truck-trans-dodge
truck-logo-dodge
Search Messages :  

2003 Ram Speedo Recalibration for Nonstandard Tires/Wheels

From : remove spam from address to reply

Q: i was not clear. i want to install an extra gauge decidated to showing trans fluid temperature. maybe on top of a dashboard. it will not be connected to or control the engine. i why dont you get a transmission temp gauge and put the sender where it will do some good. in the line going to the cooler. roy wrote want to install something on my trans fluid pan that could send the temp to the gauge on dash so that i can see the trans temp on my dodge ram 1500. i am sure you can rig up a sensor to work like you want it to. but then the computer will think your trans temp is the eng temp and set the fuel to the wrong mixture. under towing conditions the pcm may think the engine is overheating due to the higher temp in the trans pan. the best way to set that up is to get a mehcanical gauge. first install a fitting into the trans pan then run the mechanical wire up the gauge mounted under the dash. james1549 .

Replies:

From : smyzdavcook

01 ram 1500 quad cab 4wd 5.9 auto w/od extra tires and rims gibson exhaust front and rear seat cover rear slider bed liner tow package nerf bars steps for kids 20000 garaged miles clean and sweet located in carlisle pa $16000 smyz@earthlink.net -- smyz 01 1500 classic fi v 10495 .

From : davcook

you can buy the software from chrysler for about $3500 then the hardware to hook your pc to the truck is about $1100. take it to a dealer and tell them what you want and they can do it for abour $25. remove spam from address to reply wrote i understand that there is a software recalibration available via the engine computer which requires an aftermarket device to connect to the wiring harness. anyone been through this procedure where can i get this device also what are the approximate axle speed vs road speed limits which can be compensated to 100% accuracy by this method best regards martin .

From : remove spam from address to reply

on 7/2/03 1352 remove spam from address to reply wrote here are some numbers to ponder a 3500-lb car being raised 5400 feet = potential energy increase of 18900000 foot-pounds. assuming this occurs over a 10-hour time span it requires an average work of 525 foot-pounds per second. ok this is good. i like a real analysis. thats basically a one-horsepower engine running full open at max load and thats at least doubly redundant dont spoil this with exaggeration. wrong ... if its a 1-hp engine it will produce 1 hp and consume appropriate fuel only when operated full-bore and properly loaded. horsepower is proportional to the product of rpm and torque; torque requires load. you dont think your lawnmower does work at the rate of 5 hp when its running full speed but not also loaded by high grass do you is that why you dont feel that the hypothetical engine would drink noticeable fuel drinking from your fuel tank without adding anything to your forward progress. but i still dont think its detectable. the wind factor would bury the extra little one-horsepower. i know its tempting to feel that should be true but if you really like analysis then do the homework. avg windspeed in this part of the country is about 8 mph. use reasonable assumptions to calculate how close to head-on this would have to be in order to require a 1-hp increase in propulsive work. for consistency with the example weve been debating assume an average ground speed of 60 mph. fyi this is important because the prevailing winds on that round trip will be mostly crosswinds. check an nrel map. plus on the return trip your flat-road consumption is reduced by that same amount as you substitute gpe for engine work. 2x the amount of gas used by that loaded 1-hp engine is quite a noticeable difference in economy! but you also compared each trip west and east individually to a normal trip and said you noticed a difference. so you can cut that 2x in half. its 2x when comparing the outbound path to the incoming which makes it twice as easy to notice. ill have to see it myself before i believe it. give it a try if you get the chance it will certainly be an eye-opener. do your best to observe the same driving habits both ways and use a trip where you just hit the road and drive avoid detours through town sightseeing other factors that would randomize the results. hopefully you arent driving a 10-mpg guzzler that would bury your results my trips were in a nissan that got about 25 mpg. also be sure that you arent fooled by the headwind/tailwind factor on whatever loop you choose. then dig up this thread and re-post with your data. best regards martin .