Jump to content

Gas Mileage


Recommended Posts

Posted

Just did stop non stop trip on a full tank. 2010 4x4 z71 3.42 gears on stock tires and stock tune. Only mods factory replacement k&n and ddynomax vt muffler. Going 70-75 we got 20.2mpg best I've seen. It was cruise most of the time unless someone was slowing me down

 

Next thing for The truck is a best cover

  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Posted
15 if im lucky and maybe 11-12 normal driving :thumbs::thumbs:

 

Yeah, im with you there, ever since I moved to SC I've gotten horrible gas mileage. Was the same way in tn when cruising through to go to Texas, all the damn hilly terrain

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

2008 5.3 AFM 4WD 3:73. I can average over 20 mpg on the highway at 65 mph. I have spent a few years learning how to conserve the max amount of fuel while driving. I do a lot of coasting while going down hills, approaching lights/stop signs, and while cruising through parking lots. I practice what is called "egg driving". I pretend that there is an egg under my gas pedal. It was hard to break some bad habits, but it also becomes a game to see what kind of fuel mileage I can get. If I can coast enough I can help take the edge off of decreased fuel mileage while driving in the city.

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

I decided to top off my truck yesterday in case this storm knocks out power long term (seems like it won't now). I downloaded an app for my phone to log fuel mileage with the last fillup and though I only put 140 miles on before buying more gas, MPG for that period was 17. Mostly highway but the truck was driven hard those miles. Once I have some hard data I'll post it up in a couple months.

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

I've gotten 19.5 MPG average according to the DIC over 30k miles. Over the road I manually record tank fulls at 22+ MPG in flat states and 18 MPG in the mountains. And yes, wind matters. I lose about 2 MPG headed West versus East depending on wind and vehicle speed. Generally, I drive +5 over the speed limit until the CB warns me not to.

 

I got a 2010 GMC 1500 extended cab 6.5' bed with power everything, 5.3L, Z71 option, 3.08 diffs, 6 speed, factory All Terrain 18" wheels w/Brigs DATs, K&N air element and oil filter, dual batteries, 110VAC inverter, Linex spray on liner, hard tonnau, CB and long antenna. Usually carry 600-800 lbs in the bed including a winch that mounts front or back.

 

Surprisingly, 4WD operation didn't kill mileage. I've used it for 1,000's of miles from Prudoe Bay to the Rio Grande through snow, gravel, mud and low range off road crawling. Love the Eaton locking diff. I live in North East Ohio but don't plow with it, this is not the right vehicle for it.

 

Something else that matters is the engine oil. I measured, not guessed, 8% less mileage using conventional oil (dealer oil change, hey I had coupons) versus synthetic (Royal Purple). Surprised the heck out of me but the test period was 10k miles for conventional oil and 20k for synthetic. Syn costs more but lasts longer and if you buy in 5 gallon pails like I do it's just a small premium.

 

Tire pressure matters a lot as I keep them at 42 lbs, well within the tire mfg specs. Factory says 35 but I think that's to keep the ride softer. After 30k miles my tires are about 50% worn and nice and evenly. TPMS is a godsend.

 

As you can guess I'm impressed by the truck.

 

One fun fact, my 2004 GMC work truck regular cab long bed with 4.3L, 4 speed, 3.42 RWD, and no power anything gets about the same mileage unloaded. That's over 122k miles. And as anyone with a 4.3L truck can testify, it's a dog. Technology marches on.

Posted

Hello. I have a 2006 GMC K1500 Crew Cab, 48,500 miles, 5.3L Gas/E85, 3.73, original tires. Ever since I can remember it averaged 15.6 MPG but after resetting the DIC several weeks and around 200 miles ago it's around 12.8 with 75% city -30% hwy. What's odd is just this morning the average was dropping wile idling at a red light incrementally to 12.1 and then increased to about 13 during acceleration. No noticeable engine problems and the only part I've changed was the EVAP vent valve solenoid. Does this sound right?

Posted

I have an '07, K1500 Extended Cab 5.3L 4WD and average about 19.2 mpgs overall. On my commute (which makes up 90% of my overall driving), 20% is full expressway, and the other 80% is double-yellow-line regular highway with a few stoplights here and there. I also drive like your great grandfather. Very happy with my truck. My previous post on page was made just after I got the truck and was inaccurate.

Posted
Hello. I have a 2006 GMC K1500 Crew Cab, 48,500 miles, 5.3L Gas/E85, 3.73, original tires. Ever since I can remember it averaged 15.6 MPG but after resetting the DIC several weeks and around 200 miles ago it's around 12.8 with 75% city -30% hwy. What's odd is just this morning the average was dropping wile idling at a red light incrementally to 12.1 and then increased to about 13 during acceleration. No noticeable engine problems and the only part I've changed was the EVAP vent valve solenoid. Does this sound right?

 

Rob, I'm sure it has to do with the algorithm used to compute the average mileage. When mine was new it did vary a lot until it had a couple of thousand on the odometer. I don't recall looking at the average that often early on but I do remember it fluctuating. Measure it manually the next fill up to confirm it's in the 15MPG ballpark and not something else wrong. If it's OK, then give some time to get enough data to compute a better average.

 

I found the DIC average mileage figure to be close over time but no substitute for manual tracking.

Posted

I have and 07 Silverado Crew Cab LTZ and I get 14-15 mpg in the city and 20-21 on the highway going 70-75. I only use shell 93 octane (no ethanol) and that gas seems to give me the best mileage. Mods done to the truck include K&N cold air intake, Hypertech max energy tuner and Corsa exhaust. If i fill up with 87 from mobile or BP my gas mileage drops to 12 city 18 highway.

Posted

Thanks for the reply Jim. Possin08's post brought up something I have been wondering. Since my truck supports running E85, does the ECM make similar adjustments (like increase the amount of fuel) if I use E10 or does it see it as pure gasoline?

Posted
Thanks for the reply Jim. Possin08's post brought up something I have been wondering. Since my truck supports running E85, does the ECM make similar adjustments (like increase the amount of fuel) if I use E10 or does it see it as pure gasoline?

 

Yup, the ECM controls fuel/air mixture, spark timing and, in my truck, throttle position based on what you're burning. It does take a bit of time for the ECM to get used to a new fuel so give it a couple of tanks before drawing any conclusion.

 

I did notice a small drop in MPG and a significant drop in performance when using 84 octane gas in the Southwest this last winter. Everywhere else in the US, Alaska and Canada, 87 octane was just fine.

 

It's been noted in this forum that more alcohol, in the fuel, gets worse MPG. Alcohol can make more power in a motor but it takes a lot more fuel to do it. So unless E10/E85 is way cheaper the cost per mile is higher than gas.

 

One of the first computer programs I wrote in the 70's calculated the MPG and cost per mile. It turned out that got better cost per mile burning 93-96 octane in my '69 Chevelle with a 327 I built having 11.5:1 compression, Isky cam, Holley, Eldelbrock, Mallory, big heads, headers..... I was getting 8-13 MPG but they were really, really fun miles.

 

The current truck gets 16 to 20 cents per mile. The '69 Chevelle was 5 to 7 cents per mile but adjusted for 40 years of inflation it's about the same cost as the truck.

Posted

My data is not quite complete as I didn't fill up before leaving for this trip but I started using an app on my phone about a month ago and between 8/21 and 9/16 I drove 999 miles, fed the truck 79.031 gallons at an average price of $3.82/gallon (premium) netting me an average of 16.5 MPG (agrees with DIC for a total of $302.28. Or about $20 more than if I ran 87, assuming my average MPG was unchanged. That's a lot of gas. :lol:

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

I'm getting between 19.2-20.8mpg is my average. I drive mostly freeway an country roads, not much stop an go. I also drive with a very light foot, keeping the RPM at or under 2,000 when the transmission shifts. Dash display shows I average of 19.8mpg. Current mileage is 17,300, an I run Mobil 1 5w30. 2011 reg. Cab. Long bed, 4.3L V6(auto) with 3.23 gearing. I know the 4.8l and even the 5.3 with the right gearing/drive style can get the same as my 4.3L 6 Cylinder.

The great deal I got for this truck made this engine worth purchasing. Got it for $15.700.81 out the door, I just paid cash for it. The 4.8L wasn't going for less than $20,000 then all the fees an taxes, etc. Added on. That's why I chose the 4.3L v6, I saved thousands. Plus I no longer tow.

Had a 2006 Chevy 2500HD Crew cab, short bed 4x4 LT. A averaged mid 19's , roughly the same as my current truck, LOL.

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

12.223mpg 60%highway/40%city in my new to me 2500hd extended cab with a 6.0L 4:10 gears 4wd 106k miles. Terrain here is extremely hilly and curvy, 900ft elevation. I am hoping for better, just changed the oil, fuel filter, air filter and cleaned the MAF sensor. A buddy of mine has the same truck except with the 8.1L and he swears he gets 13-15 city.

Posted

2004 Silvy 1500 4X4 5.3L V8, 4 Speed Auto, 3.73 Rear. 123,000 Miles on truck, replaced heads at 119.

 

I get 16.2 to 16.8. The best the truck ever got was 18. When I switched from the factory Goodyear tires to Bridgestone Revo's MPG dropped 1MPG immediately.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • It's official. Chevy pulled the covers off the next-gen 2027 Silverado 1500, and we got the first official look.   Full breakdown here: https://www.gm-trucks.com/2027-chevrolet-silverado-official-first-look-specs/   The quick hits: LT is dead. The new core trim is just called "Silverado." Two new V8s, a 5.7L and a 6.6L. No horsepower or torque numbers yet. The 2.7 TurboMax finally gets the 10-speed. ZR2 moves to standard 35s with front and rear lockers. Over 60 inches of dash display on ZR2 and High Country, passenger screen included. Seven trims, three lifted from the factory: ZR2, Trail Boss, and a new Custom Trail Boss.   So let's get into it: 5.7 and 6.6 instead of holding out for a 6.7. Right call? Killing the LT name after all these years: bold, or a mistake? Does the new look land for you, or is it too safe? No power numbers at reveal. Smart tease, or frustrating? What are you ordering on day one?   Drop your first impressions below. 
    • LOL west coast they need to see what the midwest actually has.  We have been holding at 2.99 for a few weeks now.  Even by work they have come down to 3.02 for the past week.
    • Diesel or gas?  The 37s will obviously, drastically reduce mpg, but the gasser will take a bigger hit to mpg, and power.  Rough guess, but I'd estimate at least a  2mpg hit on the diesel, and up to 4on the gasser. Maybe more.    I wouldn't sweat a gear change on a duramax at all, and unlikely on the gasser either. You're obviously not concerned with acceleration or towing, and the 10spd will find itself in the right gear without much hunting, if any.    If towing, mpg and acceleration are a concern, you're doing the wrong mods.  Either leave it alone, or do the lift/tires and let the chips fall where they may. 
    • I understand. It is disturbing to think a manufacture asks so much and gives so little in engineering support. This is not a GM issues, this is a greed issue and one the ALL practice.    My intent was not to remove the wind from anyone's sail but rather to point out the areas deficient so that they can be discussed with improvements the goal. But to do that you have to know the truth and what that truth is.    The commercial interest are honed in on a few select issues in which they control all the variables and are not forthcoming in the least with their customers about the details. Failure is the only thing that drives these people to improvement. One way not to fail it to manage public "expectations". The set a bar they can clear and put their thumbs under the suspenders with chest puffed.... Only the internal data tells the story fully. As we don't have access to that for decades then we have to generate it ourselves. UOA's with data that matters.  
    • I had skimmed through that article when you posted the link and honestly I felt rather defeated in a sense and realized that all these years in changing oil that in fact putting in what I was told was a good quality oil was probably not filtered as well as it should be although the filter put on the engine would be what ( as long as it never went into bypass mode ) would be the final filtering of the new oil that the engine components would first see, but then the filtering media itself is not up to par to what is ideal because a full flow filter would be too restrictive to filter fine enough for the engines best outcome in the long run. Only one of our tractors over the years which was a Versatile with a 855 Cummins had a separate bypass filter, some engine manufacturers did spec a partial bypass system within the main oil filter but I don't believe any other trucks or equipment I was servicing used such a filter. No doubt a product like the Amsoil bypass system is of benefit as long as nothing goes sideways with the extra plumbing and filter such as a rupture/leak that could cause the oil to pump out of the engine ( yes that Versatile had a remote canister with hoses routed to it as well ). With the idiot egr system on a diesel and as a result forcing a lot more soot into the oil, that certainly isn't helping the diesel engines cause or as you pointed out the GDI engine issue with creating more soot and aside from having a fancy secondary filtering system, changing the oil more often helping lower the total soot load.     So oil manufacturing and the end product is not something one can control and I wonder if there are specs on what various oil packaging companies produce in particle count or size. As to the filtering, if the OEM is not designing a filter size and spec that is really what it could be, they too are short changing the end user and so what is the answer. Of course as you say the oil side can only do so much if the air side isn't keeping up its end of the picture and air filters are only so efficient and if in a dusty environment such as farm or construction or driving gravel roads there is a lot of dirt to filter out and some of that ends up into the air stream.    Of course the irony in places like where I am where they dump the salt on the highways but also will mix in some calcium or outright pure calcium for problem road area's, or using calcium as dust control on gravel roads, the vehicle that gets used in that environment may rust out before a properly engineered engine and maintenance finally wears out so one has to face that reality in the rust belt. 
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...