Author Topic: Anybody getting 24mpg.. (Read 3789 times)

EVOC ONE · « **Reply #30 on:** April 09, 2005, 01:42:51 AM »

Good Morning, Savorino: Congrats on 19mpg from your 2000. I feel fortunate to be getting good mileage from my 2000 given the weight and engine size. I'm refering to my previous SUV's. Before the Explorer I had two Bronco II's. One had a 5 sp. manual and the other a 4sp auto. Both had the 2.9. Both got mid 20's highway and low 20's city, but the little 2.9 had no grunt. Given all the bad press about the Bronco II, I thought it was handy and exellent for many circumstances. Tight turning radius, great for driving through the dirt trails in hunting area's, great in parking lots and excellent in the snow. You just had to respect it when driving, but then SUV's are not hot rod's. The Liberty is very similar in those regards. If fact, I've often told the little lady that the Liberty seems to be a modern version of the Bronco II with four doors.

When I took the new job, I was concerned about vehicle reliability due to the 150 mi round trip. So I traded the F150 for the Ranger. We traded the last Bronco II for the Explorer a year before. Now the Ranger sits most of the time and the Explorer is racking up the miles. Primarily due to the better mileage and room. I keep a suitcase, floor jack and many more items in it that I normally wouldn't if I worked closer to home.

I'm a bit concerned about what to get to replace it when the time comes. I know folks who have the re-styled Explorer and none of them get the mileage we get. I have been looking at the Jeep Diesel, but I'm not sure the added expense of the diesel is offset by longevity and mpg. However, if Jeep puts the diesel in the Grand Cherokee and can get the same or very close mpg, I would give that a hard look. From info I have gathered, the diesel has been in the G. Cherokee and Liberty for two years in Europe. So it seems Jeep may be testing the US market with the Liberty first. The mileage may be within reach. According the the specs, the Liberty weighs only 100 or so pounds less than the G. Cherokee.

Good thread. Nice to learn from others experiences.

EVOC ONE

Snowshoe · « **Reply #31 on:** April 25, 2005, 02:24:27 AM »

I have a 2000, F150 2 weel drive, v6 5 speed, and on a trip 23 mpg driving 65-70 mph. If I realy take it easy and drive 55 it bumps up to about 24-25 mpg. I had a 1993 Mazda 1/4 ton 4 cl, 5 speed that got 30-32 mpg, but it had no comfort at all. My Ford is the most comforatable truck I have ever had, and it will do anything I need to do.

gino · « **Reply #32 on:** April 25, 2005, 05:52:35 AM »

I have a '93 Toyota extended cab 4x2 PU with a 4 cylinder engine. At 70mph on the highway I get 26+ mpg, never checked it for mpg around town.
gino
:grin:

Braz475 · « **Reply #33 on:** April 26, 2005, 06:02:18 PM »

Our 4x4 Duramaxes are getting 30 MPG on the HWY with our Ultrapower packages which include reprogrammed computers (Westers Garage), aero turbine mufflers and AFE air intakes. Our shop dyno tests all of the products out there and the banks six gun with speedloader does not produce as much power or deliver the same fuel mileage that this system does. If you are interested you can check out our website and contact us through it. We will have dyno charts posted shortly.

www.brazelsrv.com

Doe Dumper · « **Reply #34 on:** May 05, 2005, 07:47:42 PM »

2000 Silverado 4x4 4.8 5 speed. At 130k I am still getting around 20 pretty much everywhere. Redline synthetic in all the cases and Mobil 1 in the motor. Great motor but the rest of the truck is falling apart.

1996 Exploder 4x4 4.0 Auto 17-19 depending on the day..lol.

1991 F150 4x4 5.0 4spd. 197k still gets between 14 and 15.

wijim · « **Reply #35 on:** May 16, 2005, 05:09:49 AM »

22 mpg

2004 gmc canyon 5 cyl, 4 door club cab. same as colorado.

i would buy this truck again as well. i towed 1500 pounds plus the bed n back seat full to wyoming from wis last fall and got 17 mpg at 80-85 mph most of the way. i had very little loss of power goin up the mts. i never needed to use my chains in the slop and only needed 4 wd once...well i just engaged it for precautionary measures.

22o hp and enough torque to get started with a load. aint the most pwerful truck but it got me pretty remote and i can afford to drive it i have put 42000 miles on it since i bought it.

my general highway work travel includes some city driving does hit 22 mpg most often....my best was 23.5. i am told a cannon air filter could get me 2 more mpg.....i will be putting one in next week.

jeeper1 · « **Reply #36 on:** May 22, 2005, 03:03:42 PM »

My recently aquired 97 F250 supercab longbed 4x4 7.3 power stroke pickup got 20.75 mpg at highway speeds. And it looks like it it going to do about 17mpg in a mix of intown and dirt trail driving.

wijim · « **Reply #37 on:** May 27, 2005, 08:25:48 AM »

update....

i went from 21.8mpg on three tanks of fuel (midgrade) to 24.7 mpg after putting in the k n n air filter. my wife's van went from 21.9 to 25.9 mpg.

they are expensive but heck its gonna pay for itself real quick and they are washable and reusable.

mjbgalt · « **Reply #38 on:** May 27, 2005, 11:43:53 AM »

it does that by letting more air in. cool. but guess what else gets in? yep, more dirt. check your oil and tell me if it doesnt look a lot dirtier a lot faster than it used to. mine did.

-Matt

wijim · « **Reply #39 on:** May 31, 2005, 03:16:02 AM »

ok i will.

i thought the deeper pleats allowed for higher surface area (ie. same same porous consistency yet more pores because of more unonstructed filter material) allowing more air to get though filtered at the same rate (taking out the same size particles). i could be wrong so im glad you mentioned that i'll be checking the filth factor of my oil...thanks for the heads up.

ga41 · « **Reply #40 on:** July 29, 2005, 02:32:40 PM »

Sorry about the delay Savorino, the chevy has done me ok, I have driven it 65,000 miles in the last 5 years and it has only put me down 2-3 times(fuel pump, starter, Ignition module)

KN filters,in the dyno test and lab tests I have seen are not worth it. Hopefully those of you that are using them are getting better results,but they aren't for me and my vehicles

ga41 · « **Reply #41 on:** October 02, 2005, 06:18:38 PM »

Recently bought an 03 Tahoe 2WD with a 5.3 ltr (yeah UGH, right before the recent gas crunc) but here is what I have found. I run a modified computer and get 22mpg with the cruise set at 65 and the AC running on the Interstate. I can add 1mpg to this if I use my foot and not the cruise. Yesterday I tried not using the AC and driving without the cruise and was VERY easy on the throttle. A 17 mile trip with lots of up and down hill driving netted 26mpg. It was tough as I let it run up to 60 down the hills and held 60 on the flats and let it back all the way down to 45 up the hills, but I wanted to see what was possible

Simple Man · « **Reply #42 on:** October 03, 2005, 07:44:50 AM »

Yesterday I was on a short road trip in my 99 Grand Cherokee limited and was watching the little trip computer thingy that estimates your present MPG, I was getting around 20-22 mpg if I was cruising on a long flat straight away, but it would drop to as low as 12mpg if I was climbing any sort of hill. My average mpg says 18 in the trip computer.