# Modding for Fuel Efficiency



## ErikBEggs (Aug 20, 2011)

You have a Cruze Eco. I don't mean to sound like a prick but be happy. You should get 40 MPG without a problem. There is little you can do to improve the MPG on the Cruze Eco. The suspension is already dropped, weight is trimmed wherever is practically possible, already have cruddy LRR tires. The best you can do is get it tuned and drive efficiently.


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

...if you're not familiar with "hypermiling" driving techniques, consider visiting some of the economy-oriented websites, such as *ecomodder.com*


----------



## Aeroscout977 (Nov 25, 2010)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...if you're not familiar with "hypermiling" driving techniques, consider visiting some of the economy-oriented websites, such as *ecomodder.com*


This! During my hypermiling experiment I achieved almost an extra 12 MPG in the city over my normal driving habits. Usually I get close to 17-18. I extended my fill up interval to every other week as opposed to pretty much every week. The hardest part is keeping the driving style and techniques going. As far as modifications go Trifecta has an Economy tune you can look into.


----------



## Skilz10179 (Mar 22, 2011)

I am modding for gas mileage as well, there are plenty of parts out there that will help. Seibon has carbon fiber Hood, trunk and fenders available that will shed some lbs off the car. ZZP makes a catless downpipe and mid-pipe that will not only improve gas mileage and power output, but they are also lighter that the stock pipes as well. Then there is the Trifecta tune which yields a big increase in power and people claim improved fuel economy as well but it also requires you to run premium fuel.


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

ErikBEggs said:


> You have a Cruze Eco. I don't mean to sound like a prick but be happy. You should get 40 MPG without a problem. There is little you can do to improve the MPG on the Cruze Eco. The suspension is already dropped, weight is trimmed wherever is practically possible, already have cruddy LRR tires. The best you can do is get it tuned and drive efficiently.


I don't mean to sound like a prick - but I know what car I purchased. Last time I checked a forum is just that - a forum. A place where you can talk freely and give advice. That is exactly what I am looking for. I am happy with the car, otherwise I would not have purchased it - that would just be silly. My question isn't if I bought a fuel efficient car or not, my question is how I can make it even MORE fuel efficient. Only the last part of your post has any relevance to my original question. No matter what car is out - there is always room for improvement.



Aeroscout977 said:


> This! During my hypermiling experiment I achieved almost an extra 12 MPG in the city over my normal driving habits. Usually I get close to 17-18. I extended my fill up interval to every other week as opposed to pretty much every week. The hardest part is keeping the driving style and techniques going. As far as modifications go Trifecta has an Economy tune you can look into.


Thank you, I am familiar with hypermiling and it does a world of difference when you can apply it.



Skilz10179 said:


> I am modding for gas mileage as well, there are plenty of parts out there that will help. Seibon has carbon fiber Hood, trunk and fenders available that will shed some lbs off the car. ZZP makes a catless downpipe and mid-pipe that will not only improve gas mileage and power output, but they are also lighter that the stock pipes as well. Then there is the Trifecta tune which yields a big increase in power and people claim improved fuel economy as well but it also requires you to run premium fuel.


This is more of what I am looking for - by chance did you get some hard numbers of how much weight?

I looked at the carbon fiber hood and read that the guy only saved half a pound, but with the trunk he saved like 5-8 lbs. 

Tuners can tune for anything you want them to tune for these days, on whatever fuel - you just have to let them know what the car is for.

Maybe some background would help. I have been around cars my whole life and I work as an engineer for a performance parts company. I have built all of my cars, but with this Eco I want to try something different. I am looking to try out a MPG build this time around. This to me is something completely new as I have always built cars to be more reliable and more powerful. Turbo cars are nothing new to me and I have access to a dyno in house (though not at the moment as we just moved to a new larger facility and still need to install it.)


----------



## lostmymind (Dec 15, 2011)

High flow cat or catless downpipe. K&N drop in air filter or an overall less restrictive intake. Tune it for economy aka lean it out. Get some aero parts on it to help the air move smoother over it. Depending on how creative you are under body panels help a lot with removing pockets where the air can cause resistance. An aluminum exhaust would help shed a lot of weight but it is also loud and not the best for a daily driver.


----------



## iKermit (Dec 13, 2010)

This should be interesting lol i suggest you get the intake, downpipe, exhaust in first then buy the Trifect Tune specifying that you have those mods and are looking for optimum MPG. And Vince will get to work on it pronto, he has been quick to get things done around here.


----------



## Skilz10179 (Mar 22, 2011)

I can get the exact weight of the catless ZZP pipes later today when I'm off work, I have them sitting on my kitchen floor. I won't be able to get the weight of the stock pipes with cats until I pull them off the car, which probably won't be until Spring time. Maybe someone else who has replaced their downpipe and mid-pipe already can weigh them and chime in on this topic so we can compare them.


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

iKermit said:


> This should be interesting lol i suggest you get the intake, downpipe, exhaust in first then buy the Trifect Tune specifying that you have those mods and are looking for optimum MPG. And Vince will get to work on it pronto, he has been quick to get things done around here.


I hear Vince left and right, I take it he is Trifecta tune? Any more info about their tuning process? They just flash it with like a tactrix cable and wrote their own program to alter the tables?



Skilz10179 said:


> I can get the exact weight of the catless ZZP pipes later today when I'm off work, I have them sitting on my kitchen floor. I won't be able to get the weight of the stock pipes with cats until I pull them off the car, which probably won't be until Spring time. Maybe someone else who has replaced their downpipe and mid-pipe already can weigh them and chime in on this topic so we can compare them.


That would be awesome - too much knowledge can't hurt anyone. I'm sure someone else can find this information useful.


----------



## lostmymind (Dec 15, 2011)

ShyEco said:


> I hear Vince left and right, I take it he is Trifecta tune? Any more info about their tuning process? They just flash it with like a tactrix cable and wrote their own program to alter the tables?



Yes Vince is Trifecta. Educate yourself man!


----------



## Vetterin (Mar 27, 2011)

Don't sweat the wheels as you already have one of the lightest sets available (17.75 lbs).


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

Vetterin said:


> Don't sweat the wheels as you already have one of the lightest sets available.


How much do the Eco wheels weight and what size are they? I'm used to 16 lbs per wheel being heavy...


----------



## Skilz10179 (Mar 22, 2011)

ShyEco said:


> I hear Vince left and right, I take it he is Trifecta tune? Any more info about their tuning process? They just flash it with like a tactrix cable and wrote their own program to alter the tables?
> 
> 
> 
> That would be awesome - too much knowledge can't hurt anyone. I'm sure someone else can find this information useful.


The Trifecta tune is actually a dual map tune. With the cruise control activated it runs lower boost and a slightly leaned fuel map, with the cruise control off it pretty much maxes the stock turbo for optimum power output.


----------



## Skilz10179 (Mar 22, 2011)

ShyEco said:


> How much do the Eco wheels weight and what size are they? I'm used to 16 lbs per wheel being heavy...


The Eco wheels are forged 17x7 +42 and weigh a little over 17 lbs.


----------



## Vetterin (Mar 27, 2011)

ShyEco said:


> How much do the Eco wheels weight and what size are they? I'm used to 16 lbs per wheel being heavy...


So you actually bought a Eco and don't even know your wheel size??


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

lostmymind said:


> Yes Vince is Trifecta. Educate yourself man!


This is what I am attempting to do fool!


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

Vetterin said:


> So you actually bought a Eco and don't even know your wheel size??


I knew they were lighter, but doubt they are lighter than Enkeis or Volks. I could care less about the OEM wheels, I will use them for winter or look for some 16s and pick up a different set for Summer. I'm more worried about the bolt pattern - I heard they are 5 x 105? If that is true, then that is a dumb size.


----------



## SeanM402 (Aug 8, 2011)

I guess I just don't see the point of spending hundreds of dollars on trying to squeeze out a few extra mpg. It will take forever to recover the money you spent trying to obtain higher mpg. Lets say you spend $650 on a carbon fiber hood. You have an Eco so we will say you are currently getting 40 mpg overall. Lets say with this hood you now get an amazing 50 mpg overall. Assuming the price of gas would stay at $4 per gallon the entire time you are recovering the cost of the hood you would only be saving 2 cents per mile. You would have to drive 32,500 mile just to break even. If you are looking to save money you would be better off focusing on you driving style. If you are just looking to do this to see what you can achieve then I say go for it and let us know what to find.

BTW even if gas was $10 per gallon you would still have to drive 13,000 miles to break even.


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

seanm402 said:


> i guess i just don't see the point of spending hundreds of dollars on trying to squeeze out a few extra mpg. It will take forever to recover the money you spent trying to obtain higher mpg. Lets say you spend $650 on a carbon fiber hood. You have an eco so we will say you are currently getting 40 mpg overall. Lets say with this hood you now get an amazing 50 mpg overall. Assuming the price of gas would stay at $4 per gallon the entire time you are recovering the cost of the hood you would only be saving 2 cents per mile. You would have to drive 32,500 mile just to break even. If you are looking to save money you would be better off focusing on you driving style. If you are just looking to do this to see what you can achieve then i say go for it and let us know what to find.
> 
> Btw even if gas was $10 per gallon you would still have to drive 13,000 miles to break even.


Rice the h-e-double hockey sticks out of it!!!


----------



## tecollins1 (Nov 6, 2011)

SeanM402 said:


> You would have to drive 32,500 mile just to break even.



Remember it's a brand new car and most people drive it till 100 k before selling their vehicle. Have to look at the long run. So at the end of the stint, it was worth it. If you can gain 10 mpg (from 40-50) you will save $2k @100k miles

(100k/40)x$4= $10,000 cost in fuel
(100k/50)x$4= $8,000

So stick to a 2k budget lol
Sent from my Autoguide iPhone 4 app


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

I'm planning on keeping the car for 20-50 years.


----------



## tecollins1 (Nov 6, 2011)

ShyEco said:


> I'm planning on keeping the car for 20-50 years.


My point exactly. It would benefit you. That's all I'm sayin.


Sent from my Autoguide iPhone 4 app


----------



## sciphi (Aug 26, 2011)

Best MPG mod I've done to my Eco has been some sort of real-time feedback like a ScanGauge II or UltraGauge. My SGII has helped me to drive more efficiently in the hills around here. In the hills, DFCO is your friend! 

Best $150 I spent on an efficiency mod was my SGII. It's repaid itself many times over in fuel savings.


----------



## SeanM402 (Aug 8, 2011)

tecollins1 said:


> Remember it's a brand new car and most people drive it till 100 k before selling their vehicle. Have to look at the long run. So at the end of the stint, it was worth it. If you can gain 10 mpg (from 40-50) you will save $2k @100k miles
> 
> (100k/40)x$4= $10,000 cost in fuel
> (100k/50)x$4= $8,000
> ...


While your point is a good one you also have to take into account that this is only one mod and there would likely be several done. Which means it is going to take even longer to recover the money spent on the mods. Plus I can't imagine a carbon fiber hood would give you a very significant increase in mileage let alone an extra 10 mpg so it would take extraordinarily longer to see a benefit. Lets be generous and say you get an extra 2 mpg overall with the carbon fiber hood. Again lets say it cost $650 for the hood and you originally got 40 mpg. Assuming the price of gas would stay at $4 per gallon the entire time you are recovering the cost of the mod you would only be saving a 1/2 cent per mile which translates into having to drive 130k miles before you would recover the cost of the mod let alone more than one.


----------



## lostmymind (Dec 15, 2011)

SeanM402 said:


> While your point is a good one you also have to take into account that this is only one mod and there would likely be several done. Which means it is going to take even longer to recover the money spent on the mods. Plus I can't imagine a carbon fiber hood would give you a very significant increase in mileage let alone an extra 10 mpg so it would take extraordinarily longer to see a benefit. Lets be generous and say you get an extra 2 mpg overall with the carbon fiber hood. Again lets say it cost $650 for the hood and you originally got 40 mpg. Assuming the price of gas would stay at $4 per gallon the entire time you are recovering the cost of the mod you would only be saving a 1/2 cent per mile which translates into having to drive 130k miles before you would recover the cost of the mod let alone more than one.


I'm sure with some DIY parts and lower prices on mods, better gas mileage can be acheived without spending mass amounts of money.


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

SeanM402 said:


> While your point is a good one you also have to take into account that this is only one mod and there would likely be several done. Which means it is going to take even longer to recover the money spent on the mods. Plus I can't imagine a carbon fiber hood would give you a very significant increase in mileage let alone an extra 10 mpg so it would take extraordinarily longer to see a benefit. Lets be generous and say you get an extra 2 mpg overall with the carbon fiber hood. Again lets say it cost $650 for the hood and you originally got 40 mpg. Assuming the price of gas would stay at $4 per gallon the entire time you are recovering the cost of the mod you would only be saving a 1/2 cent per mile which translates into having to drive 130k miles before you would recover the cost of the mod let alone more than one.


Exactly what part of RICE THE **** OUT OF IT do you not understand!? Get out of my thread.


----------



## bubby2411 (Sep 3, 2011)

install a boost gauge it helps alot and makes it so you know how much gas to give it and still give it a good bit of accleration


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

bubby2411 said:


> install a boost gauge it helps alot and makes it so you know how much gas to give it and still give it a good bit of accleration


Are people having difficulty determining if there turbo is spooling? Thanks for the tidbit, but I have had turbo cars before and always felt when I was in boost. It takes some time to bond with a car enough to just feel it though.

I also do not see too many good mounting options in the Cruze - where did you place yours?


----------



## lostmymind (Dec 15, 2011)

ShyEco said:


> Are people having difficulty determining if there turbo is spooling? Thanks for the tidbit, but I have had turbo cars before and always felt when I was in boost. It takes some time to bond with a car enough to just feel it though.
> 
> I also do not see too many good mounting options in the Cruze - where did you place yours?


I can make a pod for you...


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

lostmymind said:


> I can make a pod for you...


Don't use that word around me... I absolutely hate how they look and how out of place they always end up being.


----------



## lostmymind (Dec 15, 2011)

ShyEco said:


> Don't use that word around me... I absolutely hate how they look and how out of place they always end up being.


Well SORRY! Captain Killjoy. Jeeze


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

lostmymind said:


> Well SORRY! Captain Killjoy. Jeeze


Skankerdoodle


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

...nice people, play nice.


----------



## lostmymind (Dec 15, 2011)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...nice people, play nice.


I'll just leave him a little surprise in his toolbox Monday


----------



## Gritts (Jan 23, 2011)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...nice people, play nice.


Well said. I was going to offer up a few suggestions, but decided why be insulted? I can get that from the wife...


----------



## 1877 iris ave (Sep 23, 2011)

I am 100% with you on your attempt to mod for fuel economy. i hope to do the same and will follow this thread. as you proceed please document your progress on this thread. It's interesting that a 5w-30 oil is specified for this engine not a 5w-20 or 0w-20 which would help with fuel economy. I guess it's because of the higher pressures created by the turbo. switching to a full synthetic oil should help a little and though it's not a mod so might raising the tire pressure from 35 to 38 or 40psi.


----------



## bubby2411 (Sep 3, 2011)

its not that i cant hear the turbo well i can when i have the music down not when it is up tho lol  but its so that i dont have to listen for it i can just look at my gauge and tell when it is. and if you go to my profile and look it is right behind the steering wheel its a great spot for it IMO. i am getting a pod made for it soon whenever my friend finishes it lol.



ShyEco said:


> Are people having difficulty determining if there turbo is spooling? Thanks for the tidbit, but I have had turbo cars before and always felt when I was in boost. It takes some time to bond with a car enough to just feel it though.
> 
> I also do not see too many good mounting options in the Cruze - where did you place yours?


----------



## chrisholland03 (Oct 13, 2011)

Teh Interwebz is serious bidness.

And I like the new guy


----------



## SeanM402 (Aug 8, 2011)

Gritts said:


> Well said. I was going to offer up a few suggestions, but decided why be insulted? I can get that from the wife...


+1
I feel super embarrassed that I didn't realize up until now that a forum is clearly not the appropriate place to be expressing your opinion on various subjects.

Regardless of his desire to have me leave his thread I still stick with my opinion that cutting small amounts of weight here than there is not going to make a significant contribution to better mileage. I had 3 of my coworkers (500 - 600 pounds of extra weight) with me on a road trip and it made very little difference (0.2 mpg lower) on the mileage I would normally see.


----------



## Big Tom (Mar 8, 2011)

1877 iris ave said:


> It's interesting that a 5w-30 oil is specified for this engine not a 5w-20 or 0w-20 which would help with fuel economy. I guess it's because of the higher pressures created by the turbo. switching to a full synthetic oil should help a little and though it's not a mod so might raising the tire pressure from 35 to 38 or 40psi.


Amsoil has a 0w-30


----------



## tecollins1 (Nov 6, 2011)

What about reducing weight in the parts that rotate instead of body panels for example flywheel, rims, not sure if which is lighter rear drums or rotors, but switch to rotors if lighter. Just saying because lighter the rotational mass better performance but also easier on the engine. Comments???

With out yelling at me for being inquisitive. Lol


Sent from my Autoguide iPhone 4 app


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

...yes, you are 100% correct, reducing "rotational/sprung *mass*" helps FE, because it takes HP to _keep_ the mass rotating/moving.


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...nice people, play nice.


This is nice, you should see how he plays when he wants to touch my bottom



lostmymind said:


> I'll just leave him a little surprise in his toolbox Monday


You use that box too! Don't crap where you eat.



Gritts said:


> Well said. I was going to offer up a few suggestions, but decided why be insulted? I can get that from the wife...


Haha - don't scare me into thinking that is what marriage is all about!



1877 iris ave said:


> I am 100% with you on your attempt to mod for fuel economy. i hope to do the same and will follow this thread. as you proceed please document your progress on this thread. It's interesting that a 5w-30 oil is specified for this engine not a 5w-20 or 0w-20 which would help with fuel economy. I guess it's because of the higher pressures created by the turbo. switching to a full synthetic oil should help a little and though it's not a mod so might raising the tire pressure from 35 to 38 or 40psi.


More good points of how to approach the matter, I will have to do more research into this. At this point I am trying to gather information towards which direction to go to, but as you can see - it seems to be a very limited number of resources.



bubby2411 said:


> its not that i cant hear the turbo well i can when i have the music down not when it is up tho lol  but its so that i dont have to listen for it i can just look at my gauge and tell when it is. and if you go to my profile and look it is right behind the steering wheel its a great spot for it IMO. i am getting a pod made for it soon whenever my friend finishes it lol.


Get pictures when it's up! You may just change my mind.



chrisholland03 said:


> Teh Interwebz is serious bidness.
> 
> And I like the new guy


I like you too chrisholland03! :th_dblthumb2:



SeanM402 said:


> +1
> I feel super embarrassed that I didn't realize up until now that a forum is clearly not the appropriate place to be expressing your opinion on various subjects.
> 
> Regardless of his desire to have me leave his thread I still stick with my opinion that cutting small amounts of weight here than there is not going to make a significant contribution to better mileage. I had 3 of my coworkers (500 - 600 pounds of extra weight) with me on a road trip and it made very little difference (0.2 mpg lower) on the mileage I would normally see.


A forum is a place to express opinion freely. However, you are completely off topic. You have not contributed to the discussion in the least bit. The question of whether this is fiscally responsible or not was never asked. If you would like to continue posting, please get back on topic or go start a new thread. These would be acceptable for your threads:

Unmodding for Fuel Efficiency

Modding=$$$=incoherent

Why modding for fuel efficiency is super dumb and silly and I am jealous of ShyEco for his superb good looks and intellect

At this point I have reached the only one possible conclusion; through my light-hearted jest, somehow you have become sexually attracted to me, as well as fire. If you continue stalking me I will have to call on an adult and taddle on you. Also, please stock searching for my Facebook page!



tecollins1 said:


> What about reducing weight in the parts that rotate instead of body panels for example flywheel, rims, not sure if which is lighter rear drums or rotors, but switch to rotors if lighter. Just saying because lighter the rotational mass better performance but also easier on the engine. Comments???
> 
> With out yelling at me for being inquisitive. Lol
> 
> ...


This is helpful and a contribution. Question is where to find these lighter wheels, since the car has a silly offset. I think I saw someone on here with lighter clutch components - if he could add to this thread, it would be helpful.


----------



## bubby2411 (Sep 3, 2011)

I already have it mounted just not in a pod lol if you go to my profile it's in the pictures


----------



## chrisholland03 (Oct 13, 2011)

I like ShyEco because I get his sense of humor. And I think he's trying to lighten things up here. Lately, Cruzetalk.com has been more uptight, negative and whiney than miata.net. Which is a pretty impressive feat. Except all the facepalming gives me a headache.


----------



## Skilz10179 (Mar 22, 2011)

Finally got around to weighing the ZZP pipes, the downpipe and mid-pipe together with hardware weigh 10.6 lbs. Now we just need someone with the stock catted pipes on hand to weigh them.


----------



## sciphi (Aug 26, 2011)

tecollins1 said:


> What about reducing weight in the parts that rotate instead of body panels for example flywheel, rims, not sure if which is lighter rear drums or rotors, but switch to rotors if lighter. Just saying because lighter the rotational mass better performance but also easier on the engine. Comments???
> 
> With out yelling at me for being inquisitive. Lol
> 
> ...


TravsCruze has a custom lightweight flywheel. 11 lbs, IIRC. Now if somebody would make a lightweight pulley set along with a lighter flywheel, I might could be convinced to install that onto my Eco. Man, the little 1.4 would rev so fast with 15 lbs less weight on the crank, assuming 5 lbs from an aluminum billet crank pulley and another 10 lbs from a flywheel. It'd be better for accelerating, but worse for hilly areas since the lighter-weight stuff would lose momentum that much faster than the heavier items. Overall it'd be a wash, and more for performance than efficiency.


----------



## 1877 iris ave (Sep 23, 2011)

since our cars are equipped with a smart regulator, turning off the daylight running lights will decrease the load on the alternator and thus the engine. there is another thread on the (i think it is called an RVC) smart regulator. I do this sometimes (turn off the lights) depending on weather and location.


----------



## sciphi (Aug 26, 2011)

It decreases load automatically, regardless of DRL or not. When it's daytime out and only DRL are operating, the alternator will drop to 12.9 volts when full voltage is not needed. When the headlights are on, it's at full output all the time.


----------



## lostmymind (Dec 15, 2011)

tecollins1 said:


> What about reducing weight in the parts that rotate instead of body panels for example flywheel, rims, not sure if which is lighter rear drums or rotors, but switch to rotors if lighter. Just saying because lighter the rotational mass better performance but also easier on the engine. Comments???
> 
> With out yelling at me for being inquisitive. Lol
> 
> ...


Lighter pulleys and flywheel would make for one very fast revving motor but the weight saved there could be beneficial to fuel efficiency. I will have to look further into this. The crank pulley would probably have to stay OEM though. People tend to have very mixed results on this



ShyEco said:


> This is nice, you should see how he plays when he wants to touch my bottom.


:eusa_clap:Well played sir



ShyEco said:


> You use that box too! Don't crap where you eat.


Eh...I'll just have to bring my box then



ShyEco said:


> I like you too chrisholland03! :th_dblthumb2:


Bromance brewing? I think it could be!




chrisholland03 said:


> I like ShyEco because I get his sense of humor. And I think he's trying to lighten things up here. Lately, Cruzetalk.com has been more uptight, negative and whiney than miata.net. Which is a pretty impressive feat. Except all the facepalming gives me a headache.


This was one of the first things I saw on here too. Have some fun with it. Share knowledge, have some s'mores, sing a little kumbaya and then start some friendlly jabbing with the locals


----------



## Skilz10179 (Mar 22, 2011)

A flywheel would be a great idea but pulleys aren't really worth it. The reason a aluminum pulley crank pulley is usually a bad idea is because most stock crank pulleys are harmonic dampeners. Using and undampened aftermarket crank pulley can actually rob power and shorten the life of your motor.


----------



## lostmymind (Dec 15, 2011)

Skilz10179 said:


> A flywheel would be a great idea but pulleys aren't really worth it. The reason a aluminum pulley crank pulley is usually a bad idea is because most stock crank pulleys are harmonic dampeners. Using and undampened aftermarket crank pulley can actually rob power and shorten the life of your motor.


Damper. Not dampener. That drives me crazy for some reason. 

I have actually seen a lot of oil pump failures in various cars from using an underdrive pulley instead of a good harmonic damper


----------



## Skilz10179 (Mar 22, 2011)

Don't be hatin...:th_coolio:


----------



## bubby2411 (Sep 3, 2011)

this is where i mounted mine and it works great!


----------



## 1877 iris ave (Sep 23, 2011)

if both trifecta and vermont tuning have an economy tune why don't they post here the results of a properly conducted test the gain in fuel economy?


----------



## lostmymind (Dec 15, 2011)

1877 iris ave said:


> if both trifecta and vermont tuning have an economy tune why don't they post here the results of a properly conducted test the gain in fuel economy?


Probably because every tune is different and unless they are doing the same tune for everyone (not a good idea) results are going to have a pretty decent varience


----------



## limited360 (May 6, 2011)

Mainly because the economy by product of the economy tune is not what they are trying to sell... hard enough to get 'real world' numbers on the performance tune!


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

bubby2411 said:


> I already have it mounted just not in a pod lol if you go to my profile it's in the pictures


Any Daytime pics?



chrisholland03 said:


> I like ShyEco because I get his sense of humor. And I think he's trying to lighten things up here. Lately, Cruzetalk.com has been more uptight, negative and whiney than miata.net. Which is a pretty impressive feat. Except all the facepalming gives me a headache.


Amen!



Skilz10179 said:


> Finally got around to weighing the ZZP pipes, the downpipe and mid-pipe together with hardware weigh 10.6 lbs. Now we just need someone with the stock catted pipes on hand to weigh them.


I added the weights to the first post. But what do you mean by downpipe and mid-pipe? Aren't they one in the same? Do you mean O2 Housing and Downpipe/Mid-Pipe?



sciphi said:


> It decreases load automatically, regardless of DRL or not. When it's daytime out and only DRL are operating, the alternator will drop to 12.9 volts when full voltage is not needed. When the headlights are on, it's at full output all the time.


This is a smart little car!


----------



## Skilz10179 (Mar 22, 2011)

The downpipe is what ZZP refers to as the o2 housing.


----------



## bubby2411 (Sep 3, 2011)

ill take some daytime ones tomorrow for you


----------



## Gritts (Jan 23, 2011)

Crap, I read this whole thread anticipating getting to the good part and then I ran out of thread.
On the Cruze Eco if you want to save weight think aftermarket flywheel. Little else is left--other than going on a diet like pulling seats (or skipping meals). Keep your fuel filled to half a tank max, that's an easy and cheap why to save weight. Running without DRLs? Oh please...


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

Gritts said:


> Crap, I read this whole thread anticipating getting to the good part and then I ran out of thread.
> On the Cruze Eco if you want to save weight think aftermarket flywheel. Little else is left--other than going on a diet like pulling seats (or skipping meals). Keep your fuel filled to half a tank max, that's an easy and cheap why to save weight. Running *without DRLs*? Oh please...


...believe it or not, but GM's *Special Test Instructions *to EPA during MPG tests state:

_"*Automatic Headlight Systems:
*Automatic headlight systems must be disabled prior to any emission or fuel economy testing. Please contact General Motors Compliance and Certification organization for instructions on how to disable the automatic headlight system.

_*Daytime Running Lights (DRL):
*_Daytime running lights must be disabled prior to fuel economy testing. Please contact General Motors Compliance and Certification organization for instructions on how to disable the daytime running lights."

_...so, if GM thinks it's important that they be OFF during the EPA MPG-tests, then just *maybe* the DRL actually *do* affect fuel economy.


----------



## sciphi (Aug 26, 2011)

They're going for every single advantage, and that draw on the alternator is going to cost them a tiny amount. Get enough tiny amounts, and suddenly there's a big amount. Like how shaving 1 weld is meaningless, but shave enough of them and suddenly the Eco MT weighs 200 lbs less than any other Cruze. (I know, it's not all shaved welds, and I took an artistic license to make my point)


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

sciphi said:


> They're going for every single advantage, and that draw on the alternator is going to cost them a tiny amount. Get enough tiny amounts, and suddenly there's a big amount. Like how shaving 1 weld is meaningless, but shave enough of them and suddenly the Eco MT weighs 200 lbs less than any other Cruze. (I know, it's not all shaved welds, and I took an *artistic license *to make my point)


...your *artistic license* duly noted, accepted and agreed with.

...here's the GM / EPA "source" document (page 55 of 65): http://www.epa.gov/otaq/datafiles/FOI_CGMXV01.8011_APPIPT1_.PDF


----------



## Camcruse (Oct 4, 2011)

ShyEco said:


> I'm planning on keeping the car for 20-50 years.



How about a flux-capacitor? That should really help the fuel mileage in 50 years.


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

I will also consider gutting the bajeezus out of the car. I love making my passengers as uncomfortable as possible. In fact, I hate passengers. I only need one other seat otherwise the girlies will be mad at me. I'm looking for every little bit that will add up.

Many race teams replace all nuts and bolts with aluminum or titanium to help shave even more weight. The last couple of cars I had, I would always gut the trunk and slowly work my way inwards :tempted:.


----------



## lostmymind (Dec 15, 2011)

ShyEco said:


> I will also consider gutting the bajeezus out of the car. I love making my passengers as uncomfortable as possible. In fact, I hate passengers. I only need one other seat otherwise the girlies will be mad at me. I'm looking for every little bit that will add up.
> 
> Many race teams replace all nuts and bolts with aluminum or titanium to help shave even more weight. The last couple of cars I had, I would always gut the trunk and slowly work my way inwards :tempted:.


The sound deadening is usually about 40-50 pounds. Take out all the insulation. Bet the car could drop about 100lbs and keep all the panels. More if all the air bags get pulled


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

Oh I forgot this car has 10 airbags, even though the salesperson reminded me twenty times. Those suckers are heavy! 10 airbags? That is WAY too safe for me!!!


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

ShyEco said:


> Oh I forgot this car has 10 airbags, even though the salesperson reminded me twenty times. Those suckers are heavy! 10 airbags? That is WAY too safe for me!!!


...uh, how much would a *casket* weigh (wink,wink)?


----------



## lostmymind (Dec 15, 2011)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...uh, how much would a *casket* weigh (wink,wink)?



Probably about the same as the airbags :th_dblthumb2:


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

Pulling airbags is far more common than you would think :uhh:


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

ShyEco said:


> Pulling airbags is far more common than you would think :uhh:


...yeah, but those were being "*stolen*" (ha,ha).


----------



## Gritts (Jan 23, 2011)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...yeah, but those were being "*stolen*" (ha,ha).


:signlol:

If you remove the back seats then there's two airbags gone. You could remove the knee airbags. (I rarely use my knees anyway.) Of course if you die because of missing airbags, GM will _*not*_ honor your warrenty.
See sig.


----------



## Gritts (Jan 23, 2011)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...believe it or not, but GM's *Special Test Instructions *to EPA during MPG tests state:
> 
> _"*Automatic Headlight Systems:
> *Automatic headlight systems must be disabled prior to any emission or fuel economy testing. Please contact General Motors Compliance and Certification organization for instructions on how to disable the automatic headlight system.
> ...


MAYBE on a test rig, but in real life conditions? I'd rather have the lights on so the guy who hits me will see me coming. (drum roll please...)


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

...ah, but when _everybody_ is driving around with DRL's on, they start to become "ignored"...similar to *Demings* condemnation of too many Signs & Slogans being merely "more wallpaper" and thus ignored (Management Rule #10).


----------



## lostmymind (Dec 15, 2011)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...yeah, but those were being "*stolen*" (ha,ha).


My car has no airbags. Shed about 50 pounds with just two of them


----------



## Gritts (Jan 23, 2011)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...ah, but when _everybody_ is driving around with DRL's on, they start to become "ignored"...similar to *Demings* condemnation of too many Signs & Slogans being merely "more wallpaper" and thus ignored (Management Rule #10).



I have thought that when everyone has DRLs then every car might blend into the background, but the DRLs do provide visible evidence when a car approaches from a shaded area and I still notice cars running DRLs before I do cars running 'dark'. All in all, better to be safe. 

As far as pulling airbags. Don't. A friend of mine drove an old S10 (no airbag) as a DD. (He was retired and made daily drips between the local liars club and home.) A car pulled out to pass a school bus (of all things) and hit him head on. After that I sold my 91 XJ and if it doesn't have an airbag, I don't drive it. Classic cars are beautiful. Keep em. Airbags aren't the end all for every situation (if a tractor trailer hits you you're dead no matter what you're driving), but they give you a chance. I was stuck in traffic when he died, but I didn't know it was him until I saw the flatbed wrecker drive by me with the remains of his truck with those stupid blue wheels.


----------



## 1877 iris ave (Sep 23, 2011)

Is there any room to improve the combustion by improving the ignition system--coils, plugs, voltage into the coils?

70AARCUDA I love the stuff you find for us. you should be called the LIBRARIAN as it seems you can find anything.


----------



## Macman (May 4, 2011)

Thanks for the info 70AARCUDA. I personally drive the cruze like an old lady and still don't achieve EPA estimated mpg. I'm closer now that my cold air intake is on, but still. I wonder at times whether or not it's even possible as a daily driver to hit the EPA's mileage. I bought the cruze because of it's mpg or I'd have gone with the malibu. Being my first Chevy, it's great and all but I feel cheated and lied to, other issues in addition to mpg have added to this. I should've gotten the cts.


----------



## sciphi (Aug 26, 2011)

The 2011 automatic will be the worst for MPG due to the transmission's final drive ratio. It's very high for no good reason. There's a reason Chevy lowered it on the 2012's. 

Coils on this car are integrated into 1 large coilpack from what I've seen. It's COP with 1 coilpack reaching across the engine, not individual coils.


----------



## Macman (May 4, 2011)

sciphi said:


> The 2011 automatic will be the worst for MPG due to the transmission's final drive ratio. It's very high for no good reason. There's a reason Chevy lowered it on the 2012's.


How can I change it, or is there some recall or update available that I don't know about? I'm considering upgrading to 2012.


----------



## lostmymind (Dec 15, 2011)

Gritts said:


> I have thought that when everyone has DRLs then every car might blend into the background, but the DRLs do provide visible evidence when a car approaches from a shaded area and I still notice cars running DRLs before I do cars running 'dark'. All in all, better to be safe.
> 
> As far as pulling airbags. Don't. A friend of mine drove an old S10 (no airbag) as a DD. (He was retired and made daily drips between the local liars club and home.) A car pulled out to pass a school bus (of all things) and hit him head on. After that I sold my 91 XJ and if it doesn't have an airbag, I don't drive it. Classic cars are beautiful. Keep em. Airbags aren't the end all for every situation (if a tractor trailer hits you you're dead no matter what you're driving), but they give you a chance. I was stuck in traffic when he died, but I didn't know it was him until I saw the flatbed wrecker drive by me with the remains of his truck with those stupid blue wheels.


I have bad experience with airbags. That's part of the reason I pulled mine. The other is that I was trying to drop as much weight as possible. I get the keep the airbags argument because it is proven to save lives. But in my particular case I had more injuries because of the airbag


----------



## lostmymind (Dec 15, 2011)

Macman said:


> How can I change it, or is there some recall or update available that I don't know about? I'm considering upgrading to 2012.


I'm guessing you either need to know how to disassemble and rebuild the transmission or buy a 2012 trans and swap it in. I don't think GM would do a recall on the final drivee


----------



## Macman (May 4, 2011)

CanI modify my driving to compensate? Maybe drive in sport/manumatic all the time to hit 6th gear by ~35mph?


----------



## lostmymind (Dec 15, 2011)

Macman said:


> CanI modify my driving to compensate? Maybe drive in sport/manumatic all the time to hit 6th gear by ~35mph?



You can try but I'm not sure if the computer would allow for that


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

I just have a death wish.

Macman - if you aren't already employing that tactic - give it a shot. the worst that can happen is you gain/lose mpgs. Keep in mind to accelerate slowly and shift as early as possible so the car doesn't struggle too much.

Tranny swaps aren't that bad if you have done them before, but pricey... You can keep your eyes peeled for a wrecked 2012. Winter is around the corner, so expect lots of accidents!


----------



## bubby2411 (Sep 3, 2011)

there is some daylight pictures for you shyeco it doesnt have the pod yet but it will soon


----------



## iKermit (Dec 13, 2010)

lostmymind said:


> You can try but I'm not sure if the computer would allow for that


Mine allows me lol So yes it does.


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

Macman said:


> How can I change it, or is there some recall or update available that I don't know about? I'm considering upgrading to 2012.


...short of having the _existing_ transmissions final 3.87:1 gears replaced with the new 3.53:1 final gears, it'd probably be cheaper to just replace the whole transmission; would need to have all the computers reflashed so they know it's a _different_ transmission being driven by the engine.


----------



## Gritts (Jan 23, 2011)

1877 iris ave said:


> Is there any room to improve the combustion by improving the ignition system--coils, plugs, voltage into the coils?
> 
> 70AARCUDA I love the stuff you find for us. you should be called the LIBRARIAN as it seems you can find anything.


One thing that comes to mind is to advance the timing a few degrees and burn premium gas. Unfortunately the only way that I know of to advance the timing is to buy a tune.

Maybe some hotter plugs in combination with premium gas?

70AARCUDA give us the word.


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

Gritts said:


> 70AARCUDA give us the word.


...if I'm a "*head* librarian" does that make me a "*commode* book-looker" (ask a sailor what a "head" is)?

...in descending order:

*• driver *- the single most important controller of fuel economy; how/where you drive greatly affects FE; ie: Eco's UP-shift light.
*•* *speed* - the slower you go, the less HP the engine needs to produce to overcome aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance.
*• Cd* - aerodynamic drag is a function of speed, so reducing it reduces HP requirement, ie: Eco's grill shutters & rear spoiler.
*• Crr* - rolling resistance is mostly (but not all) due to tires, so LRR tires will help here, ie: Eco's LRR Goodyear tires.
*• weight* - mostly affects acceleration, requiring more HP to get up to speed, ie: Eco's reduced <3100 lbs. weight.
*• RPM* - best fuel economy occurs when engine speed is typically between 1,000-2,000 RPM; ie: Eco's triple-overdrive transmission gearing.
*• BTU *- energy content of fuel: summer gasoline is ~ 114,000 BTU/gal, winter gasoline is less; E10 is ~112,000 BTU/gal due to ethanols lower 76,000 BTU/gal value.

...notice that n_othing _has been mentioned about *engine *modifications, because sadly most owner-applied engine modifications, typically, "brake" the engines' ECM's ablility to maintain "closed-loop" operation within EPA smog-law emission limits. Most aftermarket "reprograms" simply force the ECM to utilize *all* the capabilities and margin-limits within the OEM programming, and as long as the ECM "closed-loop" operation isn't broken, the engine will still meet EPA requirements. Todays engines are remarkably efficient when operating within their design and operational limits, but not so when beyond those limits. For more information on this process, someone like Vince, needs to speakup.


----------



## Gritts (Jan 23, 2011)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...if I'm a "*head* librarian" does that make me a "*commode* book-looker" (ask a sailor what a "head" is)?
> 
> ...in descending order:
> 
> ...


:bowing:


----------



## ShyEco (Dec 14, 2011)

bubby2411 said:


> View attachment 3145
> 
> 
> there is some daylight pictures for you shyeco it doesnt have the pod yet but it will soon
> ...


Does it block anything for you at all? It actually doesn't look as bad as I thought it would! How much are you reading on that?


----------



## ckcruze (Apr 3, 2012)

SKN Germany has an eco chip tune for 1.8 and maybe for 1.4 too and generally in europe there are many eco tunners as the price per litre of petrol is seriously high here (about 2.5$ a litre). That being said you have to keep in mind that the lowest quality here is 92 Octane the usual quality 95 oct the plus quality 97 oct and the premium quality 98-102 oct. So better fuel has an effect on economy compared with your 83 oct fuel. I am planning to install in May their tune for my 1.8 and will post about the fuel economy here (though mine has auto trans and 17" wheels which are not very beneficial for economy but that is how it is sold here)


----------



## motoxsk8rxxx (May 20, 2012)

I just bought a pro sport boost gauge for my 2011 chevy cruze. I now am in need of the steering wheel pod for the gauge. Can you get back to me on where you got your pod from? Please e-mail me @ [email protected] thanks, by the way my names Greg.


----------



## Logitech73 (Sep 22, 2011)

My question is maybe more basic here. Will a Carbon Fiber hood with air intake vents hurt or help the MPG? I know it will help performance but will the added air intake vents cause more drag on the car and effect the aero, causing worse MPG?


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

They will increase air drag, simply because the air flow will be split in more directions. This will reduce your MPG, but by how much I don't know. It may be very noticable or not noticable at all.


----------



## Logitech73 (Sep 22, 2011)

That is what i was thinking but wnat to confirm. Thanks!


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Logitech73 said:


> My question is maybe more basic here. Will a Carbon Fiber hood with air intake vents hurt or help the MPG? I know it will help performance but will the added air intake vents cause more drag on the car and effect the aero, causing worse MPG?


It's likely that it will hurt aerodynamics, but probably not by a very significant amount, at least compared to modifications you do to the front of your car. Depends on where these hood or intake vents would be. The hood vents will help reduce under-hood temperatures, but that will work against you in the winter. I know this because I did the same with my 95 Regal to reduce under-hood temperatures so that heat factory (M90 supercharger) on the engine I swapped in doesn't heat soak the intake and cause copious amounts of knock. In the winter, it took the car an uncomfortably long amount of time to heat up. 

The Cruze 1.4T motor already takes a long time to heat up in the winter. Doing this will only make it worse. It will also keep your car in open loop longer during warm-up, causing you to waste more fuel, so it will indirectly have a hit on fuel economy. 

The other issue you need to worry about, especially if you live in an area where they salt the roads, is drainage. I don't believe engine components are designed to be constantly soaked and subjected to the corrosive nature of road salt.

Intake vents will be practically useless if you cannot actually connect them to your intake system.


----------

