuel is considered 85 and Mid Grade is 87(trust me I hate it). If not mistaken if I head east by one or two states I could to 93 for premium, but can't remember right off

Sucks to be you, nosebleeder (lol I kid)? I've been to CO. Gorgeous country out/up there.

 

[Muffin1]

I drove the return trip to what i originally did as posted in my first post the only
difference i could say is there were no slow downs from traffic or construction,
( which i think ultimately led to that high for me MPG # i got ) and i was able to keep the 75+ most of the way, it was about 17* (54*) cooler then the day trip of 71*
Out of curiosity i placed a temp sensor inside the airbox, and the receiver i had inside the cab sitting in the dash storage pocket, the temp while driving showed exactly what the outside ambient temp from the infotainment display was showing, after i parked at home i brought the receiver in the house and within a half hour the airbox sensor was showing 99*.
I was a believer that the stock plastic airbox would do a good job of resisting heat soak from the engine or even summer temps and stop n go traffic but i can see it doesn't.
So 22.9 VS 21.5 mpg. either one is acceptable considering my driving style., the motor is very negatively sensitive to higher mph's.

 

[DROZ23]

don't forget to add that the performance gains are most noticeable at high altitude and/or towing a heavy load. That statement in the next paragraph tells me that any other condition, the gains are minimal.

The Ranger maybe tuned for 87 but It is more fun at 93 TBH. Us Americans are in love with $2-3 Gas but Turbos love octane. It is the reason you can put 50 WHP on 2.3L with a Conservative Ford Tune. Just the fuel alone will give you the HP and Torque.

Definitely a good way of thinking there. Even though many think the aftermarket air filters are the way to go, you still get best filtration with the OEM Air filters. Personally instead of the air box modification like the OP did I would say go with the Velocotec(or however it's spelled) for a 2WD truck or go with a Snorkel with a 4WD Truck especially if going OffRoad regularly. Both would help provide a positive pressure on the intake and in turn would help with the MPG.

AEM Dry Flow tests well for a high flow AM filter. I build a Ram system for $1 worth of Tape and piece of cardboard vs $140 Big Mouth. Don't get me wrong, I might still buy one for the sexy look, but you can almost buy a CVF hot side pipe kit for that amount of money. That will would for sure get you better Throttle response and more HP.

 

[DROZ23]

My preference would be to keep the factory filter for longevity.

I drove a ranger from 200k miles on a K&N filter. probably the dirtiest of them all and it was fine. Get AEM Dry Filter. Then are pretty good. Doing a box without going to a high flow filter is not useful.

 

[DROZ23]

Not wanting to spend hundreds on a new airbox i went ahead and did my own take on the fender feed intake that's posted here on the forum but routed from the grill area where the factory intake gets its air, i used a 1.5'' tube for now because the opening next to the radiator support was only that wide and angled, i cut the airbox and the small plastic diverter behind the grill.
It seems to be more responsive getting up to highway speed but that could d be a placebo i don't have any scientific proof, i did have a increase in mpg's,
So after filling up at Costco with 87 and doing a 90 mile highway trip back home running mostly 75-80 with two slowdowns thru a construction zone (50mph) setting up and a cluster of slow pokes going 60-65 the return trip was 22.9 and i never since owning the truck got that high mpg.
The previous on the dash was 21.3, i did not reset the monitor, so it creeped up from 21.3 the 22.9 for this trip. Also the original filter is still in use and looks fine with almost 18,000 miles so far
i will be doing the same trip Monday so i will report back, and i realize there are a lot of variables and the intake tube is relatively small in diameter, could be a tailwind maybe

I thought of very similar thing but not cutting holes in the box, rather opening up the inlet in the cover and extending it through the wall you cut for the snorkel.

Sponsored