2019 Ranger MPGs

[Gizmokid2005]

The ONLY way to calc MPG is to have fuel usage and ODO #. Fuel use can only be calculated from a fuel flow meter, or using math and %PWM on the injectors sampled say every 0.05sec.

Your math "(1440*22 + 10*1 = 31690 / 1441 = 21.9916)" looks faulty to me (in context of "lifetime avg").
Taking your math, lets say:
1440*22 = block-A
10*1 = data point #1441
12*1 = data point #1442

Now what's the avg after data point #1442 has been measured?

My point was it doesn't store flow rates and fuel used, it stores a MPG calculation.

This is exactly how a weighted lifetime average works though, statistically and realistically.

It would be largely the same math: 1440*22 + 10*1 + 12*1 = 31702 / 1442 = 21.9847.

So now "block A" would be 21.98mpg over 1442 data points.

Sponsored

 

[Deleted member 1634]

The ONLY way to calc MPG is to have fuel usage and ODO #. Fuel use can only be calculated from a fuel flow meter, or using math and %PWM on the injectors sampled say every 0.05sec.

Your math "(1440*22 + 10*1 = 31690 / 1441 = 21.9916)" looks faulty to me (in context of "lifetime avg").
Taking your math, lets say:
1440*22 = block-A
10*1 = data point #1441
12*1 = data point #1442

Now what's the avg after data point #1442 has been measured?

Oh Chuck, you're really sticking to your guns here aren't you. haha You're either the most persistent guy or the most stubborn, I can't tell which. Either way, this has to end at some point. I think whether you're right or @Gizmokid2005 is right, it doesn't matter at this point. This isn't a court of law, where truth and facts actually matter and have bearing (as much as some of us would like); this an internet forum, where rumors and opinions run rampant and in the end nothing matters except what any of us thinks (I am guilty of this as well).

 

[Bud]

What are all the new owners getting for gas mileage?

Thanks

Jake

I only have 1400 mile on my 4x2 and my mileage seems to be settling in at around 24mpg. That is mainly rural driving.

 

[chuck stein]

My point was it doesn't store flow rates and fuel used, it stores a MPG calculation.

This is exactly how a weighted lifetime average works though, statistically and realistically.

It would be largely the same math: 1440*22 + 10*1 + 12*1 = 31702 / 1442 = 21.9847.

So now "block A" would be 21.98mpg over 1442 data points.

That seems very wrong. Now you have 3 #'s in that equation, presumably 1st and 2nd were stored, and the 3rd was just read bu ECU. Will there be hundreds of #'s available for the equations when the # of data points is 2x10^12 ?? If the math does "rollback" (or "feedback") using just two #'s in the equation, the lifetime avg will not be accurate at all.

And no, not hell bent on this as some are suggesting, just pointing out the pitfall in such a # being fed to the dash.

 

[Gizmokid2005]

That seems very wrong. Now you have 3 #'s in that equation, presumably 1st and 2nd were stored, and the 3rd was just read bu ECU. Will there be hundreds of #'s available for the equations when the # of data points is 2x10^12 ?? If the math does "rollback" (or "feedback") using just two #'s in the equation, the lifetime avg will not be accurate at all.

And no, not hell bent on this as some are suggesting, just pointing out the pitfall in such a # being fed to the dash.

Can you explain how this is wrong?

1440 = number of reads
22 = average of above reads.

For ever read you increment the number of reads (1440 + 1 + 1 ...) and do the math to update the average (which is the math I gave above).

After each read you wind up with the same two values, number of reads, and average mpg of reads. That's how weighted averages work.

If you want to discuss the "realtime" MPG, none of this matters. This only matters for the stored MPG numbers, whether they're in a trip memory or lifetime memory. There are going to be different variables for each of them to keep them separate, all doing their own averages based on the length of time since their reset.

 

[Traneman]

Just did a fill, and I am at 13.5! OUCH! I thought 16.3 was bad..

I do use remote start, but only runs 3-4 minutes. It's mostly short drive to work.

 

[Gizmokid2005]

Just did a fill, and I am at 13.5! OUCH! I thought 16.3 was bad..

I do use remote start, but only runs 3-4 minutes. It's mostly short drive to work.

The short drive to work makes that seem reasonable. You don't have enough non-moving miles to counteract all the usage while not moving. Remote start sure takes a toll on mpg, especially when you don't get in any longer/highway driving to count against it.

 

[Deleted member 1634]

Just did a fill, and I am at 13.5! OUCH! I thought 16.3 was bad..

I do use remote start, but only runs 3-4 minutes. It's mostly short drive to work.

The short drive to work makes that seem reasonable. You don't have enough non-moving miles to counteract all the usage while not moving. Remote start sure takes a toll on mpg, especially when you don't get in any longer/highway driving to count against it.

Yeah, my last tank was 16.0 even, which is the worst non-towing mileage I've gotten. The whole tank was just my short work commute and it was relatively cold as well, so the truck never really got up to efficient running temp at all during the whole tank. This current tank I've been babying a bit to try and recoup my losses. Currently used over a 1/4 and sitting around 20mpg average. I'm very sure that the people around me don't appreciate my slow and smooth acceleration, but who cares about them. haha

 

[454x]

With a mixed commute of 70 mph and 65 mph on the interstate I'm getting a combined of 22 mpg and if I dont drive over 65 mph on the interstate I've seen 25 mpg. Just wish I could get a Brown Davis long range (35 gallons) tank from Australia.

 

[ch47dmechanic]

Even with traffic here in the bay area, I'm averaging close to 20 MPG during my commute driving. It's great on the weekends though when I'm able to get close to 23-24 highway.

 

[Derek123]

Drove to see family yesterday and after spending 3.5 hours on the road, I noticed that on flat roads with no head winds, my instant milage would suddenly, and for no apparent reason, drop from 27-30 MPG to 19-20 MPG. My cruise was set at 70 MPH every time and again, totally flat road with no head winds. A/C was (obviously) off. I'm not sure what's going on but something was definitely drawing the mileage down.

Try turning off trailer sway. its on 24/7 even when not towing. I turned it off in an F150 and gained 4mpg while heading down the highway

 

[Msfitoy]

Try turning off trailer sway. its on 24/7 even when not towing. I turned it off in an F150 and gained 4mpg while heading down the highway

Really?! Where's that button?

 

[Derek123]

Staying off boost is the key for better mpg. I'm able to get a best of 22+ on highway and 19+ city if I watch my foot. Forgetting mpg and just driving normally, my city goes down to 17-18, 19-20 highway.

BTW, I'm able to monitor the boost condition (among other info) through my ipad/OBD gauge setup...

What OBD are you using for this?

 

[Derek123]

Really?! Where's that button?

Under settings on the left dash screen. you have to turn it off everytime you start the truck. I turn it off in all fords and it makes a difference. I had a 2017 ford explorer sport that chewed the rear brakes in 20,000kms because of the trailer sway system. was only towing for 1000km of that.. turn it off everytime, mileage increased in all cars.

 

[Gizmokid2005]

Under settings on the left dash screen. you have to turn it off everytime you start the truck. I turn it off in all fords and it makes a difference. I had a 2017 ford explorer sport that chewed the rear brakes in 20,000kms because of the trailer sway system. was only towing for 1000km of that.. turn it off everytime, mileage increased in all cars.

This feels very...odd. I'm not saying you're wrong, but also it just doesn't really pass the smell test.

Sponsored