and the Hybrid silverado will do all of this

 

Fewer cylinders requires more torque to push the heavy weight of the truck, to get to speed.

 

A 2001 Chevy Truck with new shocks and $20000 in the glovebox?

 

Yes that was a serious consideration....well actually a 2005 GMC and 9,000 in the glove box.

 

As much as I like defending my decision of buying a Dodge pickup in a Dodge pickup forum, can we get back to the task at hand?

If you can tune the MDS out, why couldn't you tune MDS to be on with a switch??

Nobody can prove to me that it wouldn't get better gas mileage. Just as I can't prove that it can. Lets try it! Who can I get in touch with at Predator?

 

I wasn't bitching about the mileage, in fact, I said nothing about bad mileage!

I simply would like to figure out a way to make it better. If I was driving anything that had MDS I would like to try doing this.

Are you against saving money??

 

10-4 good buddy.

OP, if you think you can come up with a better fuel saving scheme (especially one that utilizes a switch) than the engineers at Chrysler, then you are wasting your time on this forum. You need to be putting out resumes.

 

You don't think that the engineers at Chrysler have thought of this?? I am sure they tried it and even if it did save fuel it doesn't mean that it would make it into production.

Marketing probably said something like this - "Make the mileage better, but give me as much power as you can, and make it reliable to XXXXX miles, and make sure that the owner doesn't feel the cylinders kicking in and out, and make sure that you give them the Hemi power on demand, and make it cost XXXXXX to produce, and, and"

I am an engineer at a large construction equipment manufacturer and trust me it isn't the engineers that make the decisions.

 

I think that the engineers at Chrysler have bent over backwards to try and supply a product that would (at the same time) meet the bs laws and demands that the government has thrown at them, and the demand for more HP from the consumer.

Read the forums (any v8, most v6, and some v4 vehicles) and look at the demand. More power go faster............and pick up 1mpg. That's what sells. Meanwhile, you have algorethm petioning the government, and telling them that the world is gonna end tomorrow morning if we don't start raping the land for lithium and cadmium immediately.

I don't know what to tell you other than that if engineers with many dollars and years of education could have drained another 1mpg out of our trucks on avg (given climaticle and elevation differences incurred with a mass produced vehicle with computer controlled fueling) then they would have. You ain't gonna do squat with a switch.

 

Let's take both sides of the argument. Let's say it would get better mileage. Even if it did, there could be other issues preventing it from being feasible, like NVH, reliability, safety (you forget you are locked into 4 cylinder mode and try to beat a train or pull out into traffic when the full Hemi mode would have done the job, bit not the MDS mode), etc. etc. This is also why you can modiiy the vehicle to make it have more power, ride better, play the front DVD player while you are driving etc, but the manufacturer can't or won't. It may give you better fuel economy though.

On the other side of the argument, often a larger engine will get better fuel economy. It's been proven in trucks and vans and even the new Prius gets better fuel economy, largely (according to Toyota) to the fact the new 1.8 engine makes more power than the old 1.5 and therefore does not have to work as hard.

Anyone here watch Top Gear? If so, I hope you saw the bit about the Prius vs. the BMW M3. If true (and I have no reason to doubt it) it certainly is food for thought. As the owner of 3 Sports Cars, 2 Full size crew cab trucks and 1 V8 4x4 sport utility I need all the support I can get. I am surprised the E.L.F. has not burned my garage down