Okay Finally got chance to take my Truck for a long ride, 2.5 hours, I noticed it got around 17.6 MPG 2004 3.7L 29 now 30k miles what can I do to improve this? 2 Door Reg Cab 4x4, I did put larger tires, 265/70R 167 instead of the 245/70R 16
MPG Improvement Question
Bradco
21 - 40 of 43 Posts
Joined
·
924 Posts
It is totally possible. I have already gotten between 20-22 in the past when I had the 215/75R15 stockers on it. And mine is also 4wd. I don't see any reason why a 2wd should not be able to get 24mpg.
With the proper driving technique and mods, I am betting someone could hit 30mpg. I know someone with a 2wd Explorer that did it. Took him 4 years to get form 18 to 30, but he finally managed to do it.
Joined
·
1,148 Posts
Mods dont really help fuel mileage if you ask me. But to each there own. ive read that the 3.9s are gas hogs so maybe if you go like 55 60 on the freeway and keep it under 1500 rpms during acceleration you could get 20 on the freeway but 25mpg in a v6 magnum is unheard of espically 30 
Joined
·
924 Posts
Mods dont really help fuel mileage if you ask me. But to each there own. ive read that the 3.9s are gas hogs so maybe if you go like 55 60 on the freeway and keep it under 1500 rpms during acceleration you could get 20 on the freeway but 25mpg in a v6 magnum is unheard of espically 30
Mods do help in fuel efficiency. A good free flowing exhaust system and intake will help the engine breathe, which in turn helps it run much more efficiently. The problem is when people mod their vehicles, they find out it now has more zoom to it. If they weer to lay off the new found zoom, then they would notice increased fuel efficiency.
Here is my argument for why 24-25 MPG in a Dakota is possible:
If I can get a solid 20-22mpg out of my 4wd Dakota, then a 2wd Dakota should be able to do better as it weighs less than mine, and also does not have the extra drag of the front axles and transfer case.
Here is someone I met in the Explorer Club I belonged to who was able to get 32mpg out of his explorer.
His Truck: http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=137531
His Quest for 30: http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=44372&highlight=quest
If an Explorer can do, so can a Dakota.:mullet:
Joined
·
1,148 Posts
Sorry but i dont believe that guys claims of 32mpg when people were posting they did 55 and can only squeak out 18. i believe you got 20mpg in your ride tho
Plus you are wearing out your starter at a much faster rate! And shifting Linkage.
Joined
·
6,435 Posts
Come on dude, when was the last time you heard a hypermiler complain about a worn out shift linkage?? The starter yes - not only do you have the wear and tear, and the waste of extra gas on the start, but then there is extra drag on the engine for a bit as the alternator replenishes what the starter took out of the battery. But the shift linkage isn't going to hurt.
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned 'Mexican cruise control', where you shift into N and coast down hills. I've gotten my overhead computer up to 99mpg doing that..
And keeping your speed down ABSOLUTELY makes a huge difference in your mileage. Simply by staying off the interstate and sticking to secondary 55mph highways wherever possible, and using cruise as much as possible I get 23mpg, vs the 16ish I was getting at 75mph (around town is still the AVG killer, but I've started walking most places in town unless I have to go grocery shopping). And this is with no additional mods other than a cone filter. Also this isn't an option in a lot of states but buy ethanol-free gas whenever possible. Around here it's a 10c/gal premium over corn gas, but you get easily an additional 1-2mpg out of it.
Oh and as far as acceleration, a quick takeoff to get you rolling is better, but if you are adjusting to a changing speed limit - say 40 to 55 - then you're better off bumping up slowly by using the cruise control ACCEL button. In most 'flat ground' cases it'll get you to the new speed without downshifting.
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned 'Mexican cruise control', where you shift into N and coast down hills. I've gotten my overhead computer up to 99mpg doing that..
And keeping your speed down ABSOLUTELY makes a huge difference in your mileage. Simply by staying off the interstate and sticking to secondary 55mph highways wherever possible, and using cruise as much as possible I get 23mpg, vs the 16ish I was getting at 75mph (around town is still the AVG killer, but I've started walking most places in town unless I have to go grocery shopping). And this is with no additional mods other than a cone filter. Also this isn't an option in a lot of states but buy ethanol-free gas whenever possible. Around here it's a 10c/gal premium over corn gas, but you get easily an additional 1-2mpg out of it.
Oh and as far as acceleration, a quick takeoff to get you rolling is better, but if you are adjusting to a changing speed limit - say 40 to 55 - then you're better off bumping up slowly by using the cruise control ACCEL button. In most 'flat ground' cases it'll get you to the new speed without downshifting.
Joined
·
1,148 Posts
Also what really helps is to just let off the gas when your rolling up to a light coasting and sometimes you can roll right through a light going 35. I do hate when people ride my ass coming up to a red light. I just go even slower HAHA
Joined
·
1,148 Posts
i know for a fact driving it under 2000rpms saves gas if my lady drives the truck she can get another 20-25 miles out of a half tank.
Joined
·
24 Posts
Yeah science.... Only problem is when you have a person using science like a retard....
1. checking anything aero at 55 mph is RETARDED. . . . (there test showed the best mpg with the net, the net removed the weight of the door)
2. try that test again at 75 or 80
3. some of you are getting 17 mpg at 55 mph, i get 19 and more at 70 with the tailgate down, i have even gotten better mpg at 70 when i can maintain 70 without all the idiots that don't know how to drive causing slowing and speeding up.
My very few mpg improvements are no engine fan, exhaust, blocked grill and a light AL shaft, syn oils.
I have gotten beyond 20 mpg, during many trips that are the same mileage 68 miles each way the truck has done it on 7 gals each day, now from a empty tank and doing the trip each day with $30, at the end of the 4 trips of 4 days the truck had more gas in the tank instead of being empty, which meant after making the same trip in 4 days at $30 a day and 7 gals and ending with what looks like atleast 4 to 5 gals in it that she was getting better than 19 mpg and more likely 22 mpg and that was with the tailgate open and at 70 mph.
This is also a 440,000 mile 3.9L
. Myth busters is wrong to an extent, there is no aero issue at 55, so doing any aero related tests at below 70 mph is wasted time and proves there is no aero concerns, but it does not prove the tailgate issue, simply look above and ask me about the mpg on that 68 mile trip one way with the TG up....
Most definitely you can get 30 mpg, however you will not do it by making the motor labor (running it to low in rpms) , gas motors all have a different rpm they are most efficient and running low rpms is a simply utterly stupid thing to do, the chamber and mixing will work in some motors better at 2200 and others at 2500 and some will be even different than those 2 rpms.
That will be there efficient spot where the air coming in thru the intake and port and entering the cylinder will fill the best and cleanest...
Lower will make it a dirty pig and higher may make it use more gas...
Now most of you do not build motors, but if you want, drive your car for a few months like a old lady and never exceed 2000 rpms, take the heads off and see the mess of everything deposits and carbon build up, thats a dirty motor running inefficiently WASTING MPG
Joined
·
3,705 Posts
Turning it off at stops does help mileage, not very practical though in a vehicle that isn't designed for it. Several of the new car manufactures are going that route to increase mpg. Some claim up to 10% improvement.
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/27/ford-expanding-start-stop-technology-to-non-hybrid-models/
Joined
·
24 Posts
I don't think anyone buys any vehicle specifically for mileage (except prius and smart owners), but i have to admit that sometimes while looking for performance it is fun to dabble in the mpg arena and look for improvements.
I had done that with a 6800 lb crew cab power ram and wound up getting i believe more than anyone ever with a hwy mpg of 19 at 65 mph..
Wasn't really attempting mpg, but playing with chamber designs for power led to another area and tuning and light weight driveline parts got a 85 W-350 crew cab to a huge 19 mpg achievement, which doesn't sound exciting, but this is a 1985 truck and no lightweight and i haven't seen another do it, and it's funny when on a outing with similar trucks i can skip a station stop and they can't.
I think the Dakota can very get into the 30 mpg range, might not all be spending money on easily replaced parts, might have to get into the motor and make some modifications..
But if i was going to rebuild my Dakotas motor i surely would use a extremely light weight piston & rod & even crank & balancer and make the mods to the chamber on that also and then add roller rockers.
Might sound expensive, but that weight savings there will definitely make a improvement in mileage as will many other options, and still get more power.
I had done that with a 6800 lb crew cab power ram and wound up getting i believe more than anyone ever with a hwy mpg of 19 at 65 mph..
Wasn't really attempting mpg, but playing with chamber designs for power led to another area and tuning and light weight driveline parts got a 85 W-350 crew cab to a huge 19 mpg achievement, which doesn't sound exciting, but this is a 1985 truck and no lightweight and i haven't seen another do it, and it's funny when on a outing with similar trucks i can skip a station stop and they can't.
I think the Dakota can very get into the 30 mpg range, might not all be spending money on easily replaced parts, might have to get into the motor and make some modifications..
But if i was going to rebuild my Dakotas motor i surely would use a extremely light weight piston & rod & even crank & balancer and make the mods to the chamber on that also and then add roller rockers.
Might sound expensive, but that weight savings there will definitely make a improvement in mileage as will many other options, and still get more power.
Joined
·
24 Posts
I have 440,000 plus HARD miles, she didn't blow and she isn't driven like a baby.
At $4+ a gallon lets say i spent 2500 on the overly light race pistons, rods and rockers (probably on the high side), now im saving (using you're mileage of 17 mpg prior to) 13 mpg, not 2 mpg but 13 . . . . at a reasonable $52 a week saved that's 2700 a year.... Guess what paid itself back in less than a year. . . .
At this time I am already without getting into the motor beyond 20 mpg, i would say without really sitting and doing the math the truck is getting 22 to 25 as it sits now, so dropping another 2k to make it back in less than a year not to mention the perf benefits...
Would be silly not to do it while in there.
I haven't had a sb or bb mopar fail yet, and the 3.9 is only a 18 missing 2 cylinders which for me gets lots of benefits from racing sb's all these years.
At $4+ a gallon lets say i spent 2500 on the overly light race pistons, rods and rockers (probably on the high side), now im saving (using you're mileage of 17 mpg prior to) 13 mpg, not 2 mpg but 13 . . . . at a reasonable $52 a week saved that's 2700 a year.... Guess what paid itself back in less than a year. . . .
At this time I am already without getting into the motor beyond 20 mpg, i would say without really sitting and doing the math the truck is getting 22 to 25 as it sits now, so dropping another 2k to make it back in less than a year not to mention the perf benefits...
Would be silly not to do it while in there.
I haven't had a sb or bb mopar fail yet, and the 3.9 is only a 18 missing 2 cylinders which for me gets lots of benefits from racing sb's all these years.
Joined
·
24 Posts
I can probably gain more mpg with a front valance just off the floor
Joined
·
24 Posts
I was talking 30 mpg also, the one modification i do to the chamber that only costs me time will most definitely be worth at the very least another 1.5 and then removing all the factory recip weight would only help more.
If i was to add a front dam to the truck that will also increase my mpg now and make it better.
The more air you keep from going thru and under will help, and i could block up more grill now, as of now only the hood grill is open and my elec fan never comes on unless im sitting in stopped traffic so i can further help aero now and block up more, add a lower dam and it'll further increase.
Like i said i am in the 22/25 area now and i haven't done anything hard or expensive, now if i add lighter wheels, remove unnecessary items and weight it can only go higher...
I don't need the tailgate at all, it's always open, so i get the net and lose that weight.
Im not far off of 30mpg now, it's only another 8 or 5 away.
I can't throw front and rear fully assembled axles in a honda or scooter, or truck shafts or many other things i put in my Dakota now.
If the govt didn't get involved with car manufactures and make them build heavy vehicles because they want idiots not paying attention to DRIVING there vehicle to be able to live from a 55mph dead stop impact our trucks now wouldn't be 4500 and 7500 lbs, and cars wouldn't weight what suvs did in the 80's
New sports cars are all over 4000 lbs, thats like building a ramcharger for racing and removing nothing....
Im sure there are a good few hundred pounds of nonsense in the Dakotas also
If i was to add a front dam to the truck that will also increase my mpg now and make it better.
The more air you keep from going thru and under will help, and i could block up more grill now, as of now only the hood grill is open and my elec fan never comes on unless im sitting in stopped traffic so i can further help aero now and block up more, add a lower dam and it'll further increase.
Like i said i am in the 22/25 area now and i haven't done anything hard or expensive, now if i add lighter wheels, remove unnecessary items and weight it can only go higher...
I don't need the tailgate at all, it's always open, so i get the net and lose that weight.
Im not far off of 30mpg now, it's only another 8 or 5 away.
I can't throw front and rear fully assembled axles in a honda or scooter, or truck shafts or many other things i put in my Dakota now.
If the govt didn't get involved with car manufactures and make them build heavy vehicles because they want idiots not paying attention to DRIVING there vehicle to be able to live from a 55mph dead stop impact our trucks now wouldn't be 4500 and 7500 lbs, and cars wouldn't weight what suvs did in the 80's
New sports cars are all over 4000 lbs, thats like building a ramcharger for racing and removing nothing....
Im sure there are a good few hundred pounds of nonsense in the Dakotas also
Joined
·
360 Posts
what motors in your dakota? thats insane if your getting that good of milage on a v8. i don't think trucks weigh a lot because the government lol your going a little too far with that statement. trucks are meant to work. haul, tow, whatever. not be a gas saving light weight race car.
Joined
·
24 Posts
I have the 3.9 in my Dakota. I have been around cars my entire life for sport and business, no one is building a sports car at 4400 lbs because its the best way to do it, no one.
If you think the manufactures want 4400 sports cars that would be a wrong thought.
Soon cars and trucks will cost more than anyone can figure with them needing to keep idiots alive in crashes and having to meet new requirements for mpg... You're going to see either lots of race parts in cars and trucks as some are already seeing to meet those requirements right now which are going to drive up the costs.
There is no reason a p/u when not working has to be a horrendous mpg vehicle, no reason a few sheets of sheetmetal made to a open box and a small size cab on 2 frame rails should be anywhere NEAR 4000 lbs.
If you think the manufactures want 4400 sports cars that would be a wrong thought.
Soon cars and trucks will cost more than anyone can figure with them needing to keep idiots alive in crashes and having to meet new requirements for mpg... You're going to see either lots of race parts in cars and trucks as some are already seeing to meet those requirements right now which are going to drive up the costs.
There is no reason a p/u when not working has to be a horrendous mpg vehicle, no reason a few sheets of sheetmetal made to a open box and a small size cab on 2 frame rails should be anywhere NEAR 4000 lbs.
21 - 40 of 43 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
