Typical Mileage

[G B L]

Thanks for the info . Sounds like a great rig.    Having a real tire is the best way and it does go very well where you have it.  

It would be nice if the 2.5 injection system could handle propane.  Here the cost difference is not great enough to make the conversion popular enough to get the companies interested.

I will continue to follow your experience with much interest.

[Fifty150]

 US liquid gallonUS liquid quartUS liquid pintUS legal cupUS fluid ounceUS tablespoonUS teaspoonCubic meterLiterMilliliterImperial gallonImperial quartImperial pintImperial cupImperial fluid ounceImperial tablespoonImperial teaspoonCubic footCubic inch 

 

=

 

 US liquid gallonUS liquid quartUS liquid pintUS legal cupUS fluid ounceUS tablespoonUS teaspoonCubic meterLiterMilliliterImperial gallonImperial quartImperial pintImperial cupImperial fluid ounceImperial tablespoonImperial teaspoonCubic footCubic inch 

 

 

(236.1 miles) / 15.8503 =

14.8956171 miles

[Fifty150]

60 liters = 15.8503 gallons.

 

I must be getting the worst mileage.

[HeRodeCBR]

In my 2015 XLT I get about 23.5 around town with too much stop and go at lights. on the highway doing 60-65 and drafting other vehicles which I do NOT recommend I was able to attain a 38 MPG avg over 95 miles distance. regular highway driving at speeds of 65-75 I get about 28.5. If I drop speeds to 60-65 I get around 30.5.

 

Stopping at lights on my local roads to work and back really hurts my milage of course. Anyone thinking of installing an oil system accumulator and engine start stop system like Cadillac uses on their 4cylinder engines now? I have tried shutting off at traffic lights and milage around town jumps to 28.5 no problem. I  do not want to ruin my starter and engine due to so many unnecessary no oil pressure  start ups.

 

[mrtn]

There is an optional start-stop system in European models but it also has a different starter. You can’t use the standard one for start-stop.

[Mike Chell]

I wish my 2017 had the start/stop system.  I am sure it would save me a ton of gas on my daily 100 mile round trip to/from work.

[sKiZo]

Depends - estimates are that most of these systems MIGHT save you maybe 5% on fuel, but the tradeoff is more expensive repairs and additional wear and tear on the premium components used. Most of the starter motors themselves are larger, with larger batteries to boot, so you're not doing much to improve the environmental bootprint either. I also wonder how much raw gas gets dumped down the pipe every time the feature cycles ...

 

(Not to mention the aggravation of people like me telling you your motor stalled every time you come to a corner.) <G>

 

I'll pass ...

[Mike Chell]

Since I do 500 miles a week, even 5% is a about 52 gallons a year.  And I've heard reports that some people are getting more than 10% savings.

I don't care about my environmental footprint ... since I don't have any kids or relatives I care about.  When Wife and I are gone, whatever happens to the planet won't matter anymore.

It's just about how much money I can spend on trips with Wife and fishing stuff.  The less I spend on gas, the more I've got for those interests.

[Fifty150]

I am in "big city" traffic.  The kind of traffic that does not move.  Even with a green light, the intersection is already gridlocked.  Or the light turns green, and only 3 cars make it across, which means that I only get to advance 3 car lengths.  It could take 5 or 10 minutes to go a few blocks.  It takes about an hour to get across town, and only travel 7 miles.  The 3 - 5 miles of freeway that I drive on never gets to freeway speed.  Most of The U.S.A. never sees this kind of traffic, unless they are watching a movie.  On top of that, "most expensive fuel in the nation" California gas is a strange blend of "better for the environment exhaust", and "good for the environment ethanol".  

 

https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/gasoline/gasoline.htm

 

The California reformulated gasoline program set stringent standards for California gasoline that produced cost-effective emission reductions from gasoline-powered vehicles. The CaRFG program was implemented in three phases.  Phase 1, which was implemented in 1991,  eliminated lead from gasoline and set regulations for deposit control additives and reid vapor pressure (RVP).  Phase 2 CaRFG (CaRFG2) set specifications for sulfur, aromatics, oxygen, benzene, T50, T90, Olefins, and RVP and established a Predictive Model.  Phase 3 CaRFG (CaRFG3) eliminated methyl-tertiary-butyl-ether from California gasoline. 
 

 

[HeRodeCBR]

"depends - estimates are that most of these systems MIGHT save you maybe 5% on fuel,"

 

Maybe ought to read my post again. I drive about 75% in stop and go. milage went from 23.5 to 28.5 by shutting off the engine JUST at traffic lights. improvement of 5mpg over 23.5 Maybe my math is bad...21%??? If I am right then it is definatel worth looking into. Different starter and an oil accumalator....

 

[Mike Chell]

Ethanol in gasoline is the worst.  And it's a lie that E-10 is better for the environment.  If you burned a gallon of E-10 and a gallon of gasoline side by side, the E-10 would, in fact, create fewer emissions.

However, since it's less efficient than straight gasoline, you need to use more to travel the same distance.  If you drive two cars 500 miles, one on E-10 and the other on gasoline ... the one using E-10 will create more emissions.

 

Sorry ... ethanol in the fuel is a "hot button" issue for me.

[desert_connect]

AND not to mention the large amount of energy wasted producing ethanol fuel as well as the transportation of shipping it too the refineries to mix it with gasoline to produce worse mpg. Who's bright idea was this! 

[HeRodeCBR]

Mrtn Thanks a bunch for the euopean start stop clue. I wonder if they even use the same engine as mine. If so a starter upgrade and an oil pressure accumalator would be SO worth it to me. Next questions would be how to access the ECU pinouts for the correct Start stop behavior. Thanks a bunch already.

[Mike Chell]

2 hours ago, desert_connect said:

AND not to mention the large amount of energy wasted producing ethanol fuel as well as the transportation of shipping it too the refineries to mix it with gasoline to produce worse mpg. Who's bright idea was this! 

Yep ... it takes approximately 70% more energy to make a gallon of ethanol than you get out of it when burned. 

It also takes enough water from the ground to affect local wells. 

This is one government boondoggle that SHOULD be stopped.

[Don Ridley]

It takes 100+ million years to make a gallon of crude oil. There is a lot of extra energy around (sun, wind, wave, Geo thermal etc). Oil is finite. When it's gone it's gone. Save the oil for the thousands of valuable carbon compounds needed to make stuff. Burning it is like burning 300 year old oak just to keep warm.

 

I love my vehicle and the internal combustion engine, but that is not the future.

 

The next generation will argue about performance mods to their electric motors.

[sKiZo]

Not to mention what to do with the mountains of dead batteries created since we went electric ... Fun fact - right now, less than 5% of the lithium ion batteries used are recycled. Costs to recover are just too great to be economically feasible. That leaves about 900 pounds of hazardous waste heading for the landfill every time a vehicle is repacked, which is on average every five years or 60K miles ...

 

 

[mrtn]

3 hours ago, HeRodeCBR said:

Mrtn Thanks a bunch for the euopean start stop clue. I wonder if they even use the same engine as mine.

 

They're definitely in 1.0 Ecoboosts and 1.5 turbodiesels.

 

1 hour ago, Don Ridley said:

The next generation will argue about performance mods to their electric motors.

 

Software. See also: Tesla OTA updates.

[G B L]

I would like to see the starter for the on - off Transit.

Hopefully Tesla will survive.  If the electric car makers Picked a Voltage and a Standard battery package to allow for a fuel station  battery swap. The number of electric cars would would make a quantum leap.  

It would allow for battery improvement being available to already produced cars.

[Fifty150]

14 hours ago, desert_connect said:

. Who's bright idea was this! 

 

 

Without getting political, my recollection is that E85 fuel was something that the prior administration pushed for.  

 

The President (prior to the current administration) was focused on reduced emissions pollution.  The biggest hurdle to cleaner alternative fuel was distribution.  During those 8 years, vehicle manufacturers were given incentives to produce flex fuel and alternative fuel vehicles.  Now we have a few fueling stations selling natural gas, propane, bio-diesel, and E85.  

 

From personal experience, the Econoline I use at work is regularly fueled with E85.  The mileage is horrible, but since it is subsidized to be sold at a lower cost, the cost per mile is almost the same.  When the smog test required a tailpipe test, the printout showed that the tailpipe had zero or close to zero in every category tested.  The first time that happened, the smog tech was baffled that a V8 with over 100,000 could have near zero emissions, and he threatened to report us to the government for tampering with the smog control equipment.  With bio-diesel in our fleet of old medium duty trucks, we noticed that there wasn't any more black smoke coming out of the tailpipe.  Some guys said that the throttle became more responsive.  

 

Yes.  It works.  Tailpipe emissions are reduced.

 

But at what cost?  

 

The environmental footprint of producing E85, Bio-Diesel, and Hybrid & Electrical vehicles is huge!  Electric cars get electricity from the power grid.  How is that power produced, and distributed to the final end user?  Isn't most power produced with fossil fuel, and what about the environmental impact of the kilowatts consumed by your plug-in electric car?  What is the efficiency in cost per mile - when your utility bill goes up as you save at the pump?  Electric vehicle batteries are equal to how many passenger car batteries?  A Prius electric car battery can last 10 years or 300,000 miles.  The electric car battery is the equivalent of 10 or 12 car batteries, give or take.  What is the environmental impact of producing and disposing of those electric car batteries?

 

E-85 and Biodiesel are both financially subsidized so that the fuels can be sold at a competitive price.  Nobody would pay the true cost of these fuels.  It cost more to make a fuel substitute,  than what the actually fuel is worth. The production and transportation of these fuels damages the environment more than the tailpipe emission of using gas & diesel; especially when you factor in the genetically modified corn and how that impacts the world food supply.  It's kind of like recycling.  You get a penny for a soda can.  But what does it cost to send out a diesel truck to pick up the recycling, transport it to a plant, and then burn fossil fuel to power the machinery which melts down the metal for reuse? 

 

We may as throw six pack rings into the ocean to kill the seagulls.

[Mike Chell]

I fully agree that E-85 is a very clean burning fuel, both one on one comparison and over a given distance.  But it IS much more expensive than gasoline.  Environmentally damaging to produce ... mostly because we haven't figured a better way to make it.  If we could grow sugar cane in massive quantities, it would be a little better.  Going green isn't cheap.

E-10 is the fuel mixture I always rant against.  All the problems of making E-85 without ANY of the benefits.  E-15 (which is being pushed for) is even worse than E-10.  Look at your new car owner's manuals.  Most of them say, all engine warranties are null and void if E-15 is used.  Even flex fuel vehicles can't properly meter E-15.

[Fifty150]

E85 could turn into a farm subsidy.  The government could pay the farmers to grow sugar cane or corn.  The government is already subsidizing the manufacturing and distribution of E85, so that retailers can sell it for about $1 less.

 

All cars can run on E85 and there are conversion kits on the market.  If manufacturers want to, every car could be sold as flex fuel. by way of government dollars, every gas station could have an E85 pump.

 

Every car could be sold with a diesel engine and all pumps could dispense biodiesel.  

 

The politics and money are what is keeping us from getting away from gasoline and diesel.  

 

No.  I don't think E85 And biodiesel are the solution.  It is symbolic of how technology and science is restrained by politics.  Big oil does not want anything to take our dollars from buying gas and diesel. So they will pay off politicians at every level to protect their revenue stream.  

 

Government could pay for a lot with our tax dollars.  The money is there. But it becomes a matter of prioritizing politics.  And I don't want to point out where they could cut spending to increase spending in other areas.  Because we all have different  ideology.  

Edited July 24, 2018 by Fifty150

[mrtn]

Of course not. Hybrids for transition in local scale or diesels for long haul transportation and full electric when the green infrastructure is available. Dino electricity is a terrile idea.

[Fifty150]

Evens hybrids, like a Prius, can be equipped with a small diesel to use biodiesel.  

 

A lot of options. 

 

Special Interest lobbying is holding back advancement.  Unless funding is allocated for further research and development, we will not be able to take the next step into a more efficient or cleaner future.  Or someone in another country will develop the technology.  China is already testing the use of solar panels on freeways.

 

That being said, I have a gas guzzling pickup truck.  

 

 

Edited July 24, 2018 by Fifty150

[Mike Chell]

Biodiesel and E-85 might be steps toward something better ... but they're definitely steps, nothing more.  All bio fuels require more energy to make than we get back out of them.  Where does that energy come from?  Coal and oil burning technology.

Although it's taken millions of years to make crude oil ... the refining/catalyst process gets more than 60 gallons of gas from every 100 gallons of crude.  It is, by far, the best fuel we have, and will likely have for the near future.

There is more than enough oil to fuel the globe for at least another century, if industry keeps finding better and better ways of burning it.  We are still only utilizing less than 40% of the heat created in the combustion process.

 

We NEED to figure out how to efficiently convert sunlight into electricity.  We NEED to develop battery technology by leaps and bounds.  Until those technologies are at full capacity, we NEED to wisely use our petroleum in the most efficient ways possible.

Bio fuels aren't really an alternative.  To power the world will require more arable land than we can lose.  We need that land to produce food.

 

Actually ... we NEED to convince the world that zero (or negative) population growth is the only way we're going to survive.

[Beta Don]

2 hours ago, mrtn said:

Dino electricity is a terrile idea.

 

My 2017 Volt is full electric drive and runs on gasoline generated electricity for long distance freeway driving.  It's a 4,000 pound car and gets 45 mpg or better on a typical drive

 

Don