Surprised by my gas mileage

AzScorpion

Moderator
First Name
Dave
Joined
Jul 25, 2019
Threads
280
Messages
21,289
Reaction score
101,276
Location
Arizona
Vehicle(s)
2023 Ford Ranger Tremor
Occupation
CEO of DeeZee
mine isnt broke in yet, has 1000 miles on it, in town driving mostly right now, after i fill up and do the math etc... last 3 tanks are solid 19.5, truck says 20.5 , so it is off..... i dont drive fast or hard ever... just saying
Chuck, if you want to correct the dash readout check the link below.Mine was off a good 1.5-2 mpg and now it's perfect, I started at 944. It does take about 5-6 tanks to fully adjust.


https://www.ranger5g.com/forum/threads/fuel-calculator-adjustment.2996/
Sponsored

 

dokkerdam

Active Member
First Name
jim
Joined
May 31, 2021
Threads
4
Messages
44
Reaction score
34
Location
ford2.3ecoboost
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ranger STX SuperCab
Occupation
flight instructor
I will tell you that when I switch to 91 or higher, the truck runs so much better. Peppier, smoother and better MPGs. When I put in sport mode - WOW!

I do switch back and forth - depending if I get the $ bug up my butt. When I run 87, I use Sport mode in town and Drive mode on the highway. When I run 92 - no need to run in Sport mode. unless I'm feeling frisky (Not THAT kind of frisky)

I'm currently running 92 (my local station has that) and I love it.
thanks for the update. i'll admit that when i get on the truck a tiny bit it feels slightly hesitant but that goes away if i really stomp on it. on the other end it is remarkably smooth and competent driving like the 60 year old hybrid loving apolitical person i am.

so the big question is: at the end of the day does the increase in MPG using 91 or 92 make up for the $$ difference per gallon?
 

EJH

Well-Known Member
First Name
Ed
Joined
Oct 7, 2020
Threads
15
Messages
814
Reaction score
1,522
Location
Oregon
Vehicle(s)
Subarus, 2021 Ranger
Occupation
Engineer
to those guys running anything other than 87 octane: have you tried 87 and had problems? modern auto engine technology/electronics should eliminate the need for anything other than what the owner's manual calls for.
My MPG is lower on 87 octane. I've used it a few times. The decrease in MPG is similar to the decrease in cost from 92 -> 87, maybe more.
 

AzScorpion

Moderator
First Name
Dave
Joined
Jul 25, 2019
Threads
280
Messages
21,289
Reaction score
101,276
Location
Arizona
Vehicle(s)
2023 Ford Ranger Tremor
Occupation
CEO of DeeZee
thanks for the update. i'll admit that when i get on the truck a tiny bit it feels slightly hesitant but that goes away if i really stomp on it. on the other end it is remarkably smooth and competent driving like the 60 year old hybrid loving apolitical person i am.

so the big question is: at the end of the day does the increase in MPG using 91 or 92 make up for the $$ difference per gallon?
This has been beaten to death on here many times. Some will swear it does while others swear it doesn't. When I changed over from 87 to 91 (highest we can get here) I did notice a slight increase in mpg but then a tank later I tuned mine. With both I gained about 2 mpg but the overall responsiveness of the truck is well worth it IMHO.
 

FX4Offroad

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jim
Joined
Jan 21, 2019
Threads
71
Messages
930
Reaction score
2,995
Location
South Florida
Vehicle(s)
2019 Lariat FX4
thanks for the update. i'll admit that when i get on the truck a tiny bit it feels slightly hesitant but that goes away if i really stomp on it. on the other end it is remarkably smooth and competent driving like the 60 year old hybrid loving apolitical person i am.

so the big question is: at the end of the day does the increase in MPG using 91 or 92 make up for the $$ difference per gallon?
Personally, no, it doesn't. I certainly get better MPGs with the higher octane but it doesn't make up the difference.

Besides, if you do the math, the monthly/yearly difference isn't earth shattering.

To me, a better running, peppier truck is worth it.

Fun driving experience = Happy guy

Or, as I say:

What has two thumbs and LOVES driving a Ranger?...
 


AzScorpion

Moderator
First Name
Dave
Joined
Jul 25, 2019
Threads
280
Messages
21,289
Reaction score
101,276
Location
Arizona
Vehicle(s)
2023 Ford Ranger Tremor
Occupation
CEO of DeeZee
Personally, no, it doesn't. I certainly get better MPGs with the higher octane but it doesn't make up the difference.

Besides, if you do the math, the monthly/yearly difference isn't earth shattering.

To me, a better running, peppier truck is worth it.

Fun driving experience = Happy guy

Or, as I say:

What has two thumbs and LOVES driving a Ranger?...
That's a good point Jim, so many get caught up at the price at the pump. If you drive a lot of miles than it's a concern but for the average driver it doesn't add up to all that much for the benefit you get from it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doc

Big Blue

Well-Known Member
First Name
Lee
Joined
May 5, 2020
Threads
14
Messages
3,168
Reaction score
7,083
Location
Wisconsin
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ford Ranger XLT FX4 Supercrew lighting blue
Occupation
Retired mechanical designer
so the big question is: at the end of the day does the increase in MPG using 91 or 92 make up for the $$ difference per gallon?
I agree with @AzScorpion. This has been beaten to death. If you ate running your Ranger bone stock, like me, and the cost difference between 87 and 91-93 is less than 10%, unlikely. No, it does not make up the financial difference. It becomes personal opinion if the slight performance gain is worth it to you. Like @AzScorpion the highest I can get is 91 octane. Yes there is a performance difference, it does run smoother, pepper and get 1-2 mpg more. But, it costs 30% more. If I had a tune and was a few years younger :) I might think differently. If you like and use the extra performance you probably won't get the extra mileage.

It all comes down to a personal choice as it will never pay for itself on a purely financial basis.
 

Trigganometry

Well-Known Member
First Name
Rick
Joined
Dec 4, 2020
Threads
150
Messages
5,824
Reaction score
25,229
Location
Massachusetts
Vehicle(s)
20 XLT scab 301A/tow 4X4 magnetic w/sport blackout
Occupation
Engineering
I agree with @AzScorpion. This has been beaten to death. If you ate running your Ranger bone stock, like me, and the cost difference between 87 and 91-93 is less than 10%, unlikely. No, it does not make up the financial difference. It becomes personal opinion if the slight performance gain is worth it to you. Like @AzScorpion the highest I can get is 91 octane. Yes there is a performance difference, it does run smoother, pepper and get 1-2 mpg more. But, it costs 30% more. If I had a tune and was a few years younger :) I might think differently. If you like and use the extra performance you probably won't get the extra mileage.

It all comes down to a personal choice as it will never pay for itself on a purely financial basis.
One of the bonuses of using Fuelly to track your mileage is it also breaks it down to cost per mile. I’ve run both flavors and I get more bang for my buck with premium 93.

Granted I’m still in low 20’s but I can’t help myself. I just have a passion for blowing off tacos and laughing while doing it.

It’s my NEW hobby!
 

dokkerdam

Active Member
First Name
jim
Joined
May 31, 2021
Threads
4
Messages
44
Reaction score
34
Location
ford2.3ecoboost
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ranger STX SuperCab
Occupation
flight instructor
I agree with @AzScorpion. This has been beaten to death. If you ate running your Ranger bone stock, like me, and the cost difference between 87 and 91-93 is less than 10%, unlikely. No, it does not make up the financial difference. It becomes personal opinion if the slight performance gain is worth it to you. Like @AzScorpion the highest I can get is 91 octane. Yes there is a performance difference, it does run smoother, pepper and get 1-2 mpg more. But, it costs 30% more. If I had a tune and was a few years younger :) I might think differently. If you like and use the extra performance you probably won't get the extra mileage.

It all comes down to a personal choice as it will never pay for itself on a purely financial basis.
i've got an open mind. some of these responses are saying i'd get an additional 2 mpg by upping the octane. like i said before i'm averaging 27 mpg so i'm going to try it. that would give me 29 mpg and over 30 on the 55 mph roads up here in elk snout, maine.

but the responses are also saying the $ difference is slight from say 87 to 91. not here in bumkin. its more like +35 cents for midgrade and +70 for premium. i'd have to see a 5 mpg change to make it worth the money.
 

AzScorpion

Moderator
First Name
Dave
Joined
Jul 25, 2019
Threads
280
Messages
21,289
Reaction score
101,276
Location
Arizona
Vehicle(s)
2023 Ford Ranger Tremor
Occupation
CEO of DeeZee
i've got an open mind. some of these responses are saying i'd get an additional 2 mpg by upping the octane. like i said before i'm averaging 27 mpg so i'm going to try it. that would give me 29 mpg and over 30 on the 55 mph roads up here in elk snout, maine.

but the responses are also saying the $ difference is slight from say 87 to 91. not here in bumkin. its more like +35 cents for midgrade and +70 for premium. i'd have to see a 5 mpg change to make it worth the money.
At 0.70 extra I wouldn't do it myself. You will see improved responsiveness but you could just run 87 and use S mode and get the same for less money. I go to either Costco or Sam's and it's only 0.35 difference from regular to premium so it's worth it for me and I don't drive a ton of miles as everything here is close by.




Screenshot 2021-06-10 at 8.53.08 AM.jpg
 

HenryMac

Well-Known Member
First Name
John
Joined
Sep 14, 2019
Threads
65
Messages
2,757
Reaction score
5,266
Location
Colorado
Vehicle(s)
2019 SuperCab XL - FX4 - Magnetic - Rocksliders
Occupation
Mech. Engineer - Retired
That owner's manual clearly says minimum 87 octane is required. ford telling you what you could use a few lines later is like saying they require 5w30 sn+ but they recommend ford oil part #blah blah.

that said, i'm always willing to learn so could you tell me if there was a measurable performance and mph difference between using 87 and 91?
I've never used 87. When we put gas in it the first time we pulled out the owners manual. When given a choice, I always want the best overall vehicle and engine performance. So we've always used 91 or better top tier fuel.

That being said the mpg's I see most folks post on this site are typically worse than what we are getting.
 

port43

Well-Known Member
First Name
Tony
Joined
Dec 12, 2020
Threads
10
Messages
657
Reaction score
1,949
Location
Detroit Suburb
Website
childrescuecoalition.org
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ford Ranger STX FX4, 2017 Lincoln MKX, 2008 Harley XL 1200N, 1972 Pontiac LeMans Convertible
Occupation
Secret agent, man
I've been making a point to try and see if I can break the 20 MPG on a tank of gas lately. I'm at 21.5 with a half tank of 87 burned and it has driven me nuts to do it. I don't get to accelerate like I want and I have to coast down hills to make up for the increased RPM going up the same hill.

Even before I had my tune I was around 16 and I (still) believe the problem lies at the end of my right leg.

I'm giving up on it and going back to driving my normal style, it's way more fun albeit a few dollars more.
 

Big Blue

Well-Known Member
First Name
Lee
Joined
May 5, 2020
Threads
14
Messages
3,168
Reaction score
7,083
Location
Wisconsin
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ford Ranger XLT FX4 Supercrew lighting blue
Occupation
Retired mechanical designer
These gas mileage threads are almost as much fun to follow as those about engine oil, I said almost.

Trying to compare mileage from one person to another is a useless exercise. Everyone's truck is different. Different lifts/levels, different tires, rack/no rack, tune/no tune, different engine mods. People live in different climates, different regions. People have different driving styles and wants from their trucks.

Gas grades available also varies from region to region along with prices. It is a given higher octane will give you better performance, that includes mileage. Is that mileage increase enough to pay for the cost is an individual calculation. The second part of the decision is, if the cost per mile doesn't justify the cost. Does the increase in performance justify it for you.

Back to comparing mileage. Comparing anything less than to average of o full tank hand calculated is meaningless. Even that will vary greatly from tank to tank, location to location, person to person. Percentage highway to city, speeds, elevation changes, even curves. I just finished a 4760 mile trip pulling my travel trailer. Got 10.6 mpg. I feel that is a fairly accurate average for me towing at 70 mph. Going 60-65 it probably would have been much better, I didn't feel like getting run over on the interstate. My weekend trips to a local campground not so much.

So I've started to just read these threads and look at what they are getting and say that's nice. I don't feel bad because I'm not getting as much as them or brag because I'm getting more. I run 87 octane regular because that is the minimum the manual requires and I can not justify the 30%+ increase in cost to run premium. I just enjoy driving my Ranger.
 

Langwilliams

Well-Known Member
First Name
Langley
Joined
Dec 31, 2019
Threads
24
Messages
2,955
Reaction score
6,725
Location
Lorain, Ohio
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ford Ranger XLT, 2014 Harley Street Glide
Occupation
Mail Carrier (retired) Navy Vet
I run a premium tune now so I always run 91-93, usually top tier 93 from shell which is $.70 a gallon. When I was running the stock tune the improvement on mileage on premium was minimum at best an not enough to cover the $10 difference in price......The FUN FACTOR DOES cover the ten bucks a tank with the tune.
 

F150stxguy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2021
Threads
7
Messages
166
Reaction score
398
Location
Texas
Vehicle(s)
F150
Damn, some of you guys who get low 20’s must really love the pep of the Ranger lol.

Back in NY while I was commuting 52 miles one way to work, it was all county and state highways, the highest speed limit was 55mph, and always very little traffic. I miss roads like that and get homesick for some real country/back roads where you can just cruise. Here in Texas is seems like everyone goes MINIMUM 75 mph on some of the back two lane roads. There’s really no relaxing. Before long you’ve got someone on your ass!

Anyway , my 4x4 crew cab 2.7 F-150 had lifetime 24.7 mpg before I made the move, and it kept slowly creeping up. I have no doubt if I stayed I would have reached high 25 or maybe 26. I bet if I had the Ranger I would be high 20’s with that commute.

stop and go kills gas mileage, but so does going 75 mph in a brick.

my lifetime has reduced to 21.5 mpg, smh.
Sponsored

 
 



Top