My 98 also got around 11-12mpg when I first bought it. I changed my plugs/wires and she now gets a consistant 15-16mpg mixed driving. I plan on changing my fuel filter and cat here soon, so maybe it will get a little bit more. For reference the truck is an auto and has 150,000 miles.

 

My '98 4x4 got 13-14 mpg when I first bought it. Since then I've changed all the fluids to synthetic, changed the pluggs & wires, k&n filter, and fuel filter. Last three times I checked it's gotten 17-19 mixed drivin'. It's got around 156k on it, so a tuneup made all the difference for me.

 

I had a 85 dodge truck that got about 11mpg.......it was at least 1,000lb heavier than your truck, and had a v8 in it. My 2000 ranger with a 4cyl gets about 21mpg with a heavy right foot, and is probably a good bit faster than yours.

 

ya my 99 gets around 13 o well

 

Well, I would give it a tune up but I dont see the point in spending money on it as I think I'm going to sell it. This kid I know is going to look at it saturday. I need more space for golf season. Gotta have somewhere to haul the clubs. Found a Civic for sale and it's pretty nice. Drives great, think I might get that.

 

And since you guys are all so smart why can't you figgure mileage by filling the truck and reseting the trip meter, gettin down to about 1/2-3/4 tank, filling it up, and divide the miles by the gallons that you put in. If that's not how you figgure it, how the **** are you supposed to geniuses?

 

dude you are a retard top off your tank right then dive so many miles or so until the fuel light turns then divide by the # of agallons put in

 

yep just divide # of miles on your trip, by # of gallons.... it's not rocket-science

 

the way you calculate it doesn't seem to matter...most of the gen2 rangers w' the 3.0 suck for gas mileage

my '91 3.0 auto got 13.01 mpg without my winter sandbags

 

That's exactly how I do it.

 

I'm not sure but I think you might have a slight case of retardation. You called me a retard saying my way was wrong, but you said the exact same thing I did, just saying run it till your really low on gas. Another reason for your slight retardation is Gen2's, and I don't know what year exactly, but Rangers didn't have fuel lights until atleast after 96 cause my dad's doesn't.

 

I think what he meant is you can't guess like that & get a perfectly accurate mpg figure... not like it matters anyways 3.0's get crappy mileage for a v6, it's a known a fact.

 

maybe it is a years thing cuase my '00 xlt, with an automatic trans, and my heavy, heavy foot get about 18-19mpg city highway... i mean i still have stock tire size, but the last owner threw a flowmaster 40 series on it, but it still get pretty good milage since my stupid escort only got about 22-23 mpg

 

i have a 92 and it has a fuel light

 

man i get about 17 highway and about 15 city. it sucks compared to a car but think about it.....its a truck man! if you expect it to get 40 mpg then your in for a rude awakening. now granted they do get a little below average for a truck but still.....its a truck. and its the way you drive. maintenance your truck and you will get a few extra mpg if you do it right but other than that.....suck it up....quit complaining. i hate my gas mileage but i love my truck.

 

yeah this is true...

but what I do have a problem with, is that I have a 3.0 V6 in a 1/4-ton, 2wd, regular cab pickup, getting 13mpg when my friend has a 4.6L V8 in a 1/2 ton F150supercrew w' much more weight (his truck is stuffed w' $hit all the time), and he also gets 13mpg.

Yes, it's a truck, and trucks DO get worse get gas mileage than cars. But the ford ranger w' a 3.0 V6 gets just as bad gas mileage as bigger trucks!