2nd Gen Ram Tech 1994-2001 Rams: This section is for TECHNICAL discussions only, that involve the 1994 through 2001 Rams. For any non-tech discussions, please direct your attention to the "General discussion/NON-tech" sub sections.

I have a hunch on why I get such bad MPG

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 14, 2010 | 11:45 PM
  #31  
Laramie1997's Avatar
Laramie1997
Grand Champion
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,980
Likes: 5
From: Springfield MO
Default

Originally Posted by PurplDodge
I think the proper way to do it is to fill the tank up, then drive the truck until the tank is nearing empty. Take the miles driven divided by how many gallons tank you have (26 or 35) - a couple gallons.
Well, no, not really. The proper way is to drive the truck down to 1/8-1/4, record how many miles driven, then divide that by how many gallons it takes to fill back up.
 
Reply
Old Feb 14, 2010 | 11:45 PM
  #32  
Miami_Son's Avatar
Miami_Son
Banned
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,816
Likes: 4
From: Los Angeles, CA
Default

Originally Posted by PurplDodge
I think the proper way to do it is to fill the tank up, then drive the truck until the tank is nearing empty. Take the miles driven divided by how many gallons tank you have (26 or 35) - a couple gallons.
Wrong. You fill the tank noting the mileage, drive, refill and divide the number of miles driven it by the number of gallons it takes to refill the tank. It doesn't matter what size tank you have, just how many gallons it takes to refill it. It is better to drive it down to about a 1/4 tank and average your results over 3-5 tankfulls.
 
Reply
Old Feb 14, 2010 | 11:46 PM
  #33  
2001Ram's Avatar
2001Ram
Thread Starter
|
Captain
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
From: Georgetown Texas
Default

Originally Posted by Miami_Son
Actually, it should unless it is near arctic outside. There's no way uncirculating coolant will hold at that low a temperature, and if the t-stat is not opening the coolant is not circulating. He either did not run the engine long enough to get it up to temperature before taking that reading or it is reading from a different point on the engine than where the t-stat is.
I ran it for like 25 miles, it was warmed up, heater was nice and hot. And not only does the Code reader say 183, the original temp gauge runs about the same. Inbetween the middle and the cold.
 
Reply
Old Feb 14, 2010 | 11:48 PM
  #34  
Miami_Son's Avatar
Miami_Son
Banned
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,816
Likes: 4
From: Los Angeles, CA
Default

Originally Posted by Laramie1997
Well, no, not really. The proper way is to drive the truck down to 1/8-1/4, record how many miles driven, then divide that by how many gallons it takes to fill back up.
Exactly right. The reason you need to run it down to a 1/4 or less is because there is less evaporation from 1/2 to full and that will skew your results.
 
Reply
Old Feb 14, 2010 | 11:53 PM
  #35  
2001Ram's Avatar
2001Ram
Thread Starter
|
Captain
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
From: Georgetown Texas
Default

Originally Posted by Miami_Son
Exactly right. The reason you need to run it down to a 1/4 or less is because there is less evaporation from 1/2 to full and that will skew your results.
K, ill let it run a little longer next time. Maybe thats what my problem is. lol
 
Reply
Old Feb 14, 2010 | 11:53 PM
  #36  
sit22 II's Avatar
sit22 II
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
From: peruvian mountains
Default

Originally Posted by PurplDodge
SO whats this gotta do with him getting 10 MPG? The factory sensor and gauges arent really that accurate anyway.

In addition to what Chris said, please use punctuation. Its a PITA to decifer what you are saying.
if the temperature sensor it is not good it will read a lower temperature than what it is and the computer will enriche the mixture.. using more gas longer than it needs to

and sorry about the typing i will type right here.. its just that here in ct some of us got lazy and a lot of people got used to that ( including me ).
it kinda throws me of now lol.
 
Reply
Old Feb 14, 2010 | 11:56 PM
  #37  
Miami_Son's Avatar
Miami_Son
Banned
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,816
Likes: 4
From: Los Angeles, CA
Default

Almost all internet forums frown on using cellphone text-speak in posts. As this is a technical forum, we prefer you don't. Also, finding the Shift key once in awhile is appreciated, too. Welcome to DF.
 
Reply
Old Feb 15, 2010 | 12:01 AM
  #38  
Weldor's Avatar
Weldor
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
From: London Ontario
Default

I use this to measure my MPG, check it out its a pretty useful site.

http://www.fuelly.com
 
Reply
Old Feb 15, 2010 | 12:38 AM
  #39  
intense00's Avatar
intense00
Professional
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
Default

You are running 265/75/16 and your stock size is 225/75/16.

Speedometer Difference: 8.063% too slow.

Have you re-calibrated your speedometer?

If not, you are traveling more miles than your odometer tells you.

http://www.1010tires.com/TireSizeCal...?action=submit
 
Reply
Old Feb 15, 2010 | 01:19 AM
  #40  
2001Ram's Avatar
2001Ram
Thread Starter
|
Captain
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
From: Georgetown Texas
Default

Originally Posted by intense00
You are running 265/75/16 and your stock size is 225/75/16.

Speedometer Difference: 8.063% too slow.

Have you re-calibrated your speedometer?

If not, you are traveling more miles than your odometer tells you.

http://www.1010tires.com/TireSizeCal...?action=submit
I have not recalibrated it. Stock size was 225? It had 245 on it before. So if it was counting more miles, I would be getting ALOT worse MPG right?
 
Reply



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:56 AM.