Jump to content

Looking for better MPG

jorswift
 Share

Recommended Posts

jorswift Enthusiast

jorswift

Posted
Posted (edited)

Have a 2015 sierra 1500 5.3. Bought truck several years ago with 70k miles. Now with having to return back to office, I am over 100k. Truck is mainly stock, but have some 33" tires and leveling kit. With having to drive a ton more now and filling up more often, I am looking to do somethings to get better MPG. Truck seemed to get good mileage when I first bought it around the 70k mark.Any advice? Thanks.

Edited by jorswift
  • Sad 1
Silverado4x4 Senior Enthusiast

Silverado4x4

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, jorswift said:

Have a 2015 sierra 1500 5.3. Bought truck several years ago with 70k miles. Now with having to return back to office, I am over 100k. Truck is mainly stock, but have some 33" tires and leveling kit. With having to drive a ton more now and filling up more often, I am looking to do somethings to get better MPG. Truck seemed to get good mileage when I first bought it around the 70k mark.Any advice? Thanks.

Get rid of the 33s and go back to stock size and remove the leveling kit. The leveling kit raises the front and creates more wind drag and the 33s are heavier than the stock tires which take more power to keep them rolling, rolling resistance. 

  • Like 5
scrapen Enthusiast

scrapen

Posted
Posted

With stock tire size expect around maybe 18 mpg.  So if you average 16-17 I’d say it’s normal.  If you haven’t done plugs there’s a good chance they’ve never been done.

 

personally if you’re putting on a lot of miles a beater car can pay itself off.  My diesel vw is averaging 49 mpg (.08 per mile last 8 years vs .19 per mile on my truck (tuned for 91)). I’ve kept over 50k miles off the truck which now sits at 42k.

  • Like 1
jorswift Enthusiast

jorswift

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Yeah, not looking to see "great" results. Just something a little better I guess. I know the level and tires would kill it, but at that time I was not driving that much. Thinking of a tuner to calibrate tires and get the 87 tune.

mikeyk101 Senior Enthusiast

mikeyk101

Posted
Posted

Another thing that may be affecting your gas mileage is regarding the 33" tires. Just curious if you corrected your speedometer? I'm not 100% sure but believe the speedometer is probably linked with the odometer. With larger sized tires, if speedo not corrected, it will show you are going slower than you are. So that would translate into showing you are covering less ground than you are. So if you are covering less ground but still using the same amount of fuel, it will obviously look like you are getting less mpg than you really are. 

  • Like 1
  • 2 weeks later...
newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted

Are they 33" aggressive tires?  Or 33" highway tread?  Are they flotation size so like 33x12.5x20?  

 

Going up in diameter, sure you'll see MPG change but the weight and tread design and if its a tire size like I mentioned has much more effect here than them being 33" diameter.  

  • Like 3
diyer2 Senior Enthusiast

diyer2

Posted
Posted

Stock size tires, remove lift. Best mileage you'll get.

  • Like 1
Z45 Senior Enthusiast

Z45

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 8/14/2025 at 10:25 AM, jorswift said:

 Thinking of a tuner to calibrate tires and get the 87 tune.

More $ wasted chasing a dream.   You are still pushing 2.5 tons of steel down the road.  Put the truck back to 100% stock if you really want to keep it, but spending money to get better mileage is a pipe dream.  Spend 100's to save pennies.  

Edited by Z45
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
On 8/14/2025 at 6:31 AM, jorswift said:

Have a 2015 sierra 1500 5.3. Bought truck several years ago with 70k miles. Now with having to return back to office, I am over 100k. Truck is mainly stock, but have some 33" tires and leveling kit. With having to drive a ton more now and filling up more often, I am looking to do somethings to get better MPG. Truck seemed to get good mileage when I first bought it around the 70k mark.Any advice? Thanks.

 

1.) Lower and stock size H/T tires. Already said. Goes to frontal area and rolling resistance. Oh and run those tires hard. Adding 3 psi over nameplate will not kill the tire nor the wear if the alignment is correct. 

2.) Alignment. Tires standing up near zero camber but negative, -.2 to 0 and even. Toe positive, even and minimum, .02-.04. Shoot for zero steer-ahead and zero thrust angle. And take some caster out of it but stay in spec. 

3.) Tune up and not a tune. Standard stuff. Plugs, wires air filter. PVC system. 

4.) Minimum weight. That stuff in the bed/cab you don't use, ditch it.

5.) Soft tonneau cover and keep the gate up. 

6.) You'll love this one...Slow down. Drive like you haven't any brakes. It's an art. Anticipate lights and traffic. Yea, it takes a few more minutes so start earlier. I'm not talking snails pace but even 10 mph make a HUGE impact. At least the speed limit. Get used to being passed but not a a$$. 

7.) Scan Gauge III. You'll be surprised how much instant real time feed back corrects bad habits. Hones point #6. 

8.) Stay out of the drive through. 

9.) Pan heater in the winter. Cold oil is the big end of the winter fuel economy loss. On trips as long as yours 0W* oil gives you next to nothing over 5W* and use a 'slick oil' Lubricity is huge. And not all 0W or 5W oils are created equal. The cold weather properties of the specs are MAXIUMS not minimums and those that use PAO's instead of Group III at the bulk base will always have lower CCS numbers. I'll let you fret the brand. 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
JimCost2014 Senior Enthusiast

JimCost2014

Posted
Posted

Not to be a complete smart-ass, but park it in the garage and get a small commuter car. A V-8 truck is only going to get a certain MPG, no matter what you do. If you believe the stories of 30++ mpg members are getting, you are going to be disappointed with your results.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, JimCost2014 said:

Not to be a complete smart-ass, but park it in the garage and get a small commuter car. A V-8 truck is only going to get a certain MPG, no matter what you do. If you believe the stories of 30++ mpg members are getting, you are going to be disappointed with your results.

 

One has little to do with the other. That said and in a more liberal meaning; it is wise to compare only to yourself. Perhaps that was the intent.

 

If you think you can't get a 15-20% improvement, you'd be mistaken. Go all in and 30% is not off the table. Pepper is not a "Story", the results were the results hand calculated and graphed. Everyone got to follow along in 2019 were for the year it tapped 30+ mpg. The items on the list I put up were the ones I used to get that result. In print in my build thread. 

 

Can I do that with a four door V8? 30 mpg? No. But I can get one to respond to the physics involved as can anyone else that honestly tries and applies the science.

 

As for the other suggestion. Yes. And if you won't believe 30+ with a pickup you will never get your head around 52+ mpg in a Mitsubishi Mirage for it's first year.

 

30,173 miles in year one using 578.75 gallons of fuel = 52.13 mpg RESULT. 718 engine hours = 42 MPH RESULT

13 mpg over the EPA combine value. 33% improvement! 6 mph faster than that national average. Rinse and repeat or Pepper using exactly the same methods to get exactly the same results. Quite a story. 

 

EPA numbers: The Mitsubishi Mirage has an EPA fuel economy rating of up to 36 miles per gallon in the city and 43 miles per gallon on the highway, averaging around 39 miles per gallon combined. 

 

 

  • Like 2
asilverblazer Senior Enthusiast

asilverblazer

Posted
Posted

I was never able to get a commuter car to pencil out. 

 

Starting at a modest 5000.00 for the car price, plus its own maintenance, registration, insurance and gas. Never even comes close to saving me money. 

 

Going up on the 5000.00 so that I'm not spending my commute in an absolute $hitbox only makes it worse. 

 

MY math, assuming I ONLY drive the commuter and don't drive my truck AT ALL, with some simple rounding... 

18000 mile per year in the truck averaging 17 mpg = 1050 gallons of diesel at $3.10 per gallon = $3300.00 per year.

In a car that gets 30 mpg = 600 gallons of gas at $2.75 = $1650.00 per year. 

I would be saving about $1650.00 in fuel costs.

From that savings I have to buy the car and pay the above continual expenses. $150.00 in oil changes, $100.00 in registration, $600.00 in insurance, assume no other repairs are needed (unlikely given we're trying to save money on the car) leaves $800.00 per year in savings. If I buy the car at the above $5000.00 price it would take over 6 years to realize any savings, at which point, the car will need tires and other maintenance costs that would likely push the savings point out to over 7 years. 

 

Raising the purchase price to lower the maintenance cost or lowering the purchase price would raise the maintenance amount... never going to work for me. 

 

OP's 30k miles in "several years" doesn't sound like an amount of miles that would push this equation to a point that make sense for him either. 

 

In broader terms this is why truck owners DO CARE about mpg, so many say "you bought a truck it won't get good gas mileage... you should have bought a car..." don't understand that some people drive to a job Monday through Friday and have other responsibilities or activities that require a truck on the weekend. Having two separate vehicles for this doesn't make sense based on the dollars above. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
swathdiver Senior Enthusiast

swathdiver

Posted
Posted
On 8/14/2025 at 7:31 AM, jorswift said:

Have a 2015 sierra 1500 5.3. Bought truck several years ago with 70k miles. Now with having to return back to office, I am over 100k. Truck is mainly stock, but have some 33" tires and leveling kit. With having to drive a ton more now and filling up more often, I am looking to do somethings to get better MPG. Truck seemed to get good mileage when I first bought it around the 70k mark.Any advice? Thanks.

 

Keep up with the maintenance and slow down.  That's all you can really do without spending money.  

 

Big truck = safety

  • Like 3

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • nfisherman
      Software Update

      By nfisherman · Posted

      Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...