2nd Gen Dakota Tech 1997 - 2004 Dodge Dakota Tech - The ultimate forum for technical help on the 2nd Gen Dakota.

Testing: Gas Mileage

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 9, 2010 | 12:50 PM
  #21  
bpark8824's Avatar
bpark8824
Champion
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,300
Likes: 2
From: Plattsburgh, NY
Default

I don't really feel like getting into anothe debate but those numbers seem way high. My sisters 07 Cobalt SS (2.4L non s/c'ed) Gets 34 mpg at 55 mph. I drove the whole from LI to my house in CT at 55 due to traffic (it was flowing nicely just slow) and got 34 mpg. You get 28 with a heavy QC dakota with a 4.7L... Just not adding up.
 
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2010 | 01:09 PM
  #22  
dodgeramguy85's Avatar
dodgeramguy85
Grand Champion
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 5,508
Likes: 7
From: Houtzdale,PA
Default

When we had a 04 jeep grand cherokee with the 4.7 the all time best we ever saw out of it was 21mpg. The numbers to me dont seem right either.
 
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2010 | 02:04 PM
  #23  
00dakSport's Avatar
00dakSport
All Star
15 Year Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 894
Likes: 0
From: long island, NY
Default

why are people braging about the milage there getting.
if your getting poor milage something little is dirty/clogged or it's just that you bought a powerfull TRUCK. not a prius.

and if you get decent milage then +1. but for trucks, gas milage
should be bottom of the list.
 
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2010 | 02:32 PM
  #24  
somebodynowhere's Avatar
somebodynowhere
Professional
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 147
Likes: 1
From: Central CT
Default

haha I've been doing ALOT of highway driving in the past 4 months. I drive around 1 am on the highway doing 55 the whole way(cruise Control) and average high 15s..I'm excited about it though..lol
 
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2010 | 02:42 PM
  #25  
mtmxdakota's Avatar
mtmxdakota
Rookie
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Default

Well i can say i used to get 19-23 in my 96 club cab with the 3.9 and 2wd of coarse and i was always hard on throttle and always calculated it by the odo and fuel consumed... and if i loaded that poor bitch down and was hard on throttle i would see 17 worst
 
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2010 | 03:02 PM
  #26  
MadisonDakota's Avatar
MadisonDakota
Thread Starter
|
All Star
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 829
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by bpark8824
I don't really feel like getting into anothe debate but those numbers seem way high. My sisters 07 Cobalt SS (2.4L non s/c'ed) Gets 34 mpg at 55 mph. I drove the whole from LI to my house in CT at 55 due to traffic (it was flowing nicely just slow) and got 34 mpg. You get 28 with a heavy QC dakota with a 4.7L... Just not adding up.
Weight has almost nothing to do with gas mileage at highway speeds. I don't doubt you only got 34 with that car, you were probably running E10 and that car is geared for speed.

Do you actually read what I post? I said that I am comparing the differences, not the actual mileage. I don't want you to reply to this thread again, unless it's a question or a test that I need to run. If it's not one of those, it's falling on deaf ears.
 
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2010 | 04:48 PM
  #27  
bpark8824's Avatar
bpark8824
Champion
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,300
Likes: 2
From: Plattsburgh, NY
Default

Yes I read it and I understand that you aren't going for the numbers, but that pretty much renders this whole thing pointless. If you can't use the numbers basically all you are saying is that you do better at 55 then 65 then 75 respectively... no kidding, anyone could tell us that.

And weight does have a lot to do with highway speeds if there is any sort or an incline. And although you would think it's geared for speed it isn't really. It only runs around 23-2400 at 70 where as my truck with 3:55s runs at 2000... so that is not a huge difference, especially considering the type of engine.


Really if you can't use the numbers then this whole thread is useless. Yeah you get better mpg at 55... no freakin way...
 
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2010 | 04:55 PM
  #28  
Billiam's Avatar
Billiam
Champion
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,817
Likes: 0
From: Clarkston, Wa
Default

bpark - I think you and everyone else over looked his first post.. Which shows why he is getting these high numbers..

Originally Posted by MadisonDakota
Now here's where it gets tricky, I will be using the overhead computer. This is not 100% accurate, but it will give me the difference in mileage, or at worst, show what helps/hurts.
If you don't like the overhead computers accuracy, i'm sorry, but I trust it for these tests.
We all know that the over head is going to say its getting a lot better then it actually is.


There's no need for getting upset with other and their opinions
 
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2010 | 05:29 PM
  #29  
MadisonDakota's Avatar
MadisonDakota
Thread Starter
|
All Star
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 829
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Billiam
We all know that the over head is going to say its getting a lot better then it actually is.
There's no need for getting upset with other and their opinions
Thank you.
 
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2010 | 06:37 PM
  #30  
thunder98110's Avatar
thunder98110
Champion
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,084
Likes: 6
From: DC
Default

Originally Posted by MadisonDakota

I am going on a 6 hour trip this weekend, I am going to run 65 the whole time and see if I get somewhere near what this test shows.
do us all a favor and use the ****ing odometer.
 
Reply



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:05 PM.