Gas Mileage - II

meredithmeredith Member Posts: 575
This topic is a continuation of Topic 207....

Gas Mileage. Please continue these discussions

Front Porch Philosopher
SUV, Pickups, & Aftermarket and Accessories Host


  • racingracing Member Posts: 3
    Hello All,

    I would like to get realistic figures on the following truck:

    Powerstroke (Turbo)
    4:10 axle (Ford, will not let you order
    the Limited-Slip diff in 3:73.....)
    8' Bed

    I've heard a variety of figures from the sales folks at the dealer. Now I'd like to get some real numbers from people who actually own a "like" rig.
    If you have a rig that's of a similar configuration, I would appreciate hearing from you. I would like to get figures such as what the MPG is with it unloaded, flat terrain, no head-wind, cruising at about 70mph, and within about five-hundred feet above sea level. I would also like to get some examples of MPG in various other situations, loaded, mix of hwy and city driving, high elevation, etc,etc,....
    Look forward to hearing from you.
    Thank You,


    ps: I apologize if this is a topic that has already been discussed.
  • BrutusBrutus Member Posts: 1,113
    racing, you can get feedback from current owners of that truck in topic #1470 (Ford Superduty V).
  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    EPA figures for ALL manufacturers are all tested the same. But to excuse inaccurate mileage predictions on testing techniques is probably reaching. I've seen the test procedure write up, and they do a fairly real world test. granted, it won't apply to everyone. but i've never seen a vehicle, GM or Ford or Dodge that didn't get somewhere in between the city and highway range given on the sticker.

    I'd say if you're not getting that mileage, there is something wrong with your vehicle. if your dealer won't fix it, they're running you around, go somewhere else. the way today's fuel injection is set up, a stupid sensor could be giving the wrong reading, the computer thinks its right, and and throws off everything. many dealers are too lazy to manually go and check every little input the computer has, because frankly, there are lots.
  • powerisfunpowerisfun Member Posts: 358
    On my window sticker, the EPA ratings are
    13 city/17 highway for a '98 GMC 5.7L, but at the bottom it says
    "Actual mileage will vary with options, driving conditions...Results reported to the EPA indicate that the majority of vehicles with these estimates will achieve between 11 and 15 mpg in the city
    and between 14 and 20 mpg on the highway."

    I'm getting 19-21 on the highway, but it would also be considered entirely normal if I got 11 city and 14 highway. That's a huge slop factor they build in.
  • wanabajawanabaja Member Posts: 4
    Some of you fellas sure know your trucks so I'm going to the mountain top for advice. I'm considering a new Dakota Quad with manual 5sp 4.7 v8. The 3.92 axle ratio gives me over 1000lbs more towing over the standard 3.55, but 90% of my use won't be towing and mpg is important. What is the best ratio for this size engine? This 4.7 was terrific in my Jeep Grand C. but I didn't tow. Would a manual be problematic with this set up to tow 5000-5500lb trailer through moderate mountains? Dodge specs show a higher tow rating for manual then automatic by 100lb? I thought that automatics towed better. Hey guys/Brutus- Help!
  • wanabajawanabaja Member Posts: 4
    Some of you fellas sure know your trucks so I'm going to the mountain top for advice. I'm considering a new Dakota Quad with manual 5sp 4.7 v8. The 3.92 axle ratio gives me over 1000lbs more towing over the standard 3.55, but 90% of my use won't be towing and mpg is important. What is the best ratio for this size engine? This 4.7 was terrific in my Jeep Grand C. but I didn't tow. Would a manual be problematic with this set up to tow 5000-5500lb trailer through moderate mountains? Dodge specs show a higher tow rating for manual then automatic by 100lb? I thought that automatics towed better. Hey guys/Brutus- Help!
  • andy_jordanandy_jordan Member Posts: 764
    I don't proclaim to be atop the mountain (too uncomfortable - nowhere to sit), but let me try and answer some of your questions.

    As far as 3.92 vs 3.55 is concerned the mileage difference will be minimal, but will certainly add up over the years. The tire and handling group should give you a slight advantage in fuel economy - the tires are larger more in height than width so there should be a net gain, but again it will be small. Having said all that 5000-5500lbs on a 3.55 is running it a bit close. Not sure what you are towing, but add gas, water, contents and the weight will soon add up - especially if you have a family in the cab as well. Personally I think I would go with the 3.92, especially as you mentioned mountains, it will give you a little more muscle from a stop, or at low speeds up steep hills. It will also give you a safety margin on the towing capacity. FYI I am getting 17-18 on my 4.7, 5sp, 3.92.

    As far as standard vs. automatic is concerned, you are right in saying that automatics are often rated to tow more than standards, but that isn't a hard and fast rule. A whole plethora of factors come into the equation, not least of which is gear ratios. The weakest link in a manual transmission, especially when towing, is the clutch, if you respect that and don't overwork it then you will have no problems.
  • wanabajawanabaja Member Posts: 4
    Thanks for the info on your 4.7. Is that a Dakota 4x4? Must be a 2000 to have that engine. Are you broken in completely, must be highway miles to get those mpg? The dealers are telling me they can't get that engine till who knows. If it is a new Dakota what do you think...what's your biggest gripe? Have you had Dodge products before? I'm ready to move on one of these new Quad cabs-very versatile for a one vehicle guy with small family- but have never had a Dodge, am reading bad things re:gas, transmission and fit/finish. Please let me know.
    Went to the Detroit Auto Show earlier this year and got in the new Ford F150 crew. Very nice with more overhead room then the Dakota but all else including payload/towing specs leaned to the Dakota. Especially since its about 5 grand less. But the drop down video screen in the ceiling would be nice for the kids in back- add $1200!!! Also not available in a standard trans. Anyone's help on the new Dakota would be welcome. Thanks.
  • andy_jordanandy_jordan Member Posts: 764
    It is a 2000 Dakota Club Cab now with about 11000km (7000 miles). The fuel economy is based on a regular highway trip, but a journey that takes around 75 minutes for a 40 mile trip because of traffic. So a good portion of city like driving even though it is on highway. If traffic is really bad I see my mileage drop to 16, but not really any worse. May see things change when the a/c is running more and the air flowing through the engine is a little warmer.

    This is my first Chrysler (or Daimler Chrysler for that matter) and I am very happy. I have the standard rather than the automatic so can't comment on reliability issues there (I didn't go standard because of concerns over the auto tranny).

    I don't really have any major gripes, the Dakota topics talk of some teething problems with the new engine - ticking and foaming in particular. There is a TSB on the ticking now. My complaints are all pretty minor, knocking the radio controls when changing into 5th occasionally.

    My full (relevant) spec is Club Cab SLT+, 4.7, 5spd, 4x4, 3.92, 31x10.5 tires.
  • jwm2jwm2 Member Posts: 43
    Have you made any upgrades to your Dakota? K/N airfilter or exhuast muffler improvements?
    I'm only averaging 15mpg on mine. I'm at 5k miles sofar.

  • andy_jordanandy_jordan Member Posts: 764
    No 'performance' upgrades yet, but I have put a fiberglass tonneau on it. That reduces drag by about 11% if I remember correctly, and hence increases mileage. I also have a grille guard and nerf bars that probably increase drag slightly.

    I don't know whether the cold weather has helped by lowering the temperature of the air entering the engine - probably has a slight impact, but I doubt that it is measurable. If you are running the a/c compressor that will have a negative impact on economy - don't forget that the compressor runs the dehumidifier for the windscreen as well as the a/c.
  • BrutusBrutus Member Posts: 1,113
    Andy, a little off subject, but if I'm not mistaken you're a musher. World Championship Sprint races were held during our annual Fur Rondy celebration. Three days of racing over a 25 mile course for a total of 75 miles. The same guy won it this year that won it last year. He won each day, beating the second place guy by about 1-1.5 minutes each day. He covered the course in under 85 minutes the first day and about 90 minutes the final day. The guy is from Sweden (Egil Elis) and doesn't run huskies. He runs some kind of terrier mix. They look similar to husckies, but you can tell them apart because they have floppy ears, not big, just floppy.

    The sprint races have taken a back seat to the Iditarod, but some sponsorship seems to be coming back. Last year, the total prize money was only $20,000. This year, the winner got over $5,000 plus a $30,000+ Dodge Durango. The Iditarod has significantly more sponsorship. The winner gets over $50,000 and a new Dodge Ram 4x4. Ford participates in sponsoring mushers, but Dodge appears to be more overtly active in the sports up here.

    Sorry to be off subject. I did mention trucks....
  • andy_jordanandy_jordan Member Posts: 764
    I'll forgive you - let's hope everyone else does too. The times in those sprint races never fail to amaze me, running Mals I just can't grasp the concept of anything over 10mph over any distance.
  • big7722big7722 Member Posts: 2
  • powerisfunpowerisfun Member Posts: 358
    Since they moved this topic to the back page, it's not getting much attention and is in danger of being killed, but I don't think it should die, especially considering the rise in gas prices that will make fuel efficiency more and more important.
    Anyway, I thought I'd post my most recent mileage of my '98 GMC Sierra Z71 with 5.7L engine. Went 437.4 miles and used 22.591 gallons for 19.35 mpg.
    Not bad for the winter cold weather.
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Andy, are you basing your mileage on the U.S. gallon, or the Imperial gallon? It would make a marked difference.

  • andy_jordanandy_jordan Member Posts: 764
    Indeed it would - almost 1/2 litre (or liter) difference I believe.

    My figures are based on US gallons.
  • powerisfunpowerisfun Member Posts: 358
    Wow, that's impressive mileage for such a big heavy truck with 4.10 rear end. Gotta love that Vortec 350! Incidently, I'm going to be getting a performance chip sooner or later for mine. It was going to be sooner, but my wife and I found a '96 Impala SS (the most practical muscle car ever built) for a deal that we couldn't pass up. That set me back for a while. Anyway, when I do get a chip, I'll let you know how well it works and how it affects mileage.
  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    I would LOVE some day to have one of those model Impala's! about the only 'car' i can actuallly fit in, and of course, a fabulous powertrain.

    I am happy with the mileage. Diesel trucks of all 3 makes only get one or 2 mpg in the same size truck. I'd say i'm a conservative driver, and take it fairly easy on the truck, but living in Austin traffic, thats a very 'relative' statement. although sometimes i do wish i had the big block power, i know i don't need it that often, and i would REALLY be feeling these gas prices if it did had the 4-5-4. overall, very happy with the power/mileage of the Vortec 350/4.10 combo!
  • powerisfunpowerisfun Member Posts: 358
    I can't wait to bring the car home. I'm getting it this weekend. My size is one of the reasons I like the Impala SS too. I'm 6'5" and 270 lbs (trying desperately to get down to 245 lbs), and anything but a full-sized truck or a big car is a compromise in comfort (head-room, leg-room, elbow room, etc. Sometimes I feel like I'm a different species). The '94-'96 Impalas are very comfortable for guys like us. Plus that 5.7L LT-1 is a real performer.
    They only made 69,678 of them over the 3-year production ('96 was the last year), and they only made them in 3 colors: Black, Dark Cherry Metallic (DCM), and Dark Green-Gray Metallic (DGGM). The one I'm buying is DGGM. The seller added some aftermarket performance parts such as Borla exhaust, ASM headers, K&N cold-air, 3.42 rear-end gears, and Hypertech Programmer. Anyway, I'll let you know how I like it once I get it and drive it for a while.
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Hey guys and girls, how about helping out a student working on a doctoral dissertation by participating in a painless survey. Go to topic 1693. Thanks.

  • lwittorflwittorf Member Posts: 96
    I have ask this question on a topic before but I am going to re ask it here. Has any body checked the fuel milage on a 99 or00 chev or gmc with and with out a lund visor on their rig? If so how much did it change or what kind of mpg are you getting with the visor on? I am getting 15-16 overall with mine and the service mgr says that they have a note from chev that the visor can knock milage down 3 mpg and a bug shield can take it down 2mpg. I have both so they are telling me I am really getting 20 mpg and to be happy but I'm not and want some body else to tell me their experances. Thank you.
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Well folks, today I received a call from my dealer
    that my Quad had arrived. Went to the dealership
    tonight (my wife drove me there) and did all of the
    paperwork. Went to delivery, only to discover that
    it was equipped with 3.92 ratio differentials.
    Refused the truck, salesman came over and showed me
    that the order manager had changed the ratio
    because you cannot get the 3.55 with 4.7 and 5
    speed with towing. Problem is, that no one informed
    me and I have been waiting since 12/24/99. They
    were rather casual about the whole thing, but I was
    very upset, since no one bothered to call or
    inform me. They said that they could order me
    another truck, but that was all they could do. Now
    I'm wondering if the combination of 4X4, 4.7, 5
    speed, and tow is available with 3.55.
    Unfortunately, it was 9:45 PM and the manager was
    not there. Please respond by post if you have the
    same combination and a 3.55. I can call D/C
    tomorrow, but right now I am crushed. Perhaps
    themacguy's prophecy is accurate.

  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Checked with D/C, and the combination is completely allowable. Error on the order manager (mangler) and subsequently the salesman who was supposed to call me, but did not. Another case of the misunderstanding the word "restrictions." I spoke with the sales manager, and told him that although I wanted to be reasonable, an additional long wait is not an option. I told him that if I asked to use the Quad until another came in, that would not be reasonable. Or, if I asked to use his vehicle, that would not be reasonable. Changing the differentials, or gifting an extended warranty such as the one they proposed (7 year, 75K, $100.00 deductible, major coverage) for $1,298.00 would in my estimation combine fairness and reasonability. I await his call. The truck is really nice (or keen in my era) and looks super. Again troops, thank you for your support. Next phase; We storm the Bastille!

  • powerisfunpowerisfun Member Posts: 358
    Just a thought. Some good things about the higher gear ratio are that you'll be easier on your transmission and you'll have better acceleration and better towing if you need it. Often, the gas mileage difference is unnoticeable because although the engine is spinning at a higher rpm, it's not working as hard. If the gas mileage does end up being too low for your comfort, you could try adding taller tires (just make sure they're not too wide). Good luck.
  • markcordmarkcord Member Posts: 113
    How reasonable is it to wait almost 3 months for a vehicle and then pull the plug for a screwed up gear ratio. Should you be pissed for them changing your order without telling you (and them making a stupid mistake to top it off)? Of course.
    Is there a tremendous difference between the 3.55 and the 3.92? I doubt it. I mean, it's not like the thing came through with 4.56's. That, to me, is unreasonable. If you want to play games with the dealer to land a free warranty, hey, I don't blame you for trying. It just sounds like you've got a pretty nice truck sitting there with your name on it. Take the warranty and enjoy.
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    They would not come up with an acceptable offer,
    and I really did not want the 3.92. I could get an
    attorney, but that is not practical. While it is
    against my principal to re-order, I have done so,
    and they have promised to push through the order.
    Principal is an expensive hobby, and I really don't
    have the time to wade into battle. It was an
    honest mistake, but my mother always told me that I
    would have to pay for my mistakes; She never
    mentioned that I would have to pay for Reedman
    Dodge's mistakes as well. You're a great bunch.

    Bookitty (Quadwaiter)
  • kit1404kit1404 Member Posts: 124
    That 75,000 mile warranty with a discount should have been around $800 when buying a new vehicle from a dealer. At least that is what I paid on a 1999 F-150 4X4 extended cab loaded - no hassle, just a good extra deal.
  • qhlisaqhlisa Member Posts: 9
    I've had a V10 (3500 Quad Cab, Dually) on order for a couple of months -its been on restriction. The dealer has proposed switching the order to a diesel. What would be the mpg comparison (unloaded) between the Cummins diesel and the V10 engine?
  • spike50spike50 Member Posts: 481
    Very nice truck. Many of the concerns stated in these post have now been "laid to rest". Having the 5 speed hasn't been a problem. 2nd gear starts are the norm (3.55 LSD rear). Put on sill guards and the $12/pr mud flaps. Waiting on the rear cargo tray and will need to find front mats. Looking at installing Catz MSC fog lights. Penda liner and TekStyles ton. on order through local shop. Tree pollen, hard water spots, and bug-guts are taking the "new-ness" away.

    I'm noticing that the air cond seems to be on all of the time even when you're not on the little A/C snowflakes.

    Rough gas mileage calculation in 133 miles / 8 gals = 16 mpg. Just an estimate.
  • spike50spike50 Member Posts: 481
    Three tanks of gas so far. Just broke 1,000 miles a bit ago. 15+ on the first tank. 17+ on the second. 15+ on the third. The second tank was a 200 mile round trip to Baltimore-Washington Airport at about 65-70 mph. Had the soft tonneau cover from TekStyles from the second tank on.
  • tmigueltmiguel Member Posts: 33
    2001 Ram 2500, V-10, 5 spd manual, 3.54 rear, 4x4,265 tires:
    braking in/easy on the pedal (pushing 850 miles)
    In Los Angeles 10.5 mpg (up and down gears)
    Round trip to Oxnard (ideal on coast, under 60 mph,flat sea level) 14.8 mpg
    Getting ready to start towing a boat trailer.
  • crazywomancrazywoman Member Posts: 14
    Just hit 1200 miles on our new 2000 F250 SD 4x4 Powerstroke - gas mileage so far is 18.7 mpg(u.s.) - mixed city and highway driving - flat prairie - no load except some furniture in the back, and diesel here is about 40cents/us gallon cheaper - makes us feel good about our choice.
  • tsantsan Member Posts: 3
    I would like to know if any owners of the new 2001 Explorer Sport Trac have figured out their gas mileage with this vehicle yet. What are they? And have you noticed that the gas gage does not read true all the time. It seems that the first half goes down alot quicker than the bottom half.
  • kmh3kmh3 Member Posts: 35
    I may have stumbled upon why people are getting wierd low gas mileage out of some new vehicles. I had a long running problem where my cars always developed pinging and my wife's did not.

    It turns out that using super (92 octane) in engines designed for regular contributes to carbon deposit buildup and reduces power and gas mileage too. I was in the misinformed camp that believed that putting super into an engine was better for it and that it would increase power, gas mileage, and engine longevity. I was wrong on all three points.

    Modern engines have an anti-knock sensor in them which causes the onboard computer to retard the timing when pinging is detected. This means that no audible pinging occurs, you just lose power and gas mileage when the computer adjusts in this manner.

    It also turns out that radically different formulations of gas can produce the same pump octane rating. In other words different brands of gas are usually different formulations.

    Gas engines develop an equilibrium state (where the rate of carbon deposit buildup equals the rate of carbon deposit flake-off) after about 10,000 miles.

    My wife had an old engine that started to ping on one brand of regular, and she switched to another (cheaper) brand and after two months the problem went away. This episode triggered my rather lengthy research on this subject.

    It also turns out to be true that on gas station is not like another. Gas stations are required to clean their tanks regularly, and they are also expected to let tanks "settle" for several hours after a refill (to let water droplets settle usually). Gas stations that skimp in either area will deliver lower quality gas to your tank than they should.

    So in conclusion, those of you getting way lower gas than others who have the same vehicle may be able to resolve it by switching brands of gasoline (if diesel this won't help you at all), or just buy from another gas station. Especially if you are using premium in a regular engine (although it will take two months to improve if the cause is excessive carbon deposits leading to pinging). If you are just using gas that is bad for your engine (no pinging) then immediate improvement should be obtainable.

    And if you want to shorten the 2 month stabilization period, some dealers have a carbon deposit removal process (cost me $130 recently) where they essentially pour oven cleaner into your engine and let it soak overnight.

  • nowickslnowicksl Member Posts: 20
    I towed an Eagle Talon on an open trailer with a bed full of tools and tires.12 mpg in the hills of New york, 14.3 on the flats of Canada's 401.

    Fantastic truck, more than enough power with the 5.3 in a half ton.
  • jridgway1jridgway1 Member Posts: 13
    After one and 1/2 months I am extrememly pleased with the mileage I've gotten so far. This is a 2000 2500 GMC extended cab 4x4 with 7.4L 5 Speed and 3.73 limited slip rear.

    Highway - mostly level grade 60-65 MPH ranges 14.6-15.2.

    Highway Towing 6000 pounds (car and trailer) same type of grade is right at 11 MPG 60-65MPH. I forget the trailer is even there, no sway, no chugging, etc.

    I live in the country so I don't really have a stop and go MPG figure. That BBC is awesome, torque is unbelievable and will pull easily in higher gears from 1000RPM.
  • mledtjemledtje Member Posts: 1,123
    My wife's aunt and uncle have a 99 dually. I told him what kind of mileage I got with my camper, and he was astonished.

    He pulls an 8000lb trailer and gets 7.5mpg. Empty he gets 8.5mpg.

    Hell, my dad pulls a 6000lb trailer and gets 10mpg with his 5.3 Silverado and 20mpg empty.

    I thought a diesel ought to get better mileage than that.

    Mike L
  • idahoanidahoan Member Posts: 12
    He only gets 7.5-8.5 mpg? I don't see that as accurate unless his truck is totally out of wack(for lack of a better term). My 00 F350 4X4 CC 7.3 SRW 3.73 gets about 17mpg when towing my 31ft 8500lb trailer and 18.5 on average when empty. He must have a terrible problem with his truck. My last truck a 97 Dodge 1500 4X4 Xcab 318 gas was getting 11-12mpg empty and 7-8 when towing the same trailer, that is why I opted for the Diesel. I have had my current truck for 14,000 miles now so it is a long term average. Most of my driving is for daily commuting, around 25 mi. each way to work. It just goes to show that no matter what brand or engine type you own there is both good and bad experiences on both sides of the issue.
  • mledtjemledtje Member Posts: 1,123
    300 miles per 38 gal tank. They are happy with that. They don't drive many miles and really like the power.

    I'll agree with you on the poor mileage of the older Dodge engines and the variability within each brand.

    We should both consider ourselves lucky with our trucks.

    Mike L
  • meredithmeredith Member Posts: 575
    After 30 or more days of inactivity....

    this topic is being "frozen." It will be archived or deleted in the next 10 days or so.

    Front Porch Philosopher
    SUV, Pickups, & Aftermarket and Accessories Host
This discussion has been closed.