Jump to content

zero

Toyota Advanced Member
  • Content count

    6,041
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by zero

  1. True enough for overall driving MPGs. Not true for just highway mileage. NO matter how many ranges an automatic has -it still robs power to run a hydraulic pump. A standard trans will have less loss when cruising down the highway in high gear. That is, unless someone has invented an automatic trans with no power-robbing hydraulic pump . Closest to that I am aware of is a belt-driven continuously variable trans (CVT) that Subaru had early-on with electric solenoids and no hydraulics. Ford C-Max has it. So do certain Toyota Corollas, et. al. Some sort of hybrid Toric Drive but can't say I know much about the new ones.
  2. No it was not. I can't say I've researched the subject much, but . . The fuel injection in my 1988 22RE is crude and not something Toyota invented. It is a crude copy of the 1973 Bosch L-Jetronic system that many Datsuns had in the 70s. It came out early 70s and many different makes of cars in Europe paid Bosch for license to copy it -just as Nippo Denso did for Toyota. I call it "crude" because a four-stroke-cycle engine fires every other stroke. So at 1000 RPM, each cylinder fires 500 times. That L-Jetronic system fires every stroke, so one charge just sits there doing nothing until it gets used by the next (power) stroke. My 79 Datsun had the same system. Many cars and trucks with carbs got better MPGs then when fitted with various forms of electronic fuel injection (until in improved). EFI certainly made them start better in cold weather though. It also made them easier to drive from a cold start. No more choke, choke-pull-off, heat-riser valves, or accelerator pumps to malfunction and make cold driving miserable. LOTs of other things to go wrong though.
  3. Sorry, that is not what meant to write. I meant to write you indicated those numbers were NOT easy to find when sourcing parts. Somehow my "not" got deleted, or my brain stopped short of the keyboard. Regardless of what Linda has experienced, I have many times NOT be able to find parts just by VIN. The post I am referring to was when you (Derek) posted a VIN for a 1 ton Toyota pickup (NOT a RV or cab &chassis). That VIN proves my point since proper brake rotors could not be narrowed down to one number just by the VIN. With mid-80s RVs. often the "3W" at the end of the model code is what gets you specific parts. Toyota dealers (at least the ones I have been too) often start with the VIN, and then the come up with all the different model codes and then the proper code gets picked. Sometimes there is only one choice and sometimes several.
  4. RE the past discussion of looking up parts for our RVs by vehicle code and not the VIN. I posted the code numbers for various years. You (Derek) seemed to indicated those codes are easy to find? I am sort of paraphrasing and maybe I misunderstood. I don't remember where that thread is buried now. I just got around to looking at two of my Toyota RVs. That Toyota code is clearly printed on a tag on both. The VIN alone will not always get the right parts. The chassis code will. Here are the code tags on my 1978 Chinook (RN28 series) and my 1988 Minicruiser (RN7y5 series).
  5. Yes, and also the hydraulic pump in the trans robs power constantly. On farm tractors we could measure it and it took 4 horsepower, all the time, to run the transmission (hydraulic) pump. I don't know what that figure is on something like an A43D. I used to love Subaru 4WD wagons when I lived in NY (as winter cars). The difference between the autos and manuals was amazing though. Both had 1.8 liter engines and 4.33 axle ratios as I recall. Model with the three-speed automatic got around 18 MPG on the highway. I had a 85, 88, and a 92 and all got same poor fuel mileage. Same rig with a five-speed manual got 24 MPG on the highway, and again - I had many of them over the years. Now with new cars and trucks? Seems soon there will be NO manual trans option. I don't know if that means they have removed the loss or we are all just getting dumbed down. No manual trans available anymore in large GM or Ford trucks as it is now. Autos with many speed ranges instead, but how pump loss is dealt with I do not know. When it comes to Honda stories - yeah - they did good but were also very light. I had a 1981 Accord with a 5 speed that got 42 MPG on a few trips, but mid-30s was more the norm. My 81 Chevy Chevette did better at 46 MPG consistently (but it had a 1.8 liter Japanese diesel). Such figures do not carry over to a vehicle that is working hard like a Toyota RV. if it did, I'd have one of those little diesels in it.
  6. Doing it with a diesel that is already 30% more efficient changes everything. My 1992 Dodge-Cummins extended-cab truck, 4WD, with a camper on the back got 17-18 MPG average going to Kentucky from NY at 65-75 MPH the whole way. I think conventional "hypermiling" as I understand it - is a load of hooey when applied to motorhomes. If somebody wants 20 MPG with a gas engine - wind-resistance has to be cut and that usually means a low and slippery roof is a must. Also an engine that - at cruising speed - is running at the peak of its torque curve. Gas or diesel engine is at peak efficiency when at the peak of the torque-curve and that is sometimes hard to do with a vehicle designed to run well at many different loads and speeds. I find doing "studies" on fuel mileage greatly problematic. I'm not sure if anyone throws off more BS then for MPGs. Even people I know to be honest come up with fuel-mileage fantasies. I think one problem is that magical "one time 22 MPG fill" that sticks in memory, while the 99% of the 12-14 MPG fills get forgotten. Also seem to be a lot of people now adays that do not know how to compute actual fuel mileage. In my opinion - having a manual trans instead of a power-robbing auto trans with a constantly slipping torque-converter is a must for optimum fuel mileage. Also a pop-up roof. Also small tires and as low to the ground as can be done safely. Also an efficient engine and sometimes - the carbed engines are better then the 80s EFI engines.
  7. I just came back from a week in the Michigan Upper Peninsula, working on our cabin. On the penultimate trip to the same place, I met a guy who had just bought a 1981 Dolphin (he had travelled 400 miles round-trip to get it) On this trip - it is in is front yard for sale and I saw the owner/seller (a skinny guy with shorts) in the yard - so I stopped. I assumed he'd had problems and was dumping it. NOPE. He told me had been searching for a Toyota micromini for a long time. THEN he found that Dolphin and grabbed it (for around $3K I think). THEN, after just getting it home - a relative told him he had one that was like new that had been stored in his barn for ten years and had been in that area of Michigan since new. So after seeing what nice shape it was in - he bought the 1986 Coachman/Travelmaster and put the 1981 Dolphin up for sale. At first - I was interested in the Dolphin thinking the price was $1500 as it seemed to appear on the sign. Nope. He is asking around $4K but "willing to negotiate." I must admit - I looked over the Travelmaster and it is in beautiful condition. Almost spotless. Note the 26 PSI tire pressure suggestion, front and back on the sticker.
  8. zero

    Engine Battery

    I'll second what Linda said. Johnson Controls makes the most batteries in the USA for cars and truck including OEM, Interstate, Duralast, Die Hard-Sears, Optima, etc. Same as sold by Walmart and I've done great with them. There are only maybe three companies left in the USA making batteries for cars and trucks and the one brand that has had severe quality control issues is Exide. I've had NO issues with any of my JC batteries from Walmart.
  9. zero

    Rare find - dually front hubs

    By the way - a 1985 Toyota motorhome uses this truck and that is what tells you exactly what parts are needed. "3W" at the end is the key. A 1985 uses a RN55L-KREA 3W or a RN55L-KDEA 3W.
  10. zero

    Rare find - dually front hubs

    No mystery that I can see. Just different databases with different descriptions. I looked at half-a-dozen Toyota databases. That VIN alone will not tell you what rotor you need. Like I said before, the actual model is what is needed - like with a "3W" at the end. Here's info from a different database - same part #s but classes the vehicles a little different. 2WD 1/2 ton uses Toyota # 43512-35081 for rotors (smaller diameter) 2WD 1 ton AND 2WD heavy-duty use Toyota # 43512-35180 (larger diameter)
  11. zero

    Rare find - dually front hubs

    That VIN offers two choices and two different rotors. The smaller rotors for a 4 cylinder and bigger with a 6 cylinder. Here are the Toyota #s and some crosses to aftermarket. VIN# JT4RN55E4F0117843 Toyota # 4351235081 for 4 cylinder engine and single rear wheels 9 3/4" diameter, Beck Arnley # 0832075 Toyota # 4351235180 for 6 cylinder engine and single rear wheels 10.1" diameter Wagner BD60804
  12. zero

    Rare find - dually front hubs

    Yes, we here on this forum understand, but we have esoteric context. When a person tries to buy parts via a parts catalog at NAPA, Rock Auto, etc. - that is where the "ton" thing goes awry. To be sure - you either have to see a "3W" in the parts listing. Or do a VIN search, get a Toyota part #, and then cross at a place like Rock Auto. To Rock's credit - they often give OEM Toyota numbers. Of course, a person can also just measure their rotor and then buy by dimensions.
  13. zero

    Rare find - dually front hubs

    All someone has to do is order for an RV with single wheels and "3W" at the end of its ID. On a 1985, five-lug rotors come in 9.76" diamater (light duty) and in 10.1" diameter (heavy duty for 3W). Terms like "1 ton" are kind of useless and meaningless in parts catalogs.
  14. zero

    Rare find - dually front hubs

    I compared brake rotors between a 1985 HD cab & chassis with single rear wheels - versus - a 1988 HD cab & chassis with a full floater and dual rear wheels. Both rotors are the same size. One mounts with 5 bolts and the other with 6 bolts. Since they are the same thickness and diameter, it makes me think the old brake mounts and calipers will work. Again - I am not 100% sure. Ask Totem on this forum. He changed his over and not sure what he had to use.
  15. zero

    Rare find - dually front hubs

    I bought that Chinook in Maine from a Cajun kid from Louisiana. He was travelling, but got stopped in Maine with a broken windshield. I bought it for $500. He painted it with a spray can. I am still trying to find a way to remove that layer of paint but save the still-existing Chinook MPG lettering and decals underneath. It is TOUGH stuff. Acetone won't touch it.
  16. zero

    Rare find - dually front hubs

    I did a changeover on a 78 Chinook with coil-spring suspension and that was NOT easy. I am the only such truck I've ever seen where it was done. Maybe other owners have better things to do with their time.. On a 1985 - finding those hubs is the main issue because you are not going to get them aftermarket. That and the brake-caliper-brackets IF you need them. The rest is easy. New calipers, pads, and rotors are dirt-cheap at places like Rock Auto. Note - if you have a friend who wants to do such a change and decides the brake-caliper-brackets are needed - I have a pair I'd sell cheap. I have them left-over from when I changed over my 1978 Chinook to 6 lug. No way could I adapt 1987 brakes to my 1978 Chinook so I still have those brackets. I only used the hubs.
  17. zero

    Chinook Highway Speed

    Certainly no rules as to latch choice. This is what I have on mine. Mine top came half way up on a trip last year when I forgot to latch them. I lucky I didn't blow the top off (which has happened to others).
  18. zero

    Rare find - dually front hubs

    Plenty around like that. My 1988 Minicruiser has one spare to fit front or back and Toyota designed it so all wheels have the same off-set. The 1987 box-truck I stripped was the same. Same with my ugly 1978 Chinook except with that - I did all the change-over work. Certainly did not come from the factory like that. I know of many duals on Toyotas in 185R-14C, 185/75-14, and 195/75-14 that worked fine on bad rocky roads and I've never heard of rocks getting wedge inbetween to be any special issue. I do most of my travel on gravel roads and I certainly have had no problems.
  19. zero

    Rare find - dually front hubs

    What the heck does that imply? The 6 lug hubs have the same bearings as the 5 lug hubs. So you just take the old hubs off put the 6 lug hubs on. If the bearing races are good in the 6 lug hubs - then nothing to be pressed in, or out. Just use the bearing races in the 6 lug hubs and bearing cones from the 5 lug hubs - lube, adjust, and that's it. Rotor bolts to the hubs and in the case of a 1985 - I do not know if the rotors from the 5 lug setup will fit. I suspect not. I think (and maybe someone will correct me) - that 5 lug hubs for 5 lug wheels have rotors with 5 mounting holes. 6 lug hubs for 6 lug wheels have rotors with 6 mounting holes. I've never done the changeover on a 1985. I've only done it on older rigs with coil-spring front-suspensions and those have totally different brakes. I assume (but am not sure) - for a complete change - you need two hubs, two rotors. two brake-caliper brackets and maybe two calipers. It is possible the old calipers do not need to be changed but I am not sure on an 85.
  20. zero

    New 1981 Sunrader Diesel Owner

    GM used Stanadyne/Roosamaster DB2 pumps - exactly the same models as Ford used. Also the same as used by the military on Humvees and diesel K5 Blazers and cargo carriers, etc. U.S. Army, starting in 1990, used JP8 military fuel in all diesels. NOT US "pump diesel." My 1994 F250 has the original pump with 240,000 miles (a "junk" Stanadyne like GM uses). Since you put a 90K figure on them, seems I'm doing better then most. Note my truck has always been run on farm diesel, or heating oil, or conventional pump diesel, or ultra-low-sulfur with 2-stroke oil added. US Military bought thousands of trucks with civilian-type 6.2 and 6.5 diesels. Same as what came in half-ton pickups (and more HD rigs), along with K5 Blazers. There are hundreds of documents from the U.S. Army documenting pump wear problems. low lube issues, and the many efforts they made to off-set those issues. Note - that's with JP8 military diesel that is close to winter-blend diesel we get at the pump. HMMWV, CUCV, - M1008, M1009, M1010, M1028, M1031, etc. All with the same Stanadyne pumps we got in civilian trucks up through 1993.
  21. zero

    New 1981 Sunrader Diesel Owner

    I worked in three different diesel fuel injection shops but all were off-road. On-road requires different equipment and has different rules due to highway emissions regs.. That said, back in the 70s and 80s - many of the same injection pumps were used on cars, trucks, farm tractors, log skidders, etc. That all changed in the 90s. GM's last year for a mechanical pump was 1993. Ford was mid 1994, etc. Most of our customers used off-road diesel that was NOT low sulfur when it was mandated at the pumps. Now - it is all low-sulfur - even heating oil (at least where I live). We saw many pump problems - but to be fair - we did not get customers come visit us just to tell us how great their rigs were running. We only saw the bad. I DID go to many service schools an DID keep up with what was going on with auto-diesels. I also owned a dozen GM, VW, Dodge Cummins, Ford-IH, and Isuzu diesels myself. There is no question that ultra-low sulfur diesel has the natural lube cooked out of it. Also no question that fuel sellers are supposed to dump a fuel lube additive into that fuel before selling to you. I also have little doubt that most sellers have little concern for weirdos that are still driving mechanically-injected diesels from the past and they are the ones with the higher lube needs. Our US military refused to switch over to electronic pumps for the GM engines in Humvees (same engines that came in K5 Blazers, ?Suburbans, and pickups). So there is much info from the military with the constant pump failures from low-lube - especially in hot areas like Iraq. Not the same fuel as the pump fuel we get here - but close. I know this. #1 Most people including mechanics don't own tools to check a timing advance and many have no clue how to even try #2 Besides advance wear from low-lube fuel - for some reason the newer fuel also eats up rubber parts so materials got updated. For me? Considering a replacement pump can cost over $1000 - I trust myself to make sure my fuel has all the lube it needs. For those that trust fuel sellers to care about us with old rigs - go for it.
  22. zero

    New 1981 Sunrader Diesel Owner

    I got thinking about your rig. I forgot until looking in my tech manual that the alternator in a 81 diesel is different from an 81 gas version. My book says your alternator has an internal voltage regulator. That likely means that IF you really want a rectifier-based isolator - you need a four-post unit and NOT a three-post like you have now. A four-post hooks up just the same as you have now except it has that 4th post that gets hooked to IGN wire that senses voltage somewhere other then the alternator post. I feel bad making this all sound convoluted - but it is. Lots of different charging systems out there and not all isolator work on all RVs. Double check for yourself - but it looks to me you have three choices IF you want full charge voltage to reach all your batteries. #1 Buy a 4 post rectifier-based isolator. #2 Buy an FET isolator (looks like what you have now but has near no voltage drop and has no rectifiers inside) #3 (MY CHOICE) Buy a "smart" relay. No voltage drop and no semi-conductors to blow out and FULL charge voltage. I have the PowerStream "smart" relay I attached an image of.
  23. zero

    New 1981 Sunrader Diesel Owner

    Isolators come in three post and four post. Newer Toyotas (mid 80s and up) usually use a four-post unit. Back to your question. All a three post isolator is - is two one-way "check valves" tied together at the middle post. Inside the box are two large diode/rectifiers. I have never seen one go partially bad. Usually they work, or they are completely blown like a fuse. Just one side can blow however. So power from the alternator goes to the center post. It can only go one-way. It can go into and through the isolator, but cannot go backwards. That power travels one-way to both end posts. One for the cranking battery and one for the coach battery. So power goes to each, but can never flow backwards. This keeps one battery from draining the other. The device is simple. Only problems are this. #1 if overloaded it will blow just like a fuse. #2 when working correctly there is always a voltage drop of 7/10 ths of a volt. So if the alternator is making 14.2 volts (what batteries should get), the end terminals of that isolator drop to 13.5 volts which will charge your batteries - but not like they should be charged. I will get more complicated now. All alternators and regulator combos MUST have a way to sense actual battery voltage do the alternator can adjust voltage AT the battery and not AT the alternator post. As I recall, that is why some rigs need a four post isolator. I think the rule-of-thumb with Toyotas is - if the alternator has an internal regulator - a four post isolator is needed (but double check).or If you isolator is working - but only reads somewhere around 13.5 volts - then nobody is telling your alternator about it. If it knew - it would adjust and you'd see voltage at the alternator output post rise to 14.9 volts so the output of the isolator would be the proper 14.2 volts. One more note. Life is much simply by just getting rid of the isolator and put in a isolator-relay instead. Nothing to blow, and not voltage drop to deal with.
  24. I'll add you do NOT want to put a 20 amp breaker in there anywhere. It does not match the ampacity of 14 gauge wire. 15 amp is what is called for and you already have two of them.
  25. I must be missing something. Your panel already has two 15 amp breakers. One for the outlets and one for the converter. Why do you want more breakers? Just use the outlet circuit for your air-conditioner.
×