Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
15 hours ago, Pryme said:

Here is a freeway run today 65-70 in my 6spd truck. 18.8mpg 
 

 

IMG_3916.jpeg

Have you verified those numbers against the old fashioned way of calculating MPG on a tank by tank basis (miles since last fill up, divided by gallons to refill tank)? Because when I do it the "old way", I find Chevy's computer reporting MPG is a whopping 11% higher than actual MPG. This is consistent over many tanks, not just a difference in how full the tank got this time, compared to the last time. YMMV.

  • Like 1
Posted
5 hours ago, Jim-GA said:

Have you verified those numbers against the old fashioned way of calculating MPG on a tank by tank basis (miles since last fill up, divided by gallons to refill tank)? Because when I do it the "old way", I find Chevy's computer reporting MPG is a whopping 11% higher than actual MPG. This is consistent over many tanks, not just a difference in how full the tank got this time, compared to the last time. YMMV.

That’s off the scangauge. It’s been pretty accurate. 

Posted (edited)

I did a freeway run this morning in my truck too.  10 speed 6.6, speeds 75 to 80 mph.  Best 25 mile stretch was 19.3 but I got 18.4 over the 160 mile round trip, verified at the pump.  It was my first unloaded highway run since it's been broken in, and the last 50 miles was in a 20 mph crosswind.  I'm VERY happy with that.

Edited by UWSkier
  • Like 2
Posted
17 hours ago, Pryme said:

That’s off the scangauge. It’s been pretty accurate. 

The scangauge is reading the data off of the GM computer. If the truck's computer is not capturing it correctly when it reports the MPG on the truck's display, won't the scan tool just be pulling the same faulty data?

 

I was kind of shocked at the 11% error on my truck's computer.  Maybe it's a bug just in the code for the year and engine I have. And, of course, it's high, making the trucks fuel economy appear better to the owner than it actually is. This, to me, is approaching fraud by GM.

 

Dealer says there is nothing they can do to calibrate it. With all the electronic stuff crammed in the trucks today, everything with the dealer is a big  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ . How convenient. I wonder if a class action lawsuit would wake someone up at GM to figure out how to fix it...

  • Like 1
Posted

The mileage accuracy is far from a conspiracy (although I enjoy a good conspiracy) its just an estimate and shouldnt be taken as gospel. Its a helpful tool for seeing what different driving styles can do to effect MPG but thats about it. The only really accurate measurement is miles traveled divided by gallons burned (being careful to fill the tank the same way each time. I think your expectations for the system are unreasonable. 

  • Like 1
Posted

On my 4000+ mile cross-country towing trek with the camper, I cross checked the computer's calculation with the pump math and it was usually only .1 to .3 MPG optimistic.  It wasn't a large percentage in my case.

  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, UWSkier said:

On my 4000+ mile cross-country towing trek with the camper, I cross checked the computer's calculation with the pump math and it was usually only .1 to .3 MPG optimistic.  It wasn't a large percentage in my case.

Mine too, and that's why I stopped doing the actual pump calculations.  My truck was so close it wasn't even worth the extra effort.

  • Like 1
Posted

I usually don’t even fill up all the way unless I’m going on a trip because it takes so darn long haha I usually just throw like 40 in and head out. So it’s not often I would do the hand calculation method. 

  • Like 1
Posted
14 hours ago, UWSkier said:

On my 4000+ mile cross-country towing trek with the camper, I cross checked the computer's calculation with the pump math and it was usually only .1 to .3 MPG optimistic.  It wasn't a large percentage in my case.

 

My 24 is very accurate as well,  Best computed average I’ve ever gotten with a GM product.  I’m at 5000 miles now and was hoping unladen mileage would come up.  Best I can get pure highway is maybe 16.5-17.  My lifetime average is 12.7 so that’s not bad with a mix I guess.  My 15 LML only gets about 14.5 average so with the cost of fuel it’s a wash.  My 24 gas AT4 CCSB weights almost 7600 lbs empty.  My LML SLT CCSB weighs 7850.  These new pickups weigh quite a bit more and they sit up so high in the air, mileage is just gonna suffer some.  For reference, I had a 2008 LMM CCSB that only weighed 7200.  

Posted

I ran my 23 6spd back to LA from AZ  and reached 19 mpg brand new....if I run it on freeway with no stop and go 16-17 consistently @ 65mph...

 

Had a 2020 and 2022 as well and both were same 

 

I live near the beach which means a stop sign or light every 10ft it feels like and the truck hates it....8mpg

 

If you keep motor going and limit the stop and go it does very well imo...

  • Like 1
Posted
13 hours ago, Dunn said:

I ran my 23 6spd back to LA from AZ  and reached 19 mpg brand new....if I run it on freeway with no stop and go 16-17 consistently @ 65mph...

 

Had a 2020 and 2022 as well and both were same 

 

I live near the beach which means a stop sign or light every 10ft it feels like and the truck hates it....8mpg

 

If you keep motor going and limit the stop and go it does very well imo...

 

Is that per the truck computer? Or did you calculate it the old fashioned way with miles driven and gallons pumped in to fill it up again?

 

Posted
8 hours ago, Jim-GA said:

 

Is that per the truck computer? Or did you calculate it the old fashioned way with miles driven and gallons pumped in to fill it up again?

 

I can say the truck computed mpg is stupid accurate.  Anyhow you live in North GA.  We live on the southside of Atlanta and are planning on coming up your way in December for some camping action.  We can't wait!

Posted (edited)
On 10/7/2023 at 10:44 AM, Jim-GA said:

 

Is that per the truck computer? Or did you calculate it the old fashioned way with miles driven and gallons pumped in to fill it up again?

 

I calculated and the computer is really close, at times it can off but on avg it's close enough to go by

 

It does take some miles on hwy to reach optimum unlike a halfton.....I just go off computer now since I've already calculated it and we'll, it's a 3/4 ton truck so whatever it is all good....already had a few halftons and they weren't enough truck so.....

Edited by Dunn
Posted

My 2024 with a flat bed loaded with around 500 lbs average is getting 13 MPG only around town. It only has 1200 miles so it is not even broke in  yet.

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

Another update on mileage.  I took my 24 on a 600 mile roadtrip all highway this past week.  I was fighting a little wind from time to time (I live in Kansas) but I was traveling between 69-80 depending upon if I was on the interstate or state highways.  I noticed once you get above 70 mph mileage really starts to drop.  At 80 I was getting about 14-14.5 roughly.  At 65-70 closer to 16-17.  Think my average tank was about 15 or so on that trip.  Kind of disappointed in the mileage at interstate speeds as it’s holding 10th gear fine, but also realize these things sit way in the air and are heavy.  On one flat stretch I put it on 60 mph cruise just to see the difference and it was closer to 18-19.  Only 7K on it so far.  My 23 started to get a little better around 10K so guess we’ll see.  Also the first tank of fuel I ran was 89 octane.  Just wanted to see if there was a difference.  I guess I’d say there was no noticeable difference.  

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,913
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Smitty462
    Newest Member
    Smitty462
    Joined
  • Who's Online   3 Members, 1 Anonymous, 638 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  
    • Have considered installing a DC to DC charger in your camper to replace your isolator?  
    • Common failure.  You need to replace the fuel door housing.   The painted cover transfers over to the new housing.  To remove the old one there is 4 spots where you poke the plastic to release it.  
    • No such thing as regenerative braking on a pure ICE vehicle.     Regenerative braking is the re-capture of energy from electric motors and stores it in the battery pack.  So hybrids, PHEV and EVs have regenerative braking.     What you are seeing is the charging system changing modes is all.  Its likely entering charge mode for some sort of reason is all.  All of the charging modes will be listed below.   As for L10 vs D.  L10 turns off automatic grade braking.  L10 puts you in control of grade downshifts where in D it will automatically do it based on brake pedal position and other factors.  Otherwise L10 and D drive exactly the same aside from that one aspect.    Battery Sulfation Mode The BCM will enter this mode when the interpreted Generator output voltage is less than 13.2 V for 45 minutes. When this condition exists the BCM will enter Charge Mode for 2–3 minutes. The BCM will then determine which mode to enter depending on voltage requirements.   Charge Mode The BCM will enter Charge Mode when ever one of the following conditions are met:   Windshield wipers are ON for more than 3 s. Climate Control Voltage Boost Mode Request is true, as sensed by the HVAC control module via serial data. High speed cooling fan, rear defogger, and HVAC high speed blower operation can cause the BCM to enter the Charge Mode. The estimated battery temperature is less than 0°C (32°F). Battery State of Charge is less than 80%. Vehicle speed is greater than 145 km/h (90 mph) A current sensor malfunction exists. System voltage is determined to be below 12.56 V When any one of these conditions is met, the system will set targeted generator output voltage to a charging voltage between 13.9–15.5 V, depending on the battery state of charge and estimated battery temperature.   Fuel Economy Mode The BCM will enter Fuel Economy Mode when the estimated battery temperature is at least 0°C (32°F) but less than or equal to 80°C (176°F), the calculated battery current is less than 15 A and greater than −8 A, and the battery state-of-charge is greater than or equal to 80%. Its targeted generator output voltage is the open circuit voltage of the battery and can be between 12.5–13.1 V. When fuel economy mode is active, the generator is not charging, only maintaining open circuit battery voltage. The BCM will exit this mode and enter Charge Mode when any of the conditions described above are present.   Headlamp Mode The BCM will enter Headlamp Mode when ever the head lamps are ON (high or low beams). Voltage will be regulated between 13.9–14.5 V.   Start Up Mode When the engine is started the BCM sets a targeted generator output voltage of 14.5 V for 30 s.   Tow/Haul Mode (if applicable) Pressing the Tow/Haul Mode button located on the center stack, the vehicle system voltage is raised and the remote (non-vehicle) battery will be charged. Having the headlamps on will raise the system voltage and if the Tow/Haul button is applied it will not serve any purpose. The voltage is regulated between 13.9-14.5 V.      
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...