MPG figures
05-08-2010, 08:59 PM
#41
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: N.D.
Posts: 61
And the lady tailgating the cargo trailer could easily have gotten those numbers. Aero drag is the most important factor causing fuel consumption at higher speeds. In fact, aero drag quadruples when you double your speed. That's a figure that can really eat your lunch. And since they were moving, I'd expect she was around 55-65 mph and may have run nearly nonstop for the whole tank. I wasn't suprised too much to read about her 45 mpg tank.
I told her to stay close and for the most part I couldn't see her in my mirrors.
Over the 1200 mile trip I filled my Dodge Ram up 9 times and burned almost 180 gallons of gas (sorry Mr. Gore).
We filled the Max up once at home and once around the half way point just for the heck of it. Only burned about 27 gallons of gas!
Not a typical occurance I know (I only get about 20 mpg city driving) but still something cool to talk about.
05-09-2010, 07:00 AM
#43
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 61
That's a common complaint I've heard about the MT, that it is geared all wrong for fuel economy. Hate to say it, but going a bit slower will likely help the gas mileage.
I've read about a guy that got to 204 mph (334.6 km/h) on a bicycle. His secret? He drafted a car. According to the article above 90% of energy expended on a bicycle is air resistance.
I've read about a guy that got to 204 mph (334.6 km/h) on a bicycle. His secret? He drafted a car. According to the article above 90% of energy expended on a bicycle is air resistance.
05-09-2010, 07:03 AM
#44
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 61
Maxed_out_99, I'm starting to wonder how much one of those consult2 scantools cost on ebay.......
I just reread your first post and noticed you said that is all city miles. In that case, you're not doing that bad. EPA city mileage is 20 mpg, so you're 1 better at least.
I just reread your first post and noticed you said that is all city miles. In that case, you're not doing that bad. EPA city mileage is 20 mpg, so you're 1 better at least.
05-10-2010, 07:55 PM
#47
Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 164
In addition to factors already mentioned, weather affects mpg. When it is winter cold it takes longer for the engine and transmission to warm up, and fuel consumption is higher during warm-up. This affects short trip mpg a lot. In addition, gasoline sold in the winter has a bit less energy per gallon. And if it's raining your car encounters more resistance than driving through only air. A strong headwind can make a difference too.
Ethanol has less energy than gasoline too. Some regions use more ethanol than others, some stations use more ethanol than others. Ethanol has a higher octane than gasoline, so *some* "premium" gasoline has more ethanol than the regular, which can actually yield lower mpg than regular unless your timing is really retarded on regular.
In my experience, a bad knock sensor will only reduce mpg by 1 point.
Ethanol has less energy than gasoline too. Some regions use more ethanol than others, some stations use more ethanol than others. Ethanol has a higher octane than gasoline, so *some* "premium" gasoline has more ethanol than the regular, which can actually yield lower mpg than regular unless your timing is really retarded on regular.
In my experience, a bad knock sensor will only reduce mpg by 1 point.
05-11-2010, 12:22 AM
#48
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 22
99 GXE, California.
Have been using 91' for a few years now, getting about 19-21mpg average with fairly aggressive driving about 60/40 traffic to freeway speeds. I do have some slight machenical issues and am probably due for some new plugs.
Have been using 91' for a few years now, getting about 19-21mpg average with fairly aggressive driving about 60/40 traffic to freeway speeds. I do have some slight machenical issues and am probably due for some new plugs.
05-14-2010, 12:55 PM
#49
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cranberry Twp, PA
Posts: 20
I didnt know that ethanol would cause MPG to drop that much! Is that really the case? If so, which 'mainstream' gas (Exxon, Sunoco, etc.) would you recommend for best gas mileage? I am using Sunoco 93, and I saw on the pump that it could be 10% ethanol (living in PA here). If I knew of a non-ethanol provider, I would like to give that a try, not only for MPG but for other performance considerations. Thanks in advance for the advice. 
05-15-2010, 06:19 AM
#50
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 61
I didnt know that ethanol would cause MPG to drop that much! Is that really the case? If so, which 'mainstream' gas (Exxon, Sunoco, etc.) would you recommend for best gas mileage? I am using Sunoco 93, and I saw on the pump that it could be 10% ethanol (living in PA here). If I knew of a non-ethanol provider, I would like to give that a try, not only for MPG but for other performance considerations. Thanks in advance for the advice.
10% ethanol likely doesn't change things much, if that's really how much they're using. I suspect they use ethanol to boost the octane of low octane fuel cheaply, which would explain why it varies. Apparently e85 vaies even more so in the percentages of gas/alcohol. I've sucessfully run e85 in my 97 villagerwith no issues, other than lower mileage.
I've noticed running high octane makes my car run smoother, but it seems to be a bit less punchy in the higher rpms. But in the low rpm range, it's hard to keep it at 45 mph---keeps wanting to speed up! The owner's manual recommends using 91 octane, but it can run 87 safely, assuming the knock sensor works correctly.
05-15-2010, 12:45 PM
#51
I do not believe the high mpg numbers quoted here. I hope everybody understands the size of the 4th gen fuel tank, it is not 15 gallons! What is it 18 or 19 gallons? And i hope everybody is doing the simple division correctly, also taking into account any leftover gas from a previous fill up when resetting the trip meter at a fill up. And please no kilometers. Lets get real numbers on this thread this time so we aren't fooling ourselves, basking in contentment and stoking the envy of others with erroneously inflated numbers, if that is the case.
I have a 99 auto i30. At first I was getting 12 - 15 and was planning on getting rid of it for a v8. I inflated all the tires and got rid of enough unnecessary trunk junk which cause my head lights to need realigning. That rose it up to acceptable. Sad thing is that my 90 Buick with a 3.8l engine uses 87 octane and always gotten better milage.
05-19-2010, 10:33 PM
#55
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,432
i put 10 gallons of 89 octane chevron in and only got 165 miles out of it. that super soft driving all city. im thinking thats around 16MPG that PRETTY bad isn't it?
what could cause that big drop in gas? only sensor out is knock sensor.
i put 6 galls of 93 octane see how many mpg i get out of it.
what could cause that big drop in gas? only sensor out is knock sensor.
i put 6 galls of 93 octane see how many mpg i get out of it.
05-21-2010, 07:33 PM
#57
Things that got my mpg from where yours is to 20ish were taking out over 200lbs of junk that was in my trunk, inflating the tires, driving like an old lady and REPAIRING my knock and o2 sensors.
05-22-2010, 01:00 AM
#58
The knock sensor is there for a reason, repair that and then check your mpg.
Things that got my mpg from where yours is to 20ish were taking out over 200lbs of junk that was in my trunk, inflating the tires, driving like an old lady and REPAIRING my knock and o2 sensors.
Things that got my mpg from where yours is to 20ish were taking out over 200lbs of junk that was in my trunk, inflating the tires, driving like an old lady and REPAIRING my knock and o2 sensors.
05-22-2010, 06:19 AM
#59
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 61
The knock sensor is really only good for those who use lower octane fuel. 93 octane likely won't knock to begin with. That is a decent number, but what do you average?
Mine runs like crap on 87. If you can't afford the car sell it...
05-22-2010, 07:46 AM
#61
Well I still knock when I am in lower speeds, but it does it less often. 29 is what I averaged on that drive; it was about a 45minute drive, and about 44 miles. Lately with 93 octane I get 27.5-28mpg.
05-29-2010, 07:00 PM
#62
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 61
I used to be in awe of these numbers til I got my Scan Guage.
By watching the numbers on the guage (epecially the gallons per hour and the throttle position sensor reading) the Sg says our daily average is in the 30s. Not bad since we usually get 25 MPG.
By watching the numbers on the guage (epecially the gallons per hour and the throttle position sensor reading) the Sg says our daily average is in the 30s. Not bad since we usually get 25 MPG.
05-31-2010, 02:26 AM
#64
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 469
97 5sp. On the highway at a steady 75 I get 28 and change. In my usual mixed mostly-highway driving I get 25-26. I use 93.
I agree about the gearing being dumb for mileage. First, second, and third are right on. I use all of them. I rarely if ever use fourth gear; it's just not a convenient gear since the revs aren't that high at ~50-60 in third and fifth isn't tall enough to merit downshifting for gentle highway acceleration. So I usually go 1-2-3-5 or sometimes 1-3-5. It all depends on what I see ahead of me, of course, and where I feel like I need the engine to be, but I rarely find myself in fourth when I couldn't be in fifth. Unless you're a highway racer, it's useless. Nissan should have made fourth like fifth is now and made fifth considerably higher - I am at about 2950-3000 at 70mph which is too much.
I agree about the gearing being dumb for mileage. First, second, and third are right on. I use all of them. I rarely if ever use fourth gear; it's just not a convenient gear since the revs aren't that high at ~50-60 in third and fifth isn't tall enough to merit downshifting for gentle highway acceleration. So I usually go 1-2-3-5 or sometimes 1-3-5. It all depends on what I see ahead of me, of course, and where I feel like I need the engine to be, but I rarely find myself in fourth when I couldn't be in fifth. Unless you're a highway racer, it's useless. Nissan should have made fourth like fifth is now and made fifth considerably higher - I am at about 2950-3000 at 70mph which is too much.
05-31-2010, 06:04 AM
#65
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 61
3000 at 70? That's ridiculous! Sometimes I wish there were 2 choices for 5 speeds, one for the speed freaks and one for the fuel misers. My auto doesn't rev quite that high at 70 but I still wold love to change out the final drive ratio to something a bit more long legged. I had a 90 LeSabre that didn't touch 2000 rpms until I got around 90 mph (in 4th gear of course) and I'm sure it was a heavier car.
Luckily we don't have to deal with traffic congestion much which may be helping the MPG figures. Of course, while my wife was doing great, she got pissed off when someone passed her and tried to catch up with them, I guess to give her a piece of her mind. Our mpg dropped to something around 24 after that. These cars can sure gulp down the gas when prompted to!
Luckily we don't have to deal with traffic congestion much which may be helping the MPG figures. Of course, while my wife was doing great, she got pissed off when someone passed her and tried to catch up with them, I guess to give her a piece of her mind. Our mpg dropped to something around 24 after that. These cars can sure gulp down the gas when prompted to!
06-01-2010, 11:25 AM
#66
I could use some help cause even when on the trips i might get 25 tops...Its a 97 5sp with about 240K. Granted i do have a short ram and a Dynomax muffler. (no name but sounds really good) and my wheels are kinda heavy. I have 18" with 245/45/18 tires. it is about a 1/4 inch bigger around than stock. my gas is 87 wiegels gas... Local gas station chain.
06-08-2010, 12:13 AM
#68
Newbie - Just Registered
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Alpine Utah
Posts: 6
On my 97 MT I use 93 and get about 25 on a good day with mixed driving. I do tend to have a bit of a heavy foot... Awhile back I had a coil pack go bad and was getting like 16 or less mpg! Once I fixed the problem I was right back to roughly 25.
06-08-2010, 09:44 PM
#70
I have a 99SEL Auto,154k, with CAI, 00VI, Y-Pipe and exhaust, 17 inch rims 245/45/17, the last trip i took to Texas i filled up all the way with 91 octane - had 3 riders, 2 full suitcases and was cruising about 80mph all the way. When i needed to fill up the odo read 455 - so if i'm doing the math right i'm getting 26.76mpg.
06-09-2010, 04:42 PM
#71
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 61
You were getting 21 mpg, correct? then you went up to 25 mpg, which is roughly a 20% increase in fuel mileage! That's not too shabby to be quite honest! Is that still city driving? 21 mpg is VERY good for city driving I think!
06-09-2010, 04:48 PM
#72
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 61
I have a 99SEL Auto,154k, with CAI, 00VI, Y-Pipe and exhaust, 17 inch rims 245/45/17, the last trip i took to Texas i filled up all the way with 91 octane - had 3 riders, 2 full suitcases and was cruising about 80mph all the way. When i needed to fill up the odo read 455 - so if i'm doing the math right i'm getting 26.76mpg.
How many gallons did you put in? on empty in my car i still have about 3 gallons left in the tank, ie I only manage to get 15 gallons in when filling up from "empty".
The generally accepted, and fairly accurate, procedure is to fill the tank up, reset your tripometer, drive tank nearly to empty, refill, and take the miles on the tripometer and divide it by the gallons you put back in. Due to any number of variables, you can end up with an artificially low or high number, so you do 2-3 tanks to get a good round average.
06-09-2010, 04:57 PM
#73
yup thats still all city looks like if im strapped for cash i should just be nice to my old lady
06-10-2010, 12:28 PM
#77
