+- Wanderlodge Gurus - The Member Funded Wanderlodge Forum (http://www.wanderlodgegurus.com)
+-- Forum: Yahoo Groups Archive (/forumdisplay.php?fid=61)
+--- Forum: WanderlodgeForum (/forumdisplay.php?fid=63)
+--- Thread: FC 3208 NA Performance Data (/showthread.php?tid=2670)
FC 3208 NA Performance Data - orbitalsolutions - 05-23-2006 17:01
At 15,000 miles the valves have fully seated on the "New Cat."
After running 1590 miles, on roads ranging from running east on I40
from Kingman, AZ to Flagstaff, AZ (Without having to stop to cool
down). Taking secondary departures to see big meteor impact sights
and the Hopi Indian ruins, along with the winding paths that weave
through the Ozark Mountains, and other stop and goes, this is what
the numbers say...
The old bus has consumed 152 gallons of fuel oil. That equals 10.46
miles per gallon, pulling a Ford Ranger with enclosed aluminum bed
shell, loaded pretty much to the gills.
The motor is currently down less than a quart of motor oil, (none
has been added). That's why I know for sure the valves are finally
comfortable.
The majority of running time has been done at 2200 Rpm's at an
average speed of about 60 miles per hour.
All I can say is I want higher gears! My bus has the original 5.62
(I think, or what ever Blue Bird put in it) They are too short for
sure.
The only running gear modification I want to make is to get some
longer legs in the pumpkin. I am convinced that it would make a
HUGE difference.
Hopefully, I can find a garage that I feel comfortable to do the
work. I would have it done tomorrow If I could.
Can't wait to see what the cruise speed will be at 2200 rpm's, or
the fuel milage at reduced revolutions.
So there are some real world numbers for anyone that may find it of
interest.
James
78FC33SB
Bull Shoials AK (But feeling ready for a drive)
FC 3208 NA Performance Data - davidkerryedwards - 05-24-2006 01:01
Good info, thanks for posting that. What effect do you think the
taller gears would have on top end power? In other words, would you
feel different if you were driving I-70 instead of I-40?
Kerry
82 FC 35
Denver
-- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "orbitalsolutions"
>
> At 15,000 miles the valves have fully seated on the "New Cat."
>
> After running 1590 miles, on roads ranging from running east on I40
> from Kingman, AZ to Flagstaff, AZ (Without having to stop to cool
> down). Taking secondary departures to see big meteor impact sights
> and the Hopi Indian ruins, along with the winding paths that weave
> through the Ozark Mountains, and other stop and goes, this is what
> the numbers say...
>
> The old bus has consumed 152 gallons of fuel oil. That equals 10.46
> miles per gallon, pulling a Ford Ranger with enclosed aluminum bed
> shell, loaded pretty much to the gills.
>
> The motor is currently down less than a quart of motor oil, (none
> has been added). That's why I know for sure the valves are finally
> comfortable.
>
> The majority of running time has been done at 2200 Rpm's at an
> average speed of about 60 miles per hour.
>
> All I can say is I want higher gears! My bus has the original 5.62
> (I think, or what ever Blue Bird put in it) They are too short for
> sure.
>
> The only running gear modification I want to make is to get some
> longer legs in the pumpkin. I am convinced that it would make a
> HUGE difference.
>
> Hopefully, I can find a garage that I feel comfortable to do the
> work. I would have it done tomorrow If I could.
>
> Can't wait to see what the cruise speed will be at 2200 rpm's, or
> the fuel milage at reduced revolutions.
>
> So there are some real world numbers for anyone that may find it of
> interest.
>
>
> James
> 78FC33SB
> Bull Shoials AK (But feeling ready for a drive)
>
FC 3208 NA Performance Data - Jeff Miller - 05-24-2006 01:52
Not quite sure what doesn't add up, but something doesn't.
At 2200rpm in 4th, 5.29:1 gears you should be running around 49mph.
Certainly should get better than 10mpg at that speed.
If your speedo and tach are accurate, then it would suggest that you
have between a 4.63:1 and 4.44:1 ratio.
I ran a 4.63:1 in a couple of my 'Birds, including my '77
FC31/3208na.
It allowed me to run 70mph plus, and to get into 3rd gear at a
higher speed for hill climbing. My speed over Mont Eagle actually
increased with the taller gears.
It didn't seem to impact my fuel mileage, since I was running 10mph
faster most of the time the aero drag increase at least offset the
lower piston travel/mile of the taller gears.
This was running clean on a '77 with a well tuned Na. If I were to
suggest gears for a much heavier coach like an '82, towing, it
depends on the terrain you're traveling and what you expect from
your coach. A couple of guys have gone to taller gears on the late
Na, but remember that the '82 FC35 is the worst power/weight
ration 'Bird made, you need to address that for performance also.
On our '84 250hp FC35 the 4.63:1 gears were too short for flatlands,
I would like to have run 4.44:1 instead. The 4.11:1 on our '88 /
300hp was a bit tall, especially with the .83:1 overdrive and 12R
tires, again 4.44:1 would probably have been optimum when towing
with that rig.
In all I feel that changing from 5.29:1 to a taller ratio (first
step is the 4.89:1 such as in the '83-'86) is a substantial upgrade
to any coach unless you're really going to spend a lot of time
climbing mountains. If climbing is your game, get a turbo engine,
you can't afford to lose 3% of your hp for every 1000' of altitude
with the Na.
- Jeff Miller
in Holland, MI
(we have hills here too, but we fill them all with water)
--- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "davidkerryedwards"
>
> Good info, thanks for posting that. What effect do you think the
> taller gears would have on top end power? In other words, would
you
> feel different if you were driving I-70 instead of I-40?
>
> Kerry
> 82 FC 35
> Denver
>
> -- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "orbitalsolutions"
>
> >
> > At 15,000 miles the valves have fully seated on the "New Cat."
> >
> > After running 1590 miles, on roads ranging from running east on
I40
> > from Kingman, AZ to Flagstaff, AZ (Without having to stop to
cool
> > down). Taking secondary departures to see big meteor impact
sights
> > and the Hopi Indian ruins, along with the winding paths that
weave
> > through the Ozark Mountains, and other stop and goes, this is
what
> > the numbers say...
> >
> > The old bus has consumed 152 gallons of fuel oil. That equals
10.46
> > miles per gallon, pulling a Ford Ranger with enclosed aluminum
bed
> > shell, loaded pretty much to the gills.
> >
> > The motor is currently down less than a quart of motor oil,
(none
> > has been added). That's why I know for sure the valves are
finally
> > comfortable.
> >
> > The majority of running time has been done at 2200 Rpm's at an
> > average speed of about 60 miles per hour.
> >
> > All I can say is I want higher gears! My bus has the original
5.62
> > (I think, or what ever Blue Bird put in it) They are too short
for
> > sure.
> >
> > The only running gear modification I want to make is to get some
> > longer legs in the pumpkin. I am convinced that it would make a
> > HUGE difference.
> >
> > Hopefully, I can find a garage that I feel comfortable to do the
> > work. I would have it done tomorrow If I could.
> >
> > Can't wait to see what the cruise speed will be at 2200 rpm's,
or
> > the fuel milage at reduced revolutions.
> >
> > So there are some real world numbers for anyone that may find it
of
> > interest.
> >
> >
> > James
> > 78FC33SB
> > Bull Shoials AK (But feeling ready for a drive)
> >
>
FC 3208 NA Performance Data - dthollis1961 - 05-24-2006 02:31
James,
You have 5.29 gears in your bus and the speedo and odometer read fast
by around 10% if I remember correctly. I got 8.75 mpg in optimum
conditions with the pedal to the floor.
Enjoy your trip and drop the bus off here when you are done with it.
David Hollis
Springfield,IL
Former owner
FC 3208 NA Performance Data - dthollis1961 - 05-24-2006 02:36
That's 8.75 mpg after correction for the fast odometer.
David Hollis
--- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "dthollis1961"
>
> James,
>
> You have 5.29 gears in your bus and the speedo and odometer read
fast
> by around 10% if I remember correctly. I got 8.75 mpg in optimum
> conditions with the pedal to the floor.
>
> Enjoy your trip and drop the bus off here when you are done with
it.
>
> David Hollis
> Springfield,IL
> Former owner
>
FC 3208 NA Performance Data - orbitalsolutions - 05-24-2006 16:22
Hello, Dave.
Thanks for the info. Obviously my numbers are off target. I will
attempt to recalibrate the speedo in the future. I think I may drive a
bit slower than you do, but then again, I'm not used to driving to
fires!
I have found the hand throttle to be greatly useful. I use it all the
time, only depressing it when I do not have an adaquate following
distance. I feel like it is the most reliable cruise control one could
ever have.
The bus is running mighty sweet!!
James
78FC33SB
Bull Shoals, AK
--- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "dthollis1961"
wrote:
>
> James,
>
> You have 5.29 gears in your bus and the speedo and odometer read fast
> by around 10% if I remember correctly. I got 8.75 mpg in optimum
> conditions with the pedal to the floor.
>
> Enjoy your trip and drop the bus off here when you are done with it.
>
> David Hollis
> Springfield,IL
> Former owner
>
FC 3208 NA Performance Data - orbitalsolutions - 05-24-2006 16:57
Hello, Jeff.
Thanks for the input. Your willingness to share expert information
speaks volums about the person you are, and is greatly appreciated.
Man, I want those 4.63:1 gears. I don't know if my face could hold
the smile I would have running down the interstatre at 70mph. I
actually looked at the Road Atlas to see how far I was from Holland
Michigan!
I try to avoid driving long upgrades as much as possible, serious
climbing probably represents less than 2 percent of the driving I
do. When I went over the top at Flagstaff I was in second gear
doing about 15 miles per hour. A trucker came on the CB radio and
asked me if the bus was on FIRE -- LOL. But the engine temp was
acceptable and the old bus growled right on over the top.
This made me feel good, slow as I was going, after I passed several
tractors that were pulled over for a cool-down. But I must admit, I
was envious when that WB40 came blasting by me like I was parked
and just disappeared in front of me.
I've seen your 77FC31 on your web site and think the paint job is
fantastic. That's a great looking 'Bird!
james
78FC33SB
Bull Shoals, AK
--- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Miller"
>
> Not quite sure what doesn't add up, but something doesn't.
>
> At 2200rpm in 4th, 5.29:1 gears you should be running around
49mph.
> Certainly should get better than 10mpg at that speed.
>
> If your speedo and tach are accurate, then it would suggest that
you
> have between a 4.63:1 and 4.44:1 ratio.
>
> I ran a 4.63:1 in a couple of my 'Birds, including my '77
> FC31/3208na.
>
> It allowed me to run 70mph plus, and to get into 3rd gear at a
> higher speed for hill climbing. My speed over Mont Eagle actually
> increased with the taller gears.
>
> It didn't seem to impact my fuel mileage, since I was running
10mph
> faster most of the time the aero drag increase at least offset the
> lower piston travel/mile of the taller gears.
>
> This was running clean on a '77 with a well tuned Na. If I were to
> suggest gears for a much heavier coach like an '82, towing, it
> depends on the terrain you're traveling and what you expect from
> your coach. A couple of guys have gone to taller gears on the late
> Na, but remember that the '82 FC35 is the worst power/weight
> ration 'Bird made, you need to address that for performance also.
>
> On our '84 250hp FC35 the 4.63:1 gears were too short for
flatlands,
> I would like to have run 4.44:1 instead. The 4.11:1 on our '88 /
> 300hp was a bit tall, especially with the .83:1 overdrive and 12R
> tires, again 4.44:1 would probably have been optimum when towing
> with that rig.
>
> In all I feel that changing from 5.29:1 to a taller ratio (first
> step is the 4.89:1 such as in the '83-'86) is a substantial
upgrade
> to any coach unless you're really going to spend a lot of time
> climbing mountains. If climbing is your game, get a turbo engine,
> you can't afford to lose 3% of your hp for every 1000' of altitude
> with the Na.
>
> - Jeff Miller
> in Holland, MI
> (we have hills here too, but we fill them all with water)
>
>
> --- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "davidkerryedwards"
>
> >
> > Good info, thanks for posting that. What effect do you think the
> > taller gears would have on top end power? In other words, would
> you
> > feel different if you were driving I-70 instead of I-40?
> >
> > Kerry
> > 82 FC 35
> > Denver
> >
> > -- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "orbitalsolutions"
> >
> > >
> > > At 15,000 miles the valves have fully seated on the "New Cat."
> > >
> > > After running 1590 miles, on roads ranging from running east
on
> I40
> > > from Kingman, AZ to Flagstaff, AZ (Without having to stop to
> cool
> > > down). Taking secondary departures to see big meteor impact
> sights
> > > and the Hopi Indian ruins, along with the winding paths that
> weave
> > > through the Ozark Mountains, and other stop and goes, this is
> what
> > > the numbers say...
> > >
> > > The old bus has consumed 152 gallons of fuel oil. That equals
> 10.46
> > > miles per gallon, pulling a Ford Ranger with enclosed aluminum
> bed
> > > shell, loaded pretty much to the gills.
> > >
> > > The motor is currently down less than a quart of motor oil,
> (none
> > > has been added). That's why I know for sure the valves are
> finally
> > > comfortable.
> > >
> > > The majority of running time has been done at 2200 Rpm's at an
> > > average speed of about 60 miles per hour.
> > >
> > > All I can say is I want higher gears! My bus has the original
> 5.62
> > > (I think, or what ever Blue Bird put in it) They are too
short
> for
> > > sure.
> > >
> > > The only running gear modification I want to make is to get
some
> > > longer legs in the pumpkin. I am convinced that it would make
a
> > > HUGE difference.
> > >
> > > Hopefully, I can find a garage that I feel comfortable to do
the
> > > work. I would have it done tomorrow If I could.
> > >
> > > Can't wait to see what the cruise speed will be at 2200 rpm's,
> or
> > > the fuel milage at reduced revolutions.
> > >
> > > So there are some real world numbers for anyone that may find
it
> of
> > > interest.
> > >
> > >
> > > James
> > > 78FC33SB
> > > Bull Shoials AK (But feeling ready for a drive)
> > >
> >
>