27 Mpg???

[allochris]

Calgary to Kamloops...good mileage...perfectly normal b/c you are starting from 3438ft to 1131ft! (the only hill to climb is probably going up the roger pass?)

 

[mountainpete]

Calgary to Kamloops...good mileage...perfectly normal b/c you are starting from 3438ft to 1131ft! (the only hill to climb is probably going up the roger pass?)

True, but I have never been able to do it since

And you don't see the real altitude drop until the second half.

 

[snowbrock]

I meant that I wondered if my truck got better gas mileage at altitude. Maybe the thinner air runs more efficiently. I have never got as good gas mileage as I did up there in Colorado.

 

[UnfrozenCaveman]

Our EFI'd Rovers always get something like a 20 to 25% increase in mileage on the first few tankfuls when we go from Iowa to Colorado / anywhere with more elevation.

It seems that it takes a little "experience" for the computer to adjust the misture correctly.

The big fat Discovery that is lucky to get 17mpg in the flatland routinely returns closer to 22mpg on short trips to elevation.

Of course, filling up in Dillon and driving thru the tunnel and down toward Nebraska always returns the best mileage numbers

 

[OldSven]

On the way back from Moab with/ or without the trailer I get about 17ish on the highway. That's 33's and re-geared, but a crap load of bumpers

 

[snipecatcher]

I have always thought that if you driving a mix of up and down, equal elevation change, you might get much better MPG. Going up you obviously decrease mileage, but when coming down I think you can get crazy mpg readings, more than making up for the decrease in climbing efficiency.

I agree 100% with that. On the flat coastal plains of Texas where I call home, I average 15-17 MPG. When I drive to the hill country in central Texas, I get 17-19. My truck is nearly stock, but I have a Tungsten foot. (Tungsten being heavier than lead )

 

[Scenic WonderRunner]

Although I have a 3.0 .........I had a similar experience.

In August 2007, I was heading to Ballarat, CA. from San Diego. I topped off my tank near Victorville.........actually right where the I-15 meets the CA. hwy 395 at the truck stop. I clicked and dbl clicked to top off my tank.

When Panamint Charlie and I arrived in Trona we topped off our tanks again.

This is only about 104 miles...........I don't remember the exact details but I do remember that I got 30mpg!

I have no idea how I did this. Except for the fact we were doing 55mph heading north up the 395 and then it was mostly ALL down hill to Trona at the cut off at Red Mountain.

Prior to this......the best I ever got was 24.50 mpg.

Sometimes.....the rock gods are with us!

Although I do believe in a higher power than the rock gods and I don't want to start a religious ranting thread!

Long live randomly high MPG!


......hehe

 

[DenCo40]

I couldn't get that kind of mpg if my truck was being towed!. How can that be? I must be doing something wrong.

Okay, so here's the story:

I went elk hunting this past weekend up northwest of Meeker, CO (gorgeous country, btw!) Didn't get anything but had a great time with my brother and his friend and some of my girlfriend's family.

Anyway, we stopped for gas and lunch on the way back in Glenwood Springs. I filled the tank at the Bradley station (i.e. cheapest gas available.) Since we weren't in a terrible hurry and it was a nice day, I just set the cruise control at about 65 for most of the trip. Glenwood Springs is right around 6000' above sea level, and there are two passes between Glenwood and Denver, Vail Pass (10,600') and the Eisenhower Tunnel (11,000') so it's about equal parts up and down.

I got back on Tuesday night, drove to work Wednesday and today and decided to fill the tank since gas is going up.

I always measure my MPG when I fill up, and I always do it the same way: Since I set my tripmeter to zero after each fill up, I just look at total miles and divide by total gallons. Well, it was 208 and some change, and 7.67 gallons. It came out to 27.19 MPG! :Wow1:

Has anyone else had results like this? This is on an '04 Taco, V-6, 5 speed 4x4 with a cab-high shell, carrying two people and probably 200-400lbs of gear. Still using the stock 265/70R 16 BFG Rugged Trail TA tires with 53k on the clock (I'll need new tires soon, btw.)

Now, I don't believe I really got 27.19mpg. I think what may have happened is that the gas station I went to has a more "sensitive" auto-shutoff than some of the other ones I use. If so, then I should get a lower than usual MPG rating with the next tank. I'll average the two to get my "actual" MPG.

However, it is unquestionable that I drove over 200 miles and my tank was still well over half full, so even if the MPG was "only" 25, that's not bad for a V-6 4x4!

As I said, what I'd really like is to "reality check" this with other Taco drivers to see if this is really possible. If it is, I'm stoked! :wings: My Subaru got 28-29 in the real world on a couple of occasions, so if I can hit 24-25 in a bigger and much more capable vehicle, I'll be thrilled. Now if only the tank was a gallon or two bigger...

 

[Martinjmpr]

I couldn't get that kind of mpg if my truck was being towed!. How can that be? I must be doing something wrong.

In my (admittedly unscientific) experience, the biggest contributor to poor MPG is your heavy right foot. The difference in MPG between 65mph and 75mph is huge. But it's not only the speed, it's the style. If you are constantly accellerating, decelleration, zipping back and forth between lanes and trying to get ahead of the next guy, your MPG will suck, even if you're keeping your speed at 65. What I try to do is set the CC at about 65, stay in the right lane of the interstate, and from that point on, the less I touch either the accelerator, the brake or the clutch, the better my MPG is. Let the road ragers pass you on the highway - what do you care? It's not a race, right?

The other factor I'd look at in your case is weight. You seem to be carrying a lot of stuff on the truck. Are your tires stock? Bigger tires offer more rolling resistance and are also heavier. When I get new tires I'm switching to 235/85 -16's.

But really the biggest factor is speed. I have yet to own a vehicle where I wasn't able to beat the EPA estimated MPG just by keeping my speed down.

 

[Ridgewalker]

I have a condo at 9100 ft in CO and a house on the front range at 5100 ft. I consistently carry a load back and forth and get 23-24 mpg from 9100 to 5100 and 17.5-19.5 mpg. All in an 03 DC Taco with SnugTop cap, stock size tires, etc.
On my last trip to East TX (almost exactly 1000 mi) I got a worst of 17 (in OK-TX) and a best (in CO-KS heading east with tail wind) of 20.6 loaded.
I find that if I don't use the cruise control and drive 55-65, I get the best mileage.:wings: But it is more tiring and it was an 18 hr drive to E TX to see a dying father. Needless to say I wasn't conservative on the drive.

 

[Accrete]

Greetings : )

Reading through the posts i saw reference to "tungsten foot" and "heavy right foot" ... i think that has quite a bit to do with it in my family's experience with our v6 2007 taco-AxCab (265/65/R17 Duelers). At sea level here on the Oregon coast to Portland (a 200ish mile round trip) we get the following (od states 8k miles)

Me (i drive conservatively at 58 to 60mph) 23mpg nearly every trip, even see a 24 now and again.

My wife (conservative but at 63 to 65mph) 22mpg nearly every trip and 20 overall per fillup as her daily driver)

Our son ("heavy right foot" pushes it to speed limit at every chance) 20mph max downhill and tailwind per trip, and 17mpg when we let him drive for two days around town and Portland trip.

attitude behind the wheel does matter. grin.

If my son could find this for sale it would be his 4 wheel daily driver:

...now that he is out of the house (left for USAF basic last month) i know the TACO is breathing a sigh of relief.

Happy trails,
Thom

 

[Bergger]

I usually average 18 1/2 to 20 mpg hwy and 16-18 city. I've got an 03 dbl cab. I've never come close to what you got.

 

[charlieaarons]

MPG is basically 4 things:
Aerodynamic drag
weight
gearing.
rolling resistance.

Anything you do to effect those will change your mileage.

Lift is a negative. Wide tires is a negative.

The biggest thing you could do to improve you hwy MPG is slow down. I can about garantee 2 mpg increase at 65 over 75.

You forgot one very important thing: engine BSFC (efficiency). The diesel in my U500 camper burns 0.333 lb/hp-hr. Typical modern gasoline engines with electronic fuel injection do 0.40-48 lb/hp-hr. Old gasoline engines with carburetors and primitive emissions components are way over that, at 0.60 or even worse. And diesel is 10-11% denser than gasoline.
How else can you explain why I get 8.6 mpg at 60 mph with a 26,000 lb truck with 47" tires that is over 11' high and almost 8' wide; whereas many gasoline powered 1 ton pickups with automatics that weigh 25-30% as much and are much smaller do about the same?
I do agree with the speed comment: I get 9.5 mpg at 55, 8.7 at 60 and 8.0 at 65.

Charlie

 

[Grim Reaper]

You forgot one very important thing: engine BSFC (efficiency). The diesel in my U500 camper burns 0.333 lb/hp-hr. Typical modern gasoline engines with electronic fuel injection do 0.40-48 lb/hp-hr. Old gasoline engines with carburetors and primitive emissions components are way over that, at 0.60 or even worse. And diesel is 10-11% denser than gasoline.
How else can you explain why I get 8.6 mpg at 60 mph with a 26,000 lb truck with 47" tires that is over 11' high and almost 8' wide; whereas many gasoline powered 1 ton pickups with automatics that weigh 25-30% as much and are much smaller do about the same?
I do agree with the speed comment: I get 9.5 mpg at 55, 8.7 at 60 and 8.0 at 65.

Charlie

Bigger motor (or more power) with lower torque curve and the lower gearing to accommodate it will get better MPG then a small motor running hard to move the same weight. Efficiency that you speak of has to do with lean burn and/or high compression on a gasser or forced induction (turbo) on a Diesel

Carbs can be made to run every bit as efficient at FI but you have to tune it to the engine and the elevation. My wife's Carbed Honda gets 32mpg and blows squeaky clean on emissions tests. My FI Toyota truck passes emissions just fine no where near a fail but no where near as clean as that carbed Honda. Now it does compensate for elevation and it does adjust for fuel mixture via a Lamba sensor.

My 79 K5 with a 350 passed smog just fine and with the 3.73 gears and TH350 it got 10-11mpg most of the time. Same truck a couple years newer had a Over drive transmission and got 15mpg.

You are also not comparing apples to apples. Don't compare a diesel to a Gasser. They are totally different in the way they react to loading of weight or wind drag.

Example:

My 88 454 suburban gets 10.5 empty at a steady 65mph. It always gets around 10-10.5 as long as I keep it under 70mph. That's its' sweet spot. Best I ever managed was 11mpg. That same motor if I were to add overdrive and get it down to about 2200rpm from the 2600 it runs now at 65 would get closer to 14. That's what a buddies 2 year newer truck with the 4L80e (overdrive) got with the same gearing as mine with the TH400 (no overdrive). The motor makes big power at low RPM and can easily over come the wind drag and rolling resistance at a lower RPM.

My buddies F250 Crew with a 7.3 powerstroke with Overdrive gets 20 empty at a steady 65. He gets 17 at 80. Pulling a car on a trailer I get 10mpg He gets 12mpg. Diesels and Gasser's act totally different under different loads. A Gasser s more about the engine RPM over the distance till you get to the point where the engine is at max power and running rich. You can see that with my 79K5 that has the same gearing and nearly same size tire gets the same MPG as my Fuel injected 1988 454 Suburban. The burb weighs near 1k more and has a much larger engine.

A diesel will run leaner at steady cruise till it gets a load and then it starts dumping more fuel and raising boost if it is a turbo so it consumes more fuel even though the RPM's stayed the same.

 

[DenCo40]

In my (admittedly unscientific) experience, the biggest contributor to poor MPG is your heavy right foot. The difference in MPG between 65mph and 75mph is huge. But it's not only the speed, it's the style. If you are constantly accellerating, decelleration, zipping back and forth between lanes and trying to get ahead of the next guy, your MPG will suck, even if you're keeping your speed at 65. What I try to do is set the CC at about 65, stay in the right lane of the interstate, and from that point on, the less I touch either the accelerator, the brake or the clutch, the better my MPG is. Let the road ragers pass you on the highway - what do you care? It's not a race, right?

The other factor I'd look at in your case is weight. You seem to be carrying a lot of stuff on the truck. Are your tires stock? Bigger tires offer more rolling resistance and are also heavier. When I get new tires I'm switching to 235/85 -16's.

But really the biggest factor is speed. I have yet to own a vehicle where I wasn't able to beat the EPA estimated MPG just by keeping my speed down.

Thats a great point. I pretty much drive slow like an old man. - oh wait, I AM an old man. At least I don't drive everywhere with my turn signal on. Not all the time anyways.
My tires are only slightly larger, the rack on my truck weighs in at about 45 lbs (yakima crossbars and all) Steel bumper in the back not much heavier than the stock one. The only real addition of weight is the ARB and winch. I didn't think that my mileage would go that bad with a couple hundred extra pounds..
I'm pretty easy on the DC. I am begining to think it's the altitude at which i live at. Toyotas notoriously run rich so with thinner air this might increase the problem. You would think the MAF sensor would correct this.....