Does modifying my airbox improve mpg?
Does modifying my airbox improve mpg?
I understand that many people are removing the snorkel and sometimes even widening the hole in the airbox. But widening everything seems like it would draw air from under the hood and not outside. does anyone have experience with this?
The reason I ask, is that my ranger is my dd, and I actually have to have a truck for work. Im currently getting 13.8mpg. I want to drive it until the wheels fall off and/or actually need a bigger truck. But I'm a bit concerned about gas going up. I've already ordered a catback system, coming in the mail. and im open to being a better driver/ down shifting less/ and possibly using mid-grade...im going to have to do a cost-per-mile evaluation.
The reason I ask, is that my ranger is my dd, and I actually have to have a truck for work. Im currently getting 13.8mpg. I want to drive it until the wheels fall off and/or actually need a bigger truck. But I'm a bit concerned about gas going up. I've already ordered a catback system, coming in the mail. and im open to being a better driver/ down shifting less/ and possibly using mid-grade...im going to have to do a cost-per-mile evaluation.
Last edited by blue; Feb 16, 2012 at 03:34 PM.
either way you will be sucking in the same air. the snorkel is entirely inside the airbox not pulling air from another source. i noticed no gains in power or fuel mileage at all when i removed my snorkel
I had to look up your profile.It would be nice if you could post the specs/mods on your truck in your sig.
Dump the 10.50 tires and go stock width. Your mpg will go up .That extra weight and road resistance is not helping.
Dump the 10.50 tires and go stock width. Your mpg will go up .That extra weight and road resistance is not helping.
14-16 city is about the best you can hope for, flat highway maybe 20.
If you actually need a truck then the ranger is to small and the mileage difference isn't significant. I have done worked in a v10 super duty before and it got about the same mileage as my 4.0 which is insane. My 4.6 CVPI gets better mileage all around, and its heavier.
If you actually need a truck then the ranger is to small and the mileage difference isn't significant. I have done worked in a v10 super duty before and it got about the same mileage as my 4.0 which is insane. My 4.6 CVPI gets better mileage all around, and its heavier.
yeah about 65mph i can get about 18-19... but since i took this job in the middle of nowhere, all the freeways are 70-75 mph. and with the cruise set at those speeds...im filling up all the time. example: spokane is about 135 miles away; it takes 2hrs and half a tank to get there:(
and I've thought about a different truck. Ive just never had any problems with rangers and i really like the level II w/ standard transmission. they're pretty sturdy...a truck is a truck for a reason i guess; they aren't built for gas mileage. i was just wondering if i tweaked the airbox, whether i would see any benifits. i appreciate you guys breaking it down for me
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Traveler5
General Ford Ranger Discussion
37
Apr 26, 2008 02:03 AM




