Konaguy
Live From Kailua-Kona, Hawaii
Premium
join:2000-10-21
Kailua Kona, HI
 ·Hawaiian Telcom
4 edits | reply to SMCinAZ
Re: Anyone Help WIthy MPG Info on 2002 Ranger?
Those are based up EPA tests and artificially too high.
Take my 2005 Ford Ranger XL for example 22 city 26 highway.
My mpg I calculated comes out to 20mpg. If the truck
comes with 5 speed over drive and drive in a lot of flat
areas your fuel economy will be higher.
This site is much better :
»www.fueleconomy.gov/ |
|
SMCinAZ
Premium
join:2000-11-29
Glendale, AZ
clubs: | Thanks-good info.
I got a great deal on it. WOuld have liked a 4 cyl but they are very rare around here.
Any info on the 2 types of bedliners? Spray in vs drop in? |
|
Konaguy
Live From Kailua-Kona, Hawaii
Premium
join:2000-10-21
Kailua Kona, HI | My Ranger is 2.3L 4 cylinder with 5 Speed O/D. I've gotten 24mpg once when I drove over a flat stretch back and forth to
my parents new house. The O/D improves your fuel economy. |
|
SMCinAZ
Premium
join:2000-11-29
Glendale, AZ
clubs:
1 edit | reply to Konaguy
There is something I do not understand: According to the fueleconomy.com site, the 3.0L V6 from Ford on the Ranger gets exactly the same mileage per gallon as the 4.3L V6 on the Chevy S10. How can this be? The Chevy is 43% bigger, and the truck sizes are approx the same, so how can this be?
Another example: According to the site, the same Chevy 4.3L engine in a much bigger truck, a Chevy Silvarado 1500, gets the SAME MILEAGE as the S10 which is also the same as the 3.0 in the Ford Ranger.
I truly do not get it. A much bigger and heavier truck with the same larger engine gets the same mileage? |
|
Lexloser
@comcast.net | Could have something to do with the rear end gear ratios. Some are geared for hauling heavy weights not for best gas mileage. |
|
SMCinAZ
Premium
join:2000-11-29
Glendale, AZ
clubs: | Now I look arounsd that site more and I see that their numbers vary largely by year, despite having the same engines, etc.
I think that site is not the most reliable. |
|
mattmag
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-04-09
NW Illinois
clubs:
 ·Mediacom
| reply to SMCinAZ
A smaller engine does not always equal better mileage. The key is that the 3.0 has much less torque and HP than the 4.3L, so it must work harder to move the weight of the vehicle. Harder working = lower efficiency as far as fuel mileage goes. The 4.3 with greater power available can be geared higher (numerically lower) thus reducing cruising RPM which results in better fuel mileage.
To complicate it a bit more, as in your example of the 4.3L in the S10 and Silverado, the engineers can take things further and modify fuel delivery curves, camshaft profiles and other computer-controlled elements to "tweak up" the engine so the mileage is consistent with it's smaller cousin. This usually comes with a decrease in pulling power for the larger truck, since things are aimed more at fuel economy on the highway.
My real-world experience with these vehicles holds this as a true factor, as customers will comment on the lower performance of the 4.3 in the big truck. The driving experience of the 4.3 in the smaller truck is generally much better.
Hope that wasn't too much information....
-Matt |
|
SMCinAZ
Premium
join:2000-11-29
Glendale, AZ
clubs:
| Hey Matt-how are ya?
So, you are saying that the smaller engine in the larger truck gets good mileage but is weaker, yes?
I am just feeling a bit bugged because I was originally after either a S-10 with a small 4 cylinder or a Silvarado 1500 with the 4.3 but decided on the Ranger with Supercab because it had more legroom than the S10's but (I thought) would have better mileage than the Silvarado. Apparently, after further review,it does get better mileage, but not anymore than 1 or 2 mpg. Guess that will have to be enough. |
|
mattmag
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-04-09
NW Illinois
clubs:
·Mediacom
| I'm good!! Still around like a bad itch.... 
Yep, the smaller engine gets a decent mileage number, but it isn't much of a powerhouse in the big truck. Works best for a retired farmer-type guy that still wants a truck to drive, but doesn't have a need for much power.
These numbers are most frustrating, to say the least. Plus, what one person achieves may be much different than the next person, depending on all the driving variables.
My advice is always to use the EPA window-sticker ratings as a general *guide* when comparing vehicles, since that way all those tested are using the same base-testing methods. They may not be fully accurate, but for the purpose of comparison (which is all they were ever intended to be used for) they work fine.
-Matt |
|
NogginFogger
Boom Head Shot
Premium
join:2004-01-18
Reno, NV
clubs:
| reply to SMCinAZ
said by SMCinAZ  :Thanks-good info. I got a great deal on it. WOuld have liked a 4 cyl but they are very rare around here. Any info on the 2 types of bedliners? Spray in vs drop in? Go for the spray-in... but do it yourself, and don't use the sprayer. Use the roller.
I've done it both ways... the spray is very thin and in my climate (Nevada) tends to dry out and crack.
I used a roller this time and it's much thicker, more cushy and is holding up FAR better then the spray did.
--
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. |
|
