All the best ideas for getting the best miles per gallon

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

What speed is the scangauge telling you returns the best mileage?

I have not exceeded 65 mph in the past week and half. Which is really about 63 because of tire size correction. Running 80, I must have been getting 10 mpg or worst. My tank has never stayed so full for so long.

What is the formula on actual miles driven with 285s vs stock? Is it 10% more miles than the trip odometer since the tires have a larger diameter?

i believe its 6% more
 
According to this website I have been going 68.48 at 65 on the speedo. I have to slow down more.

Tire Size Calculator

I believe 5 to 6% is correct. The circumfrence is 97.88 for stock and 103.14 for 285s.

I think I might try 255/85 r 16s next time.
 
Last edited:
Mind providing your opinion? $170 on their site, or $160 w/free ship on ebay.... I'm tempted...
Interresting... you can easily monitor the mileage after change/tune up... but how many MPG do you have to save to pay it ?
Something like 15 to 20 tanks I guess.
I'm interrested anyway...
 
I had one in my 80 and now in my 100.... Scangauge that is...
They are a cool little tool and the new ones have more features and more informaiton. The best thing for me is that they give you very accurate readings of water temp, RPM, Volts etc. and they are an OBDII reader and can clear codes.

The only thing I wish it gave is oil pressue, but I guess the sensors don't report that to the computer
 
I feel naked without the scangauge now. For some reason I must know what my intake air temp, TPS and engine load is at all times. :rolleyes: I haven't successfully programmed it for the 285's, but the best MPG appears to be around 45MPH, which is what I expected. Coming from the jeep world, 45 was always the perfect speed to cruise with the top down. Go any faster than that, and you are pushing the limits on noise level and comfort.

I'd give the hundy another 5 MPH for aerodynamics, but down here at 12ft above sea level, the Scangauge hovers around 19MPG when I travel at 45. Bump it up to 55 and you are more like 17MPG.

I really need to program that thing...sorry, I have just been lazy.:meh: It also resets itself every time you help some hottie turn of her CEL.

I'd buy it direct. They ship fast and you never know when you might need some tech support.
 
I think its somewhere in the hundred thousands, the gas chamber is on a 24-hour duty cycle right now...cant get a break.
 
you guys have calibrated the mpg on these SGs, right?
 
Any experience with MPG at different speeds? 55 mph, 65 mph, 75 mph??? I might drive slower if I had a sense it would increase my mileage by a good amount.

Thanks,
Gil
 
This past week I made an effort to not exceed 65 mph. I have corrected for tire size and got 13.71 mpg in my commute vs 11.9 mpg when driving in excess of 75+ mph. Driving fast is much more enjoyable however better mpg from the tank is pretty cool too. I am taking a trip to the coast today and I plan to stay below 65 mph. It will be interesting to see the highway mileage. Most trips in the past going to the coast I have driven between 75 and 85 mph. The trip is about 150 miles one way.

Should I disconnect the battery for the truck to learn my new turtle style of driving?

PS - I apologize in advance about the kittens.
 
Any experience with MPG at different speeds? 55 mph, 65 mph, 75 mph??? I might drive slower if I had a sense it would increase my mileage by a good amount.

Thanks,
Gil


it's very significant in general.

no numbers handy for the 100 but just read an article by consumer reports where they did tests on a sedan and got something like 25, 30, and 35 for 75, 65, and 55 mph.
 
TRVAIS351 posted these numbers from his scangauge. Quite a difference.

I'd give the hundy another 5 MPH for aerodynamics, but down here at 12ft above sea level, the Scangauge hovers around 19MPG when I travel at 45. Bump it up to 55 and you are more like 17MPG.
 
TRVAIS351 posted these numbers from his scangauge. Quite a difference.

I'd give the hundy another 5 MPH for aerodynamics, but down here at 12ft above sea level, the Scangauge hovers around 19MPG when I travel at 45. Bump it up to 55 and you are more like 17MPG.

What about at 7,000 foot and 75 mph???
 
If I remember my physics correctly, energy used to fight air drag grows exponentially as speed increases. That is because air drag is basically caused by the need to accelerate air molecules out of the way. The faster you are moving, the more acceleration needed, energy use then grows in an upward curving line (not linear). Given the boxy shape of the 100's this curve will be steeper than a sedan.
So if you double the speed, the energy used to fight drag should quadruple. At low speeds, energy used to fight air drag is not significant, since most is used to fight mechanical friction, but it does become significant, even dominating at higherspeeds.

For best results, drive as slow as possible in the highest possible gear.

Same logic applies to acceleration, accelerate as slow as possible for best results.

Coast as much as possible, anticipate red lights, stops, & turns.
Minimize use of the brakes(within reason), because braking is just scrubbing energy and turning it into heat and mechanical wear.
 
If I remember my physics correctly, energy used to fight air drag grows exponentially as speed increases. That is because air drag is basically caused by the need to accelerate air molecules out of the way. The faster you are moving, the more acceleration needed, energy use then grows in an upward curving line (not linear). Given the boxy shape of the 100's this curve will be steeper than a sedan.
So if you double the speed, the energy used to fight drag should quadruple. At low speeds, energy used to fight air drag is not significant, since most is used to fight mechanical friction, but it does become significant, even dominating at higherspeeds.
snip


hmmm.... afraid not, sorry...

the drag coefficient is approximately independent of velocity for a given shape if you stay in the same regime (turbulent, quasi-incompressible etc).
Therefore the drag force is approximately proportional to the velocity squared.
Therefore the power required to overcome drag is approximately proportional to the velocity cubed.
Therefore if you double the speed the power needed to overcome drag is approximately 8x higher.
Now, of course there are other losses which don't change as fast so the overall power needed to get the car velocity to double is not quite 8x more.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom