My quest for 30 MPG - Ford Explorer Gas Mileage Tips

aldive · July 12, 2006

aldive said:
Back with data .....

Alas, no acetone testing was done; I spilled all of it prior to the trip. Trip shortened to 1200 miles.

First leg - 547 miles, avg speed 62.4 MPH. 37.6 MPG. All I75.

Next leg ... mixed in town ( Atlanta ) and highway driving, 26.8 MPG.

Need to fill up tomorrow for last data.

The last leg of the trip netted 30.7 MPG.

This was complicated by speed, traffic and weather issues. When I could I drove 72 MPH, however, I was stuck in traffic in S GA for over 1 hour ( stop and go ). Further, from Tampa to Sarasota, it was raining so hard that traffic speed was about 3o MPH ( also stop and gp ).

The gas used on the last leg was Shell 89 ( I normally use Amoco/BP 89 ). Also, no FP60 ( http://www.lubecontrol.com/ ) was added to the gas.

ponycarlover · July 13, 2006

Autolite plugs

Couple of post back someone was asking about plugs. I was working for an auto parts store and back in Feb. when Autolite sent us a bunch of promotional material on their new iridium plugs. So I bought a set for my 01 v8, I have always preferred Motor Craft plugs. I have tried about every plug out there just about and all Bosch, Autolite, Delco or any other so called performance plug I have tried has at best last about 3 months with the ford ignition then they start crapping out, only Motor Craft has lasted. Well I have had the Autolite iridiums in the car since beginning of Feb. and about 8k miles later they still run strong and smooth. I replaced the wires at the same time with Taylor Performance wire and I gained about a 1 mpg. I gapped them at the highest suggested rating in the owner’s manual.

Ken_on_Maui · July 17, 2006

I get about 320 miles on a tank here on Maui.
And our gas is bucks!!!

Shoggoth · July 18, 2006

Synthetic switch

I recently purchased a '97 XLT 4WD SOHC with 93,000 mi. Is it a good idea to switch to synthetics on a higer milage vehicle? Problems with seals/gaskets?

aldive · July 18, 2006

Synthetic fluids do not cause leaks. If you have none now, by all means make the switch.

Good luck ............

dwalin · July 19, 2006

aldive,

long time i wanted to ask you, what do you think is more fuel efficient: increase speed very slowly at 2000 rpm for a long time (0-60 mph for example) to reach cruising speed or rev the engine to 3000 rpm and accelerate fast for a short time, then switch to coasting dropping rpm? i mean, when i accelerate i look at computer display and no matter if there's 2000 or 3000 on tachometer the instant fuel economy shows 4-5 mpg. if i accelerate slowly, computer keeps showing 3-4-5 mpg then slowly increases to 10-11 when i reach coasting speed, then it shows 22-24 mpg while coasting. if i accelerate fast, computer shows 3-4 mpg for a short time, then i reach coasting speed and mpg peaks to the same 22-24. i wonder what is more efficient?

p.s. i know i shouldn't trust computer too much, it's impossible to get 24 mpg on an old ohv engine and crap-like tranny but nevertheless i'm curious.

aldive · July 19, 2006

For me, slow acceleration is best.

dwalin · July 19, 2006

aldive said:
For me, slow acceleration is best.

not to offend you, but that doesn't mean this way is more fuel efficient, only that it suits you best. did you ever wish to try driving it the other way and measure results?
i'd try myself but i have no opportunity to do that, no long trips, only city driving and AWFUL traffic jams every day.

aldive · July 19, 2006

dwalin said:
not to offend you, but that doesn't mean this way is more fuel efficient, only that it suits you best.

It is more efficient ( i.e., better gas mileage ) for me, thats why I do it.

[qupte]did you ever wish to try driving it the other way and measure results?[/quote]

Yes.

dwalin · July 19, 2006

aldive said:
It is more efficient ( i.e., better gas mileage ) for me, thats why I do it.

a-ha. so your opinion is backed up by scientific data. thank you, it was a question that bothered me a long time.

rob17san · August 9, 2006

How is it coming along? I am new to the post and Just wanted an update after reading the entire post. Also, I have a 1999 SOHC getting at best 20MPG hwy. I have 4.10 Gears and 20" Wheels! haha. How much do you think my wheels are affecting my mileage? I just started to wonder about that...

aldive · August 9, 2006

rob17san said:
How is it coming along? I am new to the post and Just wanted an update after reading the entire post. Also, I have a 1999 SOHC getting at best 20MPG hwy. I have 4.10 Gears and 20" Wheels! haha. How much do you think my wheels are affecting my mileage? I just started to wonder about that...

You have two strikes against you: (1) the gears and (2) the 20" wheels.

I cannot put a number on the wheels but I bet they are really hurting you. Maybe you can borrow somw 15"ers and give it a test.

Good luck .....

aldive · August 9, 2006

I recently tested the Tornado in my truck for its effect on gas mileage.

Take a look at http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=164360

snocross1985 · August 9, 2006

Good idea. Now it can finally be put to rest as being a worthless hunk of crap. Got dyno number and mileage data that prove it. Good work, Al. :thumbsup:

BrooklynBay · August 16, 2006

Here is a link that explains how using high octane gas, or octane booster additives could take away gas mileage: http://autos.aol.com/article/general/v2/_a/which-gas/20060630112009990001 It explains that the higher octane gasolines don't burn as easily, so they aren't as efficient as lower octane gasolines. Higher octane gasolines are required in old muscle cars, or on poorly maintained vehicles with a lot of carbon build up. It needs higher octane in order for them not to knock, and run on. Here is another link which explains what octane ratings are: http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question90.htm

aldive · August 16, 2006

A lot deprnds on the computer tune that one is using.

BrooklynBay · August 16, 2006

Here's another link with information on octane: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane

BrooklynBay · August 16, 2006

So is it possible to fine tune a chip to use a low octane, and still have a high compression ratio for a performance engine?

aldive · August 16, 2006

BrooklynBay said:
So is it possible to fine tune a chip to use a low octane, and still have a high compression ratio for a performance engine?

Doubtful.

jfman · August 19, 2006

best I ever got was 20.25mpg with my 33's I have a manual tranny with 3:55 gearing. That was going on I-95 north at 80ish miles an hour with no ac.

Calculations tell me that the truck gets 22% more miles than indicated because of the 33's.

so filled up in North Carolina
reset trip odometer
was driving at an indicated 70ish mph(in reality 22% higher)
when I stopped to fill up again, check miles on trip times 1.22 divided by gallons just put in. I got 20.25mpg

However in Atlanta traffic(very bad), I get 13.4mpg using the same method to calculate.

And because of my gearing and the 33's, I find that the truck uses up more gas at indicate 60 than at an indicated 70. At indicated 60 mph, the truck is right 1 2000rpm and struggles more than at 2300-2400rpm. I can feel the truck struggling.

Also AC MAKES a BIG difference on the interstate I can feel the torque loss when I turn it on.

My quest for 30 MPG - Ford Explorer Gas Mileage Tips

aldive

ponycarlover

Member

Ken_on_Maui

Member

Shoggoth

Member

aldive

dwalin

Member

aldive

dwalin

Member

aldive

dwalin

Member

rob17san

Well-Known Member

aldive

aldive

snocross1985

Explorer-less

BrooklynBay

Moderator & long time member.

aldive

BrooklynBay

Moderator & long time member.

BrooklynBay

Moderator & long time member.

aldive

jfman

Well-Known Member

Explorer Features

Explorer Features

Similar threads

Featured Content