Only one fuel filter on these, located on the chassis as you recall, Tracy. The regulator is part of the pump assembly in the tank. Injector o-rings is a good point - could make for vacuum leaks. It could also have something to do with the fuel pulse dampener on the fuel rail, that compensates for back pressure waves that result from injectors closing. Or the fuel check valve on the outlet from the pump having failed or fallen out of spec so that the pump can't maintain pressure at the rail- leak down test for that, if it passes a pressure test. Could also be a clogged fuel filter. Start there. If Karl needs a pump, it'll need doing anyway.
Have not checked pressure at the fuel rail for being a pump but the premise to the vaporizing the fuel properly seems logical. But let me throw something at you. If the pressure does not vaporize properly, then shouldnt there be an excess of fuel being read by the 02 sensors and thus leaning out the fuel mixture?
Here is something else. I tried Dans cold vapor system and it didnt do squat either(mod #5) so I removed it. Not saying it doesn't work, it does in practice and for others who tried it since its a cold vapor system and shoots vapors into the system thus causing the ECU to read rich and cut back on fuel. Well my system ECU didn't read a rich mixture when it should have. That is another reason why I keep looking at the ECU as a culprit of no success. I had it on for about a thousand miles with no difference for the better. Others have seen good results with his system. In fact I think I lost MPG since the system fed more fuel into the system without the ECU compensating and leaning the rest of the injectors out. That is why I keep blaming the ECU and not the mods that do work.
As far as the filter. I changed it about a year ago and have another filter before the fuel rail(fuel ionizer mod)so there is more resistance but not much since the filter has decent flow.
Will have to check pressure somehow and may have to have a mechanic do it since I have to have my tension pulley and power steering changed since the noise of the bearings is getting louder by the week. Will have the mechanic check the pressure at the same time.
I am willing to go deeper only if I know results will follow. Kind of tired of banging my head against the wall and throwing money at a hidden demon. But if I know there is a problem that will give me the results I should see, I will go the mile for sure.
Thanks Greg for your persistance and ideas. They are definitely appreciated.
Tracy is also a huge help even though he is one of those tin foil gubmint conspiracy nuts.
Only kidding Tracy. Collette made me say that.
Unburned fuel could mix with oil if it's not properly atomized. engine heat would make it eventually evaporate off, somewhere...blowby, I guess. Maybe this is why you had o2s reading lean after the mod, if I recall that correctly. also, check your Catalytic converter - rich exhaust may have melted and clogged it.
(I may be interested in buying your Merrick equipment. discounted price if I'm correct?)
Fuel filter a year ago...when we're talking about a $200 pump replacement plus labor and tax, can a $10 shot in the dark really hurt?? I mean, we DO mess with fuel formulation with our MPG remedy additive - has anyone checked to see what it does to fuel etc in the tank rather than just watching mileage numbers? if it causes a precipitate to form that gets caught in the filter (or worse, clog fuel pumps), wouldn't a filter replacement every 6 months be prudent? Another thing - that fuel ionizer - does it work? is there something about what it does interfering (again) with fuel atomization at the injectors, preventing gains from the groove? As I said to a new visitor to this forum from my (relative) neck of the woods, Barry009, we have to strip this whole thing down to the basics and build it back up slowly, a step at a time to truly and using scientific method get the gains we're after, even if how the Groove actually works/what it does to intake air stream is a bit of a mystery. As Ron Hatton said, and I hate talking like he's deceased when I gather he's simply off taking care of some health issues, you have to try one thing at a time because if you start messing with 2-3 or more simultaneously, you can end up juggling a whole mess of problems and chasing a bunch of tails trying to track a main culprit down. Does that make more sense now?
My story is this: I found this website through a youtube video. I tried the MPG Remedy and it worked. so I needed to do a tuneup anyway, including swapping the plugs, so I gapped them bigger when putting them in and that worked too. then I realized my o2 sensors were original, 200k + miles old, way overdue for replacement, so I changed them out and I got mileage gains, starting to edge over what the gov't says I should be getting. OH boy! Adjusted my idle and re-set my IAC valve, both helped. Tire pressure I knew about for a long time; that's helped for years. taking the heating lines off my intake manifold, another gain (that's from another couple of vehicle specific websites...your truck should have a composite intake, so not applicable, but on my engine, in 2002 the composite intake came with an EGR system delete, so I've had to research how to make sure it stays closed - no need for it to open if I'm burning less fuel, better, post-groove, right? - and plug that factory-designed and implemented vacuum leak. not tried it yet, but stay tuned; look into it for your truck). grounding/charging/electrical, for sensors - I've got 12' each of red and black jacketed 4 gauge wire and new battery terminals waiting for when I have enough daylight off time to re-do/upgrade the 14 year old factory stuff. And I also did the RVS back in the autumn, and got gains there too. and I just called the Gadgetman office to get my PL yesterday...missed Collette's return call, but I emailed her with my questions. I guess what I'm advocating is a patient approach, knowing that you CAN achieve mileage and power gains. You might not be realizing them yet, but I'm pretty sure they're there to be had...back to basics and take one step forward at a time...until you need to step back and sidestep and start forward again. air-fuel-spark. minimize losses to maximize gains. lube what needs to move, stick what needs to be stuck. learn the system, then focus on it's sub-systems and their intricacies. tweak the whole way along until you hit on what works best. and then dig deeper and do it all over again.
The electric fan mod I mentioned is widely tested/used and well known to reduce engine load. the 2.5 engine from tuner/racer/HP perspective is underpowering our heavy trucks (even my 3.0 is underpowered according to those people - they recommend swapping to a 5.0 Mustang engine, and supercharging that!), so I'm sure the freed horsepower will make it to the road and help you drive more efficiently if you do it. Will the amount of fuel it potentially saves over the life of the truck be worth the cost of the kit? only you can answer that, but I believe it would. of course, it may mean you'll need to upgrade the stock 95A alternator to something bigger, or change over to LED lighting to lower the electrical load on the current one...oh, depending on your final axle ratio, you may see benefit to upsizing your tires. I went from stock 235/75r15 to 31x10.5x15 and it made a very slight difference (improvement) to fuel economy, but I enjoy the difference in how it rides. There's an underdrive crank pulley swap for my truck that frees HP and torque to the rear wheels; I'm going to couple that with the electric fan swap, after I groove and get Bruce McBurney's catch-can Compensator on my PCV re-route. Then I might put on some roller-rockers that also gets more horses/torque to the road. all those mods (minus the groove) apparently add somewhere between 45 and 60 HP and 60-70 ft-lbs of torque in total, 30+% on both ratings over factory; I figure if I can get the truck moving and keep it cruising with less gas pedal input, I'll save fuel and justify the cost of those add-ons with the fuel savings. added bonus is I get a truck that's as (or more) environmentally friendly as a new hybrid...hopefully, or as close to it as I can come with 20+ year old Internal combustion technology. I say this now, but I'm a big believer in stopping when I've got enough. if I can get this truck to 40+ MPG with a groove, catch can, driving habits and everything I've done so far, I might just call it a day. If I figure some of this stuff may get me over the 50 MPG hump from the mid-high 40s...I'll do it just to blow some people's minds, and say I did it. QED, veni vidi vici and all that good stuff.
no Greg, you just explained yourself incredibly well, you just said in your own words many thoughts/ideas I've had for so long now!
See it's like you have read my thoughts and restated them better than I thought them!!
Probably 'cause my new Alcoa Fedora wuz off, I was smoothin' sum wrinkles in it. Didja know there's this 'lil tag under the brim that says sumthin' 'bout wearin' it outside durin' lightnin' storms? Shoot, ah think I'll look kool wearin' it while I'm flyin' my foil kite
You guyz shure know howta spark my imaginashun...
The contrasts between Karl's and Greg's two stories of their Mazda trucks, is trying to tell us something. Back to basics. Engine needs fuel/spark/compression to run.
Greg has had results each step of his way.
Karl has had huge frustration.
I've had suspicions re: these re-badged Ford's and the engine power/weight ratio.
If a vehicle is underpowered in operation, as a driver you wheeze along w/ your foot in it, right? That's exactly what my Subaru wagon was when I bought it over 10 yrs ago. (Bought it for courier work). It's easier to increase power, AND reduce some parasitic losses, than reduce vehicle gross weight. Analogy: Why does the fat kid shuffle along looking strained walking up the hill, while the athletic trim kid saunters right up the same hill? Power-to-Weight.
Compression: Karl's engine measured quite well there
Spark: Karl has done the coil-pack re-routing trick, and has 2 Torquemaster plugs per cylinder. he's probably AT LEAST adequate there.
Fuel: Well it's getting some right?? Details? I recommend a Ford forum search to see if anyone else has posted about this (potential) issue. Yes, Karl definitely get the pressure at the rail checked. Greg got better operational results w/ his new fuel pump? Even better MPG?
To me Greg's results w/new fuel pump is a huge clue. If this hunch is right, it's a real lesson.
Karl, we've turned over lots of rocks lookin' for the Gremlin in your Mazda. Could this be it? Also- can any other component in the fuel delivery system be a factor? If this is IT, it reminds me of how I became an Ignition fanatic. Stock/parts store plug wires LOOK OK, the engine runs, you can't understand or see any difference, until you measure resistance w/ a digital ohm-meter, then do a tuneup w/ performance/low-resistance ones, and FEEL the difference.
FUEL- if anything causes the Injectors to deliver a sub-par spray pattern, it's like a carburetor that needs a rebuild, it runs, but not at best. It ought to be obvious--we here are striving for Above Average Performance, how else can you get top MPG? You wouldn't expect to get top performance while driving w/ the parking brake partly engaged. That's Obvious, you can see and Operate the park brake manually, you know all about it. But there's no fuel pressure gauge to look at. The pump is back in the dang tank, how ya gonna look at it? And most DIY'ers don't have a fuel pressure test gauge set... (wow Greg the regulator is in the tank too, so it's not man. vac. referenced?) Can this fuel system in these Mazda's be so forgiving as in it'll still run, but have sucky MPG or power?
Again-fuel/spark/compression, well Karl's spark/compression is likely ok, that leaves fuel.
I didn't start getting good even occasional phenomenal MPG's until the Subie's power issues were fixed, and it's relatively light... Better Efficiency is another word for better MPG & Power.
OK I gotta smooth my hat now...
Founder and Constant Aide to Gadgetman
Gadgetman Reno, NV
The numbers surprised the heck out of me...and they're climbing. I posted a photo of my enginelink monitoring app a while back that displayed a 24.99mpg combined average. That's gone up since then, so if the groove gives me 30% and Bruce's Compensator on the PCV re-route gives me another 25% increase in MPG on top of that, I'll be looking at Around 40-42MPG - double the govt combined mileage rating. Karl's engine, being more modern and more efficient to begin with, will probably have better results. But I have further to go, and he can as well.
First things first. It might be fuel pressure in Karl's case ( return less fuel system - no vacuum) but it might also be a malfunctioning fuel pulse dampener on the rail pumping extra fuel into the evap system, the dampener's failure mode for if the diaphragm gets torn or punctured. I can't verify if his engine has one like mine from the Haynes manual because it isn't detailed for either of our trucks in there - I got it from an experienced tech on another forum, and they do fail like any other part with age. So dig in and guide your mechanic, teaching what you learn.
Did a pressure test at the rail. Bought the kit from Harbor Freight for $20.
First turn of ignition got me to 50psi and it dropped to 38 in 15 minutes.
Turned on switch again and it hit 60 this time and dropped to 50 in 15 minutes.
Cranked engine on and got 65psi. Turned off and it dropped to 55 in 15 minutes. Right about where it should be according to the link. Not a new pump but definately not weak enough to cause problems.
Specs say 56-72 at rest. So the pressure is sufficient supposedly.
Karl's engine, being more modern and more efficient to begin with, will probably have better results.
Not really. The millions in technology in todays engine is meant to stop you from getting efficiency or better MPG's. Think Charles Pogue, Tom Ogle, Stan Meyers. All with ideas that got between 100-200+ MPG's and even eliminating using gas all together and all suppressed. Two of the three killed for not selling out their ideas to big oil.
Do a research on this and it will get you frustrated all the gas saving inventions shelved/suppressed, the inventors threatened or their shop vandalized/destroyed and at the evil the powers that be will do to keep you under thier thumb. Its all about control.
That it took a few tries to achieve correct pressure is an indicator of problems, Karl. How many miles does this fuel system have on it? Based on my experiences in my truck from a generation previous, you're likely due to replace the pump at 100-125k miles or so. I'm on my 3rd.
I have no experience w/ this issue, on THESE trucks/engines, though I've checked fuel rail pressures before. Heysoundude is doubtful, I'm a bit skeptical too. I think I'd do it again, but watch the press. closely for the first 5-10 minutes. I'd base my judgement on how the time/pressure drop curve looks. Like if it holds indicated press. w/ a slow even drop, several times, then I'd lean towards Karl's opinion. If it falls off fast at first, then slower as time passes, then I'd be more suspicious. As I've said before w/ this truck, Karl- ask someone firsthand who's worked on 'em a lot, or who has much experience w/ this Ford injection system (right here/now, that's heysoundude).
Or- find the Late nite Psychic call-in channel on TV and have Miss Cleo do a reading for your Mazda. You will need its date of Manufacture from the sticker so she knows when it was born, the plant location will be needed too.
sorry Karl I couldn't resist, hey maybe I could whip out a nice foil Hat what's your size...?
you must Believe you deserve better milage, you must have correct Intent...
guess what, I'm coming to Believe that's true...!
Founder and Constant Aide to Gadgetman
Gadgetman Reno, NV
The pressure drop after 15 minutes should only be 5-8psi. Karl has double that. Eventually back flow pressure will take the regulator out, and then the check valve on the pump, and then the pump itself.
All of those are still working well enough, but the race is on to see what fails first and causes a cascade in the fuel system, bringing about the fuel pump assembly replacement. Now Karl knows what to look for, next time.
I have a question for Heysoundude; you had mentioned in the "pre-groove checklist" topic, that you changed the MPG Remedy ingredients from ASA to Ibuprofen. Does that give you better results?
I tried it, based on something fuel guru Dan Merrick said in the original MPG remedy thread, and yes, it did have better results for me; however, I may have toasted a fuel pump using it.
I made a batch with 3 Advil extra strength gelcaps in alcohol. I let it sit to dissolve the gelcaps. the next day, they were dissolved, but there was a layer of crystals on top of the liquid. I filtered as usual, added at fillup and saw my numbers bump. later that week while idling at a store, my engine stumbled and stalled with 1/2 a tank on board. new pump, numbers climbed again, but given all the difficulty and cost involved in replacing a fuel pump, I've gone back to aspirin - a bit stronger mixture than before - and have kept those gains, and improved on them. I'm not saying DON'T try it; I'm just saying work your way into it if you decide to go that way.
Here's a video that popped up in my YouTube feed that I found interesting. It compares various fuels (some of which get used in our MPG Remedy concoction) and their ability to release energy quickly, and the cost effectiveness of each. I wish they had done the hard math on-screen, and I also wish we had a burner with the Remedy in contention in this video, as I'm interested in how the aspirin -and perhaps its concentration - affect burn.
I've used 99% Iso Alcohol all along. It's readily available at my local big box club store for less than the Yellow HEET is at my local auto parts store.