Dumb question on RPM.

Submitted: Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 00:15
ThreadID: 99606 Views:3055 Replies:4 FollowUps:7
This Thread has been Archived
Ever since I have had my car, a 96 2.8TD Patrol, it has sat on about three grand when travelling at 100kph.
During the week I have had new rear discs and pads put on the brakes.
Travelling on the highway for the first time tonight it is sitting on 2600rpm at 100pkh. To get it sitting at 3000 I was doing around 115.

Could the brakes have been dragging since I have owned it, thus slowing me down requiring more revs to get up speed?
It's the only reason I can think of.
Any other ideas?

In theory with lower revs I should better better fuel economy. Is that correct?

Thanks

PS. I was not towing.
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Travis22 - Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 00:40

Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 00:40
The only possible way for you to alter the rev's of your engine at a given speed is with actual physical changes to the drive line / running gear.

Larger / Smaller tires, Diff centers, Different gears inside your transmission (numbers of teeth) etc.

If you had dragging brakes, or were heavily loaded, towing etc. the engine would simply become less efficient and use more fuel but the rev's at a given speed would not change.

I do not know the specifications for your make of vehicle, but im sure the answers could be found online with a little searching regarding the rev's the vehicle is known to do in top gear at 100km/h... personally id have thought 3000rpm was a little on the high side.

My guess would be, if you are getting a different reading now the cause is electrical. Unless that is you recently fitted new tires etc.

Lower rev's should equal better economy but it really just depends on the load on the engine.

Travis.
AnswerID: 500891

Reply By: Member - PJR (NSW) - Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 06:39

Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 06:39
If you have an automatic then a dragging brakes could need more revs to maintan your speed. But I do not know whether you have an auto or not as I don't know a lot about your car.

Lika sTravis said. Yes about the revs but other factors come into the formula like load, the environment (strong headwind with a roof rack is a killer), terrain (sand, mud) etc.

Phil
AnswerID: 500894

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Monday, Dec 24, 2012 at 04:04

Monday, Dec 24, 2012 at 04:04
even with an auto more modern than about late 80's it wouldnt be the case unless the lock up torque convertor was also faulty.
All modern autos lock up above a certain speed/rpm and provide a solid drivetrain.
0
FollowupID: 777006

Reply By: Ross M - Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 09:13

Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 09:13
SDG
To have that much change yours has to be an auto unless there has been a previous electrical sensor fault.
To have brakes dragging since 96 I would imagine they would wear out fairly quickly and have to be replaced often, if dragging that much. Not to mention the overheating of the brakes.

Is is possible since 96, you have been driving around with the overdrive/lockup button deselected and now someone has pushed that button and the revs have dropped because it now find the highest gear?

It seems about the right amount of revs difference for that to happen.

Lower revs don't necessarily give better fuel consumption.
You didn't mention the economy you do get.

Ps Did the brake people also change the rear axle /diff for one which has a lower number ratio??? This could account for the revs drop.
Have you looked to see if the diff or axle has been recently replaced?
ie clean marks on bolts and fittings. I have seen this happen before on cars.
If it has, your front and rear diff ratios won't be the same and selecting 4wd will cause windup, suck most of the engine power and cause immediate transmission/driveline damage.

Now there is some thoughts associated with the problem.
AnswerID: 500904

Follow Up By: Patrol22 - Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 09:40

Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 09:40
I'm pretty sure that the 2.8 patrol in either the GQ or GU versions never had an auto transmission as a option.
0
FollowupID: 776950

Follow Up By: SDG - Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:52

Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:52
Manual transmission, and no. The diffs were not changed.
Usually get about 12/13l per hundred when driving sensibly (highway)

Possibly an electrical fault fault that was showing a higher rev. Who knows. Will need to keep an eye on it.
The mechanic has closed shop til the new year, other wise I would have been asking him a few questions.
0
FollowupID: 776961

Follow Up By: Patrol22 - Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 12:09

Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 12:09
SGD....I had my 2.8 for just on 10 years....covered a tad over 340000 km and the average fuel consumption for that entire period (includes significant towing of my 1.4 tonne camper and lots of off road work) was 12.3 ltrs/100km. I just wish that my current Navara D40 dual cab auto was as thrifty on the fuel.....this ute returns and average 13.5 ltrs/100 km.
0
FollowupID: 776963

Follow Up By: SDG - Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 13:34

Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 13:34
Patrol22.
How did you go at towing? I just got myself a camper at a little over a ton. Been on a short trip to Adaminaby where I blew a water pump at the top of Talbingo, since repaired, so have not got the best idea out of it yet. Before that was towing a little over half a ton. Hopeing it was just worn out with age.
I'm on just over 300 thousand on the clock. Already had the head repaired 60thou ago. That apparently was the biggest issue with them. Heading off to Alice next year so no hills which is a plus.

When towing, where did your temp gauge usually sit?
From my understanding temperature was the biggest problem with these. The Clyde, Brown, etc, were the main problems as expected when the temp rose.
0
FollowupID: 776970

Follow Up By: Patrol22 - Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 15:46

Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 15:46
Thankfully I never had any problems with mine...untill just before I sold it. Apart from changing tyres, doing regular services (myself), and beefing up the suspension for off road work, the car was a gem. Why did I sell it? - Well the JC nut on the crankshaft had worked loose and the harmonic balance keyway work badly. I "fixed" this with a punch, lots of loctite and a new harmonic balance and key and then traded it in. Interestingly, the car is still running around Canberra today my son tells me.
It was a bit of a slug to get going on hills and moreso when towing but apart from that still great on the highway. To get around the problem of getting moving on inclines and when off the turbo on hills, I fitted AVM manual locking hubs and then used low range 2WD. No issues when in 4WD low range so towing off road was all good.
0
FollowupID: 776976

Follow Up By: Patrol22 - Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 15:48

Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 15:48
PS - could I suggest that you check torque the JC nut - its the one on the front of the crankshaft....if this comes loose and damages the crank you may well be up for a very expensive engine rebuild.
0
FollowupID: 776977

Reply By: Patrol22 - Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 09:38

Sunday, Dec 23, 2012 at 09:38
As a previous owner of a 2.8td Patrol I can assure you that the RPM you are now reading for 100kph (ie 2600rpm) is exactly the same as mine was. My patrol was fitted with 265 70R16 BFG All Terrain tyres.
AnswerID: 500906

Sponsored Links