|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: TresMon]
#835349
09/12/07 12:00 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 122
Wheeler
|
Oh thats awesome.....I was expecting above 20MPG also.....mine should be on the road by the end of the month. I guess I'll find out the hard way!! I have the Weber carb (on a side note) and the truck runs much better w/ it!
1989 Dodge Raider 2.6L/5spd 2004 Honda Element EX 1989 Dodge Daytona Shelby Z 1993 Toyota P/U
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: sparkem]
#835350
09/12/07 12:10 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 8,557
Forum Moderator
|
You have a fully boxed frame with an all metal body and bumpers and a heavyish 109hp carbed engine with 4.625 axle gears. Be happy with 17. Exactly. When you get rearended, your lack of fuel mileage will pay off in non body work being done. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/lol.gif" alt="" />
87 Raider 4D56td v5MT1 31's..Basically Stock
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: TresMon]
#835351
09/12/07 12:11 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,231
Trail Leader
|
Yup, that's about the right mileage for the 2.6 engine.
One question: what size tires are on the vehicle?
?_________ |_|_|\____\___ l-----[O]≡≡≡≡[O] ()_)()_)-----)_) Stay the Trail!
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: CapnCrunch]
#835352
09/12/07 12:59 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 49
Getting the Wheeling Fever
|
Well my assumption was incorrect, I am suprised. I guess the dealer that was trying to sell me a V-8 Grand Cherokee was right...the larger engine helps gas milage on a big vehicle.
And I thought he was pulling my leg...jeesh! <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/notooth.gif" alt="" />
2002 Montero Sport 3.0L LS AWD, 130K - Stock
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: TresMon]
#835353
09/12/07 03:21 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,356
Trail Leader
|
17.5 MPG...!!! What's your secret man? Give it up or we'll hunt you down... <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/evil.gif" alt="" />
I was thrilled to hit 16.8 on my last tank. That's with the turbo and 33s.
Big Truck: 00, 3.5, Endeavor, 5-Spd drive line in hand! Little Truck: 87, 2.6T I/C, MT, LSDs, Tonneau Top Her Truck: 03, 3.8, 20th Anniv, 65k Daughter's: 06 Eclipse, Keeping it Mitsu! FSMs: MitsubishiLinks.com
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: TresMon]
#835354
09/12/07 04:03 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 119
Wheeler
|
Please tell me it is so low beacause my "check EGR" light is on!
I think the EGR light comes on based on the mielage to remind you to check the EGR system, not to indicate a problem with it. The EPA listed your rig as 15 city / 17 hwy when it was brand new... 20 years ago! You can probably do some things to boost your mpg - I'd definitely do the carb - but you'd be hard pressed to get over 20 mpg city. IMHO the less than stellar fuel economy is totally worth it when you consider all of the other good things about these trucks. Good luck with whatever you decide to do with it <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/cheers.gif" alt="" />
Jim
1994 Montero LS
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: jmdt]
#835355
09/12/07 05:15 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,458
Trail Leader
|
As of this afternoon, I've clocked an 'indicated' 42,000 miles and change on my 87 Raider. The best tank mileage I had oddly was in winter and with 33's...about 20.5 mpg 'indicated' as I haven't changed the speedo drive gear yet.
My normal driving: 235's on stock alloys = 17 to 18.5 mpg 31's on 8" steel wheels = 11 to 19 mpg, range due to trailer towing in 4-lo and substantial highway with a single bag of dirt (250 mile trip for a bag of dirt!!) 32's on stock chrome steelies, driving up and down from Tahoe = 14 to 16 mpg 33's on alloys = 13 to 20.5 mpg
I carry many tools on a daily basis, use the truck almost strictly for work, and use 4-lo quite often.
The 25-mpg is for a Samurai, not a Mitsu. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/drunk.gif" alt="" />
1987 Raider - Roxy 1988 Mighty Max 2.6L Turbo - Pearl 1997 Mountaineer V8 - Freddy 2000 Excursion V10 - Freya
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: TresMon]
#835356
09/12/07 05:09 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 155
Wheeler
|
I get around 24 in my 3.5L 95SR.
--------------- 95 Montero SR - 207k miles, rebuilt @ 146k Stock. Longview, Texas Ithaca, NY for the summer of 08.
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: nedfunnell]
#835357
09/12/07 05:30 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,356
Trail Leader
|
What! I never broke 20MPG when I had mine. My 95 LS and 98 3.5 SOHC never break 20MPG.
Big Truck: 00, 3.5, Endeavor, 5-Spd drive line in hand! Little Truck: 87, 2.6T I/C, MT, LSDs, Tonneau Top Her Truck: 03, 3.8, 20th Anniv, 65k Daughter's: 06 Eclipse, Keeping it Mitsu! FSMs: MitsubishiLinks.com
|
|
Re: 2.6 Liter = 17.5 mpg!?!?!?!?!?
[Re: MontyMcV]
#835358
09/12/07 07:50 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,088
Body Damage is Cool
|
Here are my findings, including gas companies:
(SILVER TRUCK) Year:1988 Mileage:235k miles (80k on rebuilt engine) Carb:Stock Tire Size: 215s,235s, and 31's (never saw a big difference) Fuel:87 Citgo MPG:15-17 (City Mostly) Top Speed:75mph on a good day on a flat highway, 80mph going down hill on a highway
(RED TRUCK) Year:1988 Mileage:135k (30k on NEW Engine) Carb:Weber Tire Size:235s,31's Fuel:87 Citgo MPG:18-19 (City Mostly) Top Speed:90mph pushing it on a flat highway, 95 mph going down hill
(RED TRUCK) Year:1988 Mileage:135k (30k on NEW engine) Carb:Weber Tire Size:31's Fuel:87 Shell MPG:20-21 (City Mostly) Top Speed:90mph pushing it on a flat highway, 95mph going down hill on a highway
88 Raider(Red):160k-Reman'd 2.6-5spd-Weber-SW Hubs-34x9.5 TSL-OffRd Pkg-1"Tbar-2"BL-CB 88 Raider(Silver):No 2.6/Bad KM145 Parts/Project 88 Montero(Brown):No 2.6,4.88s Parts/Project [b]4X4 STICKERS,SHIRTS,ETC: 4WD Stickers AT COST.[b]
|
|
|
|