good MPGs . . . - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


SOHC - 2.3L & 2.5L Lima Engines Discussions and Topics specific to the Lima 4 cylinder engines

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 08-26-2007
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 7
good MPGs . . .

you see alot of question about improving MPGs. I am tickled to death with what my new '89 beater is doing. I'm getting 26 mpg on the highway with a full load of equipment ( 400-500 lbs ) in the bed and doing 65-75 MPH the entire time. Around my home, I'm getting 21-22. I had a '90 back in 1990 ( bought it new ) and it didn't do as well as this old truck is doing. So . .some of them are just sipping fuel :o)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-26-2007
Mike9825's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Willard OH
Posts: 489
that's awesome man! I can break 20mpg's on my 2.5 but I have to baby the hell out of it. Stay up with it mechanically and you shouldn't have any issues -Mike-
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-27-2007
ranger1998xlt's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 36
same here. I ran 91 ocatne fuel in my 98 2.5L and drove it LIKE A BABY and when I say that, I mean it. went about 53 all the time all highway. I have a K&N, Dual-Exhaust and the Regular Cab stepside with a 5-Speed- 2 wheel drive. I drove 468 miles on 11.93 gallons of fuel. Believe it or not- it's true. I proud of the ole girl!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-28-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Macomb, MI
Posts: 111
I've been running 87 octane fuel in my 97 2.3L, can I run any other type of fuel (Idk If I'm just limited to the 87 octane...scuse me if it's a stupid question :P)

Dave
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-28-2007
greygooseranger's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 3,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by ranger1998xlt
same here. I ran 91 ocatne fuel in my 98 2.5L and drove it LIKE A BABY and when I say that, I mean it. went about 53 all the time all highway. I have a K&N, Dual-Exhaust and the Regular Cab stepside with a 5-Speed- 2 wheel drive. I drove 468 miles on 11.93 gallons of fuel. Believe it or not- it's true. I proud of the ole girl!
Thats 39.22 mpg!!!!!!!!!! If thats true, thats nuts...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-28-2007
03bamaGT's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: B'ham, AL
Posts: 1,752
There are guys with Rangers doing alot better than that. There is a website that is a forum on hypermiling that I looked at while writing a report. There is a 4.0 Ranger on there doing 38.XXMPG!!!!! Most all of them are getting over 100% of the EPA estimate.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-04-2007
timpat92855's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Lousiville, MS
Posts: 1,067
i am getting 28-30 out of my 97 xlt 2.3 5 spd...and everyone around here says thats not possible but good set of plugs and plug wires, clean air filter, and good oil and be easy on the clutch anything is possible...
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-04-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 6
i also have a 97 xlt ext. cab 2.3L 5 speed and live in a city and even with all the stop lights i average around 22-25 mpg.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-04-2007
RangerMuse's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,727
I am getting 18-21 with my 4.0 and I thought it was doing good but I just used some sea foam to clean everything out and I am installing a jet performance module by the end of the week so lets hope that boosts it up a lot.
Anyone have other ideas on what I can do to boost my mpg?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-05-2007
timpat92855's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Lousiville, MS
Posts: 1,067
dont drive fast, dont punch it at from a dead stop...install a vaccum guage and keep the neddle in the green and u will gain a few mpg but u will be driving like a granny but hey it works...
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-06-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NH
Posts: 292
Quote:
Originally Posted by timpat92855
dont drive fast, dont punch it at from a dead stop...install a vaccum guage and keep the neddle in the green and u will gain a few mpg but u will be driving like a granny but hey it works...
I do what you say don't do and I tihnk I am getting about 18-20. But I have fun..
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-10-2007
timpat92855's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Lousiville, MS
Posts: 1,067
lol the vaccum guage idea was my auto mechanics teachers idea and i borrowed ours from the shop for a day and hooked it up to my intake vac line for my purge valve...and wow...i coulnt drive to keep it in the green if my life depended on it but he does and he gets 40+ mpg outta his lil geo with 230,000 miles
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-19-2007
strictlystangs2's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Alachua, Fl
Posts: 6
I have a 99 2.5 5 speed, I always get 23mpg with a mix of some highway some city driving.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-19-2007
jtslmn720's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Kent State, Kent Ohio
Posts: 7,367
by best so far was 24mpg on my 3.0 driving 40+ miles a day highway at 60
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-19-2007
zabeard's Avatar
who?
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
i get 16mpg and get excited!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-19-2007
timpat92855's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Lousiville, MS
Posts: 1,067
4.56s and 35s i killer on gas...friends 2001 z71 with 6 inch lift 15x10 wheels and 35in buckshots gets like 10
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-01-2007
97ranger xlt's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Mass.
Posts: 459
optimum rpm's for fuel economy

on a flat highway with little or no wind, in 5th gear, i can get 55mph turning about 2,200 rpms. on the other hand i can get 72 mph turning 3000rpms. just wondering what would be the better one for fuel economy?
i always thought it would be the 55mph but now i'm not so sure???
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-01-2007
Red_Ak_Ranger's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 17,221
I wondered something like that too.

I drove to south dakota going 60 average and it took 4 and a half hours.

Then I drove back going 80 and it took 3 hours.


So which one used less gas? Because I cut off an hour and a half driving 80.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-01-2007
2003stealthedge's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The ILL State
Posts: 1,297
15-16 mpg stock tire size, cai, recent tune up and almost all highway driving i hate my truck and cant wait til its paid off to get rid of it
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-02-2007
97ranger xlt's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Mass.
Posts: 459
Icon3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red_Ak_Ranger
I wondered something like that too.

I drove to south dakota going 60 average and it took 4 and a half hours.

Then I drove back going 80 and it took 3 hours.


So which one used less gas? Because I cut off an hour and a half driving 80.
i'm not sure that the time it took you is important .. it's how many gallons of fuel it burned to cover those miles.

i guess what we have to do is make long mileage runs (around 200 miles should do it ), essentially on cruise control ... and see how many gallons the engine uses at 55mph vs. say 70mph..

it just seemed to me that i got a lot more speed out of 3000 rpms .. without a huge increase in rpms compared to 55mph...

i'm sure you can see where i'm going with this .. that faster is more efficient i just have to prove it somehow. this goes back to what the OP was saying at the very top of this thread.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10-05-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 45
Just keep in mind wind resistance goes up more at higher speeds so it requires proportionally more engine output, although that't not nearly as much fun to be in the right lane all day! You'll probably find that the slower speed is more efficient. I read that in designing the Bugatti Veyron it required exponentially more horsepower to overcome the wind resistance at 200+ MPH! They have to get several hundred more HP for a few more MPH increase at those speeds.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-05-2007
jtslmn720's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Kent State, Kent Ohio
Posts: 7,367
^ not to mention the veyron has the aerodynamics of a prius ha... yeah depending on the vehicle 54mph is the most efficient speed
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-05-2007
Red_Ak_Ranger's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 17,221
it took me a full tank of gas both ways. I think I had a tiny bit more gas on my trip back, err i ended up with a lil more extra.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-05-2007
BRENSRANGER's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,308
mine gets about 12 that is good right?....lol
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-05-2007
97ranger xlt's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Mass.
Posts: 459
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccootsona
Just keep in mind wind resistance goes up more at higher speeds so it requires proportionally more engine output, although that't not nearly as much fun to be in the right lane all day! You'll probably find that the slower speed is more efficient. I read that in designing the Bugatti Veyron it required exponentially more horsepower to overcome the wind resistance at 200+ MPH! They have to get several hundred more HP for a few more MPH increase at those speeds.
rightly so.. and the ranger is not exactly what anyone would call aerodynamic...lol

however.. we're not talking about 200mph only between 55 and say 70mph..


that fancy vw would only be in first gear!

maybe the tonneau cover would help...
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
100+ MPGs.... knightmare1015 General Ford Ranger Discussion 38 04-09-2008 03:41 AM
MPGs with 33s rinconmanof90 4.0L OHV & SOHC V6 Tech 7 02-10-2008 09:37 AM
20.24 Mpgs! Steve_O113 General Ford Ranger Discussion 26 07-20-2007 12:35 PM
many report higher gears are better for MPGs? 05DSG 4.0L OHV & SOHC V6 Tech 8 04-12-2007 09:59 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:55 PM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.