- Thread starter SVcummins
- Start date
Fawteen
Well-known Member
- Location
- Downeast Maine
I've had a few vehicles with the mileage readout.
Never had one come within 10% of actual mileage checked by recording fill-ups and odometer miles and doing the math. All were optimistic, some VERY optimistic.
Never had one come within 10% of actual mileage checked by recording fill-ups and odometer miles and doing the math. All were optimistic, some VERY optimistic.
MarkB_MI
Well-known Member
- Location
- Motown USA
I've noticed my Duramax gets great highway mileage IF I can keep it below 65 mph. But in Michigan, you feel like you're standing still in traffic if you aren't going at least 75.
Ivan in Mich
Member
I have a 2018 Chevy silerado and I get 20 to 27 miles per gallon depends on what brand of gas I use. I had to go to Saginaw VA a month ago and with th cruse set at 75 with air on I got just a hair over 27 MPG. If I use the gas from the farm CO OP it gets 25 per gal running around on short trips. One thing I have noticed that on this truck it does not seem to drop the MPG when I run the air
fixerupper
Well-known Member
That is 1 1/2 MPG better than my 98 one ton dually 24 valve under the same driving conditions. I am not driving mine much until I get the famous Dodge death wobble cured.
rustyfarmall
Well-known Member
Exactly! I once owned a 1971 Ford F100. 240 cubic inch inline 6 and 4 speed truck tranny. I pulled that 6 and dropped in a 390. Actually gained about 2 miles per gallon.
Russ from MN
Well-known Member
- Location
- Bemidji MN
Our 13 Silverado 1500 with a 5.3 averages about 19, empty, < 65mph. Higher speeds just kill it.
I had the Mercury 240 six in my 65 F100. It was horrible on gas and low on power. But cannot say I ever had the tank full so I could check
the MPGs scientifically. I have a 1995 4WD F150 with the same basic engine as a 300 with modern tweaks like fuel injection, and overdrive.
I can get 18 MPG at 60 MPH empty on a flat highway.
the MPGs scientifically. I have a 1995 4WD F150 with the same basic engine as a 300 with modern tweaks like fuel injection, and overdrive.
I can get 18 MPG at 60 MPH empty on a flat highway.
My 92 Dodge 4WD, 5 speed, extra cab and longbed got "21 MPG" empty at 65 MPH for many years. That is until I found out it was lying to me. Dodge used a little speedo-correction gearbox between the speedometer cable and Getrag trans. I found out if was off and made MPGs read better then they really were. Once I recalibrated it, my true mileage was 19 MPG at 65 MPH. Still better then my 94 Ford. My 94 F250 4WD, extra cab, long-bed with a 7.3 IDI turbo diesel never did better then 15 MPG at 65 MPH in New York. Here in northern Michigan it gets up to 17 MPG (flatter highways).
I just bought a 2008 Ford truck with a 6 speed automatic and a 3-valve 281 cubic inch V8. Took a 300 mile trip at 65-80 MPH in the Michigan Upper Peninsula and got 21.8 MPG for trip. I am impressed. Much cheaper to drive then my diesel Ford but much lighter too.
I just bought a 2008 Ford truck with a 6 speed automatic and a 3-valve 281 cubic inch V8. Took a 300 mile trip at 65-80 MPH in the Michigan Upper Peninsula and got 21.8 MPG for trip. I am impressed. Much cheaper to drive then my diesel Ford but much lighter too.
Indiana Ken
Well-known Member
30.6 MPG is very good for that heavy of a vehicle. Have you ever compared the computer numbers against a "real world" manual measurement/calculation?
I am always suspicions of what kind of accounting the computer uses. For example, are you sure it is recording fuel used while the truck is not moving. After all, when the truck is stopped, engine efficiency is zero. Why would anyone (the computer) want to include that condition in a calculation of fuel mileage...?
John M
Well-known Member
- Location
- Nunyafn business
I think, maybe thats how many gallons was put into the truck.
John M
Well-known Member
- Location
- Nunyafn business
Mine only gets about 15.5, give or take. Very seldom sees a highway, and most of the time never goes faster than 55. Ive run it on E85, non ethanol, normal 87, high octane 93 - never got any better. I did notice though on E85 and 93 it downshifted less on some hills it would normally downshift.
Indiana Ken
Well-known Member
Okay that makes more sense. So 469.3 miles / 30.639 gal = 15.3 MPG. Do I have it...?
Thanks for the correction John
Blackhole49
Well-known Member
- Location
- White Lake MI
When I drove my 2000 Audi TT (101,000 miles on odometer) home from Sacramento CA (3,500 miles) in 2012, the computer said I got 32 mpg. This trip was back roads and mountain driving to Denver, then expressway to Detroit MI. I kept all receipts and put 109.4 gallons in the car. Actual math 31.985 mpg.
Yep, 15.3.
Anyone besides me see something wrong with this? No, now that SV said. The mileage thing. My son in law drives OTR. He tells me that his semi tipping the scales real close to 80,000 pounds can pull as much as 6 MPG. But a pickup, no load, tipping the scales at what 5,000 pounds only gets 15-18 MPG? Loaded drops to 10-11 at say 25,000? I'm thinking they should do way better than that! After all it's 16 times lighter. And the frontal area is pushing well under half the air the frontal area of a semi.
FWIW that same son in law and my daughter drive a 7.2 powerjoke F350. He gets about 15 because of his driving habits. My daughter gets about 18 with it. It's an 02 with about 350,000 on it, 7.2 auto.
Rick
Anyone besides me see something wrong with this? No, now that SV said. The mileage thing. My son in law drives OTR. He tells me that his semi tipping the scales real close to 80,000 pounds can pull as much as 6 MPG. But a pickup, no load, tipping the scales at what 5,000 pounds only gets 15-18 MPG? Loaded drops to 10-11 at say 25,000? I'm thinking they should do way better than that! After all it's 16 times lighter. And the frontal area is pushing well under half the air the frontal area of a semi.
FWIW that same son in law and my daughter drive a 7.2 powerjoke F350. He gets about 15 because of his driving habits. My daughter gets about 18 with it. It's an 02 with about 350,000 on it, 7.2 auto.
Rick
Yesterday I checked my 18 Silverado crew cab 1500 LT Flex fuel. I had E85 in it and it did 15.5 mpg. this was my fifth tank of it so should be pure e 85. My speed varied from 55 on county roads to 80 mph on I 29. All miles were in S.D. When using E10 its around 18-20 mpg. I always manually calculate mpg, It can differ from the display a mile and a half or so
caterpillar guy
Well-known Member
Several reasons for the semi getting the milage it does versus the pickup.
The semi is only turning about 1200 -1600 with wot @ 1800-2100.
Peak torque in the semi is around 1200 peak HP is around 1600.
Torque in the semi is around 1500-2050 depending on engine and computer settings.
Hp is in the 400-600 range.
The pickup is turning about 2600 RPM or more.
Peak torque is about 1400-1600
Peak HP is around 1800-2200
Torque in the pickup is about the 280-450 range
HP is about 180-300
These are rough specs with no tuners,chips or what have you. So with more rpm's to make the power you get less engine efficiency. The engine has to work harder to meet the demand on it.
The Part that always amazed me was the fact that with the difference in tire diameter the rear axle ratios were so closely the same. Semi's from 4.33 - 3.36 pickups from 4.10- 3.55 depending on axle manufacturer.
The semi is only turning about 1200 -1600 with wot @ 1800-2100.
Peak torque in the semi is around 1200 peak HP is around 1600.
Torque in the semi is around 1500-2050 depending on engine and computer settings.
Hp is in the 400-600 range.
The pickup is turning about 2600 RPM or more.
Peak torque is about 1400-1600
Peak HP is around 1800-2200
Torque in the pickup is about the 280-450 range
HP is about 180-300
These are rough specs with no tuners,chips or what have you. So with more rpm's to make the power you get less engine efficiency. The engine has to work harder to meet the demand on it.
The Part that always amazed me was the fact that with the difference in tire diameter the rear axle ratios were so closely the same. Semi's from 4.33 - 3.36 pickups from 4.10- 3.55 depending on axle manufacturer.
Other than your 2500 weighs a lot less and only pushing 4 tires my 2500 diesels only weighed 7500 so you might weigh 7000 so I?m more than 2700 pounds heavier with more wheels and still getting better mileage doing the same thing you were .
The gas ford 2013 6.2 liter at work gets a whole 8 mpg . That?s why I posted these numbers and those the other day because a one ton truck will not get close to a Diesel one ton maybe If you compare a half ton gas to the Diesel you?ll get kinda close
The gas ford 2013 6.2 liter at work gets a whole 8 mpg . That?s why I posted these numbers and those the other day because a one ton truck will not get close to a Diesel one ton maybe If you compare a half ton gas to the Diesel you?ll get kinda close
Ivan in Mich
Member
Mine is an 8 cyl and then swiches to 4 cyl once it gets up to speed
by your way of thinking a half ton pickup should get
32 or 33 mpg not the 17 or 18 mpg because it
weighs less than half what the truck I posted weighs
and a car should get 90 mpg because it weighs a
1/3 of the weight and a lot shorter and a lot smaller
and less tires unfortunately in the real world if
doesn?t work that way
32 or 33 mpg not the 17 or 18 mpg because it
weighs less than half what the truck I posted weighs
and a car should get 90 mpg because it weighs a
1/3 of the weight and a lot shorter and a lot smaller
and less tires unfortunately in the real world if
doesn?t work that way
2003 GMC K2500HD, 6.0L gas, 5 speed manual, 4.10 gears, LT235/85/16 tires. Truck is basically a single wheel one ton rating, IIRC GVWR 9200 lbs. Most trips 15-25 miles each way. Running right at 15mpg.
Just put new LT245/75/16 (switched back to original tire size) so when I fill up next I'll see what I am getting now.
Could be getting better mileage if I didn't run the A/C. I usually lose at least 1 mpg when A/C is used. Dang it is supposed to get hot, temps upper 90's for at least a week.
Just put new LT245/75/16 (switched back to original tire size) so when I fill up next I'll see what I am getting now.
Could be getting better mileage if I didn't run the A/C. I usually lose at least 1 mpg when A/C is used. Dang it is supposed to get hot, temps upper 90's for at least a week.
Brendon-KS
Well-known Member
- Location
- Goessel, KS
My 2012 F-150 is the same way. When I fill up until the pump clicks off the number on the pump matches within a few tenths of a gallon to the number on the computer. Speedometer checks within 1 mph at highway speeds when compared to a GPS. With an accurate fuel usage number and an accurate distance number one would expect that the calculated miles/gallon is also accurate and my hand math has confirmed that it is. Reading this thread there must be a lot of vehicle manufacturers out there who haven't figured out how do this yet.
Similar threads
We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.
Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.
All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.
Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy