...

 

justin ,ure opinion please-is it an inaccurate statement that tow tunes should be a tad richer to keep egts lower?if so?was under the assumption this would not allow maximum performance as a performance non-towing tune would,i know when i do the fueling on my sportbikes-either on the richer side as well as the leaner side of perfect affects hp numbers as well as reliaibilty of the engine-your take on this please...

 

I would tend to believe Mythbusters. Having watched a lot of their episodes I think they do a good job of backing up their theories with evidence versus some guy on the F150 forum swearing leaving his tailgate down made a huge difference.

 

especially in the times of $4 dollar + gas times-ford,gm,dodge,toyota,& nissan would make covers oem equipment if it gave them another mpg for cafe #'s -****-they'd do it for another .25 mpg improvement

 

Tow tunes can be set up richer to lower EGTs and there are also some ways to do this automatically. If someone really wants to get very specific with their towing conditions, payloads, goals, and needs, I can set up tunes that are geared a certain way be it performance, mileage, flat land towing, mountain towing, etc.

At the other end of the spectrum, there are two major contributors to EGTs that we can control, spark, and timing. Adding timing actually lowers EGTs because more burning occurs in the cylinder, and most tunes have quite a bit more timing in them than stock.

 

very interesting- thank-you

 

Truck makers get their cafe numbers elsewhere. The truck market has been aimed at a guy or a woman who wants more power than he can ever possibly use and in most case uses his/her truck to commute, all alone in what is basically a huge 5 passenger SUV with a little bed in place of the third row seat. That will probably change since they are shutting down truck lines as fast as they can and switching to cars. They could do a lot of things for fuel mileage that they don't do because they don't think they can sell it (nothing is free). But that might change as well.
If they had wanted fuel efficiency, why did NISSAN start out with the largest gas guzzler on the market, and why did all the rest hurry to follow suit? Why is Ford repeatedly criticized for having fewer CCs than all the others when a 4.6 can do what most of us need to do and a 5.4 will finish off the rest of us. Toyota could never get close to their EPA numbers with that little 4.8, yet they now have I think a 5.8. That thing needs to be refueled-in-flight for any more than a trip to the store. I don't think the toy boys were too worried about their cafe numbers.