The Official MPG Thread

[vonVeezelsnider]

2007 Impala LS 3.5L, 100% City, 28MPG.

[Sixty8panther]

I'm still waiting for Dodgefan... I think he took a roadtrip down pikes peek with the #s he quoted me.

[A Horse With No Name]

2007 Impala LS 3.5L, 100% City, 28MPG.

That's real damned good!

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

Toyota Mega Cruiser...built from '95-02. Had front, center, rear differentials, four wheel steering, 4.1L 4 cyl turbo diesel. Toally badass.

They should have sold it here with a Hybrid Synergy Drive as the Prius Green Beast or something..

Actually Lambo had an SUV also that kinda looked like this...

Chris

[Sixty8panther]

66S:

That was a horrible insut to the LM2000!!!

That vehicle was/is functional and also designed in the late 1970s.

This Toyota can't hold a candle to it.

-----

DF: Sooooooo.... are you going to share the G.Marq's MPG numbers?

[regfootball]

ok, the 500 has been showing big time mpg lately on the DIC. so tonight i was setting out on a rant and i set it so it would keep track of my mileage tonight.

got back, about 50-60 miles of stop and go with some light freeway.

26.4 mpg. damn. not bad for a big ass car! My 2 loaner Focuses this year didn't barely crack 25 with me beating on them.

i checked the progress of the whole tank and its around 27....includes half my last trip and the recent in town driving.

the cool air can't alone be responsible....plus the car is running like a demon and has lots more snap and throttle response.

Then I remembered. When i filled up across the state border on the way back last sunday.....i put in non-ethanol/non-oxygenated gas...almost a full tank. or it was the other way around....it was a 89 octane blend. i can't recall. anyways, i think its the gas....my mpg has been up about 10% this summer prior to this tank, the car must be finally breaking in....but this 25+ in in town driving, I'll take that!

[Robert Hall]

Average mileage this week in the JGC has a not-so great 15.3. My new commute is all city, a mix of smooth flow on 6 lane avenues, 2 and 4 lane streets, winding up and down 7 stories in a parking garage, with some stop and go with the lights. Note to self--do NOT leave the office exactly at 5pm.

[Intrepidation]

66S:

That was a horrible insut to the LM2000!!!

That vehicle was/is functional and also designed in the late 1970s.

This Toyota can't hold a candle to it.

-----

DF: Sooooooo.... are you going to share the G.Marq's MPG numbers?

Oh yeah. Last week was it? We made a 4 hour trip in the GM from Lawrence to North Dartmouth and back and it averaged something to the tune of 38.6 mpg while cruising at 70 the whole way over a distance of 180 miles and refueling 4.6 gallon. I had to check it 3 times to be sure.

The numbers my be off slightly...I don't have the text message I sent to Sixty8 that night anymore.

Score one for the RWD V8 powered BOF cars.

Edited September 19, 2008 by Dodgefan

[AAS]

Took my mom's FWD Enclave on a ~215 mile round trip and got around 25/26 mpg all highway. I was driving by myself... mpg drops by a couple mpg when its loaded up with 5-6 people.

[trinacriabob]

On the new one, I've only checked mileage once and it was 30.24 mpg on a freeway-only trip.

On the old one, I checked mileage today on a trip that was on 2-lane highways with speeds in the 55 to 65 mph range. I used A/C part of the way. Got 27.92 mpg. Not bad, considering at its next oil change, it will have a quarter of a million miles.

[Sixty8panther]

My theory is one of two things:

- extra sensitive gas pump filler vapor-off system

- 25% odometer discrepancy

[knightfan26917]

'72 MC = "Browny"

...after ~195 miles ... 12.385 gallons ... 15.75 MPG

'76 MC = "Elvira"

...after ~190 miles ... 11.466 gallons ... 16.61 MPG

'79 MC = "Sweet Pea"

...after ~192 miles ... 11.466 gallons ... 16.74 MPG

'81 MC = "Sweet Tea"

...after ~191 miles ... 10.003 gallons ... 19.14 MPG

'87 MC = "Baby Blue"

...after ~130 miles ... 9.515 gallons ... 13.70 MPG

previously:

...August 29 ... 15.84 MPG

...September 7 ... 18.66 MPG

...September 13 ... 15.90 MPG

...September 14 ... 24.40 MPG

[Intrepidation]

My theory is one of two things:

- extra sensitive gas pump filler vapor-off system

- 25% odometer discrepancy

Or alternatively, you could try believing it. You'd be surprised how could your fuel economy can be when you are driving like a madman, and when traffic is free and clear the entire trip.

Latest fuel average was 21.8 mpg over the course of Friday and Saturday where we used the full take. Saturday was a trip to Vermont for a wedding, Friday was a 3 hour traffic jam from south of Boston all the way back to Lawrence, thanks to the combination of Friday traffic and 2 wrecks. This as you would imagine, killed fuel economy.

[regfootball]

a fellow member at chuch it up i spoke with this morning, admiring his spanking new Lincoln MKz.....

30 mpg+ achieved recently on a trip from twin cities to IOWAY and back.

this is with the new 3.5.

[trinacriabob]

The day after Thanksgiving

Distance traveled: filled up north of Portland OR and filled up again in Bellingham WA* (20 miles south of the Canadian border)

My new Lacrosse with the 3800 V6:

about 64 mph (cruise "on") on open stretches and about 60 mph (cruise "off") through metro Seattle. No A/C, obviously.

32.54 mpg. Couldn't believe it.

*lots of granolas in Bellingham.

Edited November 29, 2008 by trinacriabob

[loki]

kinda had an oddity recently. had 25% highway @62ish and the rest was town driving and i some how did the 240 miles on ~12.5 gallons. that's just not right... i should have been getting high 20's if not low 30's on the highway and 18 at worst in town.

what i'm seeing when my gas gauge works on my newest tank is prolly 16-18 mpg, vast majority in town some intertown driving, 55mph max.

could the cold really be killing my mileage that badly? i don't let it warm up much..... not checked my tires since it got cold. prolly should have the tranny fluid changed (147K miles)

it runs fine/idles smoothly

any ideas?

[trinacriabob]

could the cold really be killing my mileage that badly? i don't let it warm up much..... not checked my tires since it got cold. prolly should have the tranny fluid changed (147K miles)

it runs fine/idles smoothly

any ideas?

Well, tire pressure does have a minimal impact. So does the air filter. No "check engine" either...

If if was carbureted, I've known those to act a little goofy during the warm-up. If multi-port injected, there should be no problem at all. In fact, most cars run better in cool weather and in damp air.

About the tranny fluid....have you done this before? I stay on a regimen of every 20-25K and DO NOT let them power flush it. The pan has to come down and they have to put in a new filter. Be more cautious about this, especially if it's been a while. I think that, if you're already in high gear once at highway cruise, the transmission becomes moot. Maybe a basic tune-up?

[loki]

Well, tire pressure does have a minimal impact. So does the air filter. No "check engine" either...

If if was carbureted, I've known those to act a little goofy during the warm-up. If multi-port injected, there should be no problem at all. In fact, most cars run better in cool weather and in damp air.

About the tranny fluid....have you done this before? I stay on a regimen of every 20-25K and DO NOT let them power flush it. The pan has to come down and they have to put in a new filter. Be more cautious about this, especially if it's been a while. I think that, if you're already in high gear once at highway cruise, the transmission becomes moot. Maybe a basic tune-up?

it's a 99 3.1L MC

never had the tranny changed before to my knowledge. got it at 100K .... if the average was 21, i wouldn't be worrying much about it...

just so odd that it wasn't even above 20mpg average.

[trinacriabob]

it's a 99 3.1L MC

never had the tranny changed before to my knowledge. got it at 100K ....

No...here's what I meant...it was if it had, or had not, been put through a trans fluid flush. Tread lightly here, meaning that if the trans fluid has never been changed, then you don't want to subject it to the "power flush" after so many years, as there are seals and all. My opinion. I prefer to change it the conventional way (drop pan, drain and refill) and do it often enough so that what's in the torque converter will eventually cycle out with as many times as I do it. Plus, there is no pressure applied to the trans case. It has worked for the Regal.

[Sixty8panther]

The Mercedes does 15 as expected.

15mpg average out of that Blitzen Benz is okay by me. It's heavy

like a bank vault & also as sturdy and safe as one. Besides, I do

100+ MPH in it quite often when traveling to UPS at 2:00/3:00 AM.

[loki]

No...here's what I meant...it was if it had, or had not, been put through a trans fluid flush. Tread lightly here, meaning that if the trans fluid has never been changed, then you don't want to subject it to the "power flush" after so many years, as there are seals and all. My opinion. I prefer to change it the conventional way (drop pan, drain and refill) and do it often enough so that what's in the torque converter will eventually cycle out with as many times as I do it. Plus, there is no pressure applied to the trans case. It has worked for the Regal.

i gotcha.

when you do this is any change noticeable? just a tranny fluid/filter change...

my car had a mystery leak a while ago the tranny fluid was barely low...maybe a pint? and the power steering was actually pretty low (in the reservoir), but couldn't find a drip pattern on anything... then it stopped in late summer. topped off those fluids myself.

maybe my inquiry should have been in the tech support board. lol

[trinacriabob]

i gotcha.

when you do this is any change noticeable? just a tranny fluid/filter change...

The tranny should theoretically shift smoother. With a '99, you have an electronic chip in the GM transmission, so it's more "solid state." With my '92, it was fully hydraulic, so I think they can do some linkage adjustments.

Still, it shouldn't impact mileage because, at about 60 mph, you should be turning about 1700 to 1900 rpm. Now, if your tach indicates otherwise, either your tach is off or it's something else (which I don't know enough about).

The reason we (should) get such great mileage in those V6 W-bodies while on the highway is because of the low rpm s.

[vonVeezelsnider]

The reason we (should) get such great mileage in those V6 W-bodies while on the highway is because of the low rpm s.

Ain't that the truth, we got near 40MPG (38MPG) hwy between Calgary and Vancouver this summer in the Impala.

[loki]

Still, it shouldn't impact mileage because, at about 60 mph, you should be turning about 1700 to 1900 rpm. Now, if your tach indicates otherwise, either your tach is off or it's something else (which I don't know enough about).

The reason we (should) get such great mileage in those V6 W-bodies while on the highway is because of the low rpm s.

at ~62 it's turning 2k which is normal w/i +-1% or so.

yeah. it is hilly in my area which would be why the 3800 would be nicer, oh well.

carry on.

[regfootball]

had the taurus x on a jaunt this weekend, about 500 miles.

mpg=

WHO CARES! GAS IS LIKE A BUCK SEVENTY! DRIVE AWAY!

[trinacriabob]

WHO CARES! GAS IS LIKE A BUCK SEVENTY! DRIVE AWAY!

I do !

Two reasons:

(1) it tells you what the car is capable of, and

(2) if the car is older, it theoretically tells you what kind of condition the engine / fuel delivery / emissions system is in

[Satty]

had the taurus x on a jaunt this weekend, about 500 miles.

mpg=

WHO CARES! GAS IS LIKE A BUCK SEVENTY! DRIVE AWAY!

And this folks is the reason gas is going to be $3/gallon again in a year. Typical American short-sightedness, lets just burn it all now, its not like OPEC wants to cut production because global demand has dropped.

[trinacriabob]

And this folks is the reason gas is going to be $3/gallon again in a year. Typical American short-sightedness, lets just burn it all now, its not like OPEC wants to cut production because global demand has dropped.

Abso-f@#kin-lutely.

I'm expecting it to roughly double by next summer, just by the time everybody WANTS to go somewhere.

[Cory Wolfe]

Last three tanks: 29.2, 29.4, and 29.1. And ironically, the highest mileage was achieved driving the fastest with most use of the gas pedal. How that can be, I have no idea.

[A Horse With No Name]

My Miata getss better milage when I drive it hard.

Those are pretty good figures for an automatic being drivin hard, BV!

Chris

[G. David Felt]

2006 Escalade ESV Platinum 14.2

2006 H2 - 12 due to driving up skiing

2005 CTS - 26

2004 SRX - 26

1999 Durango - 14

1998 Dakota - 17

Pretty much same as it has always been. Excited that we might finally get a duramax Deisel Suburban, That would be awesome especially in a Denali XL Trim.

[A Horse With No Name]

I just love Deisels. Keep us posted.

Chris

[NeonLX]

I'm amazed at how close to the EPA mileage estimate both of our current cars perform. The Maxx averages about 20 MPG around town, and will consistently pull 30 MPG on the highway (if I keep speeds below 70 MPH). The Neon pulls 25 MPG in & around town and 32+ on extended highway trips, again exactly what the sticker says.

Worst fuel economy I ever got was 3 MPG, in a '78 Chevy K20 pickup with "full time" 4WD. We were pulling a horse trailer across South Dakota and bucking one helluva headwind all the way.

My '72 Olds Regency used to get 11-13 MPG on the highway. I didn't really care when gasoline was 35-cents/gallon.