Averaging 11.5 Miles to the gallon??!

This is a good point. I hand calculate every tank, after adjusting mileage for tire size. The on board computer has always underestimated, even when stock tires were on it.

 

This is even more true for the manuals because of the 4.3 rear end. At 70 in 6th hear I'm right around 2500 rpms. At 75 it's about 2750.

Lots of useful power, but it hits the fuel economy hard. Fortunately I'm rarely in a hurry.

 

My 2009 tacoma also gets really bad millage, it does have 184k miles but it's still I feel like I should be getting more than 12.. I drive a little bit more on street but I never floor it or anything, stock lift tires, I have a cold air intake on it, no engine codes it just gets poor mpg. I notice tho the ticking on my truck is abnormally louder than other tacomas tho but I wish it had better millage. Hell my girlfriends nissan frontier gets 18 with 130k mikes both 4.0 v6 wtf?

 

If you put on 265's it lowers that 75 MPH to 2500 RPM. I find it perfect for highway driving. I am still in the power at 2500 and I get 18.5-19.5 at that speed.

 

i love threads that dont give all the info first. yes your lift and tires are ruining your mpg. also throwing off the computers calculations due to slightly larger diameter. if you got 11mpg on a stock truck, something would have to be stuck or broken. lowest ive seen in mine was like 16.8 and i consider myself an aggressive driver and still reminding myself its a truck and not a rotary engine like my last car. how easy is it to push when in neutral?

 

180k 2nd gen prob different issues. hows the maintenance been?

 

Forgot about one additional point... AIR CONDITIONER. This'll cost about 3 mpg. So now we are up to 19.55, which is basically as advertised.

 

hmm, not sure about 3 mpg. I have been running mine alot and I do not think if I turned it off I would be at 21-23 MPG. Maybe, but I doubt it.

 

The A/C is really bad for fuel consumption.

 

Very noticeable on the Taco. My other cars, not so much.

 

I don't suppose that your other cars happen to have electric fans on the A/C or radiator, do they?

 

Not sure, 2015 WRX, and 2015 Honda Pilot.

 

You need to apply your multiplier factor from the increase of tire dia. and make sure the ECT button is not pressed. Currently getting 16.5 mpg on stock DCSB but my drives are all with in a 2 mile radius work, gym, stores and dog park.

 

The honda will have a transverse engine, which means that it *must* have an electric radiator fan. If the WRX is anything like my wife's Forester, it also has an electric fan.

 

Did you miss the manual transmission part or did the 3rd gen odo sensor get moved?

 

When the A/C is on, the air going into the radiator is pre-warmed. Then the air coming out of the radiator is REALLY warm, which heats up the fan clutch, causing the fan to lock to the water pump shaft. The majority of the additional fuel consumption is from driving that freaking big fan.

Electric fans are more efficient, since they don't spin faster with the engine. Since they're powered by the battery, they don't even hit the engine with a load all at once. Sit at a light for a minute and you get extra heat, run the fan off the battery for a bit, then speed up, cut the fan with a switch, and regular air flow cools it down from there.

 

What's your point? The odometer sensor will be on the output section of the transmission or transfer case, and will be different depending on the differential ratio that the vehicle shipped with. You don't need to compensate for the transmission being manual or automatic.

Those people talking about the manual being less efficient are referring to the fact that it has a lower overall gear ratio when fully shifted out. Engine spins faster, thus eats more fuel.

 

Yes you do. Autos are at the wheels and manuals are at the tran which means you need to calculate them differently.

 

Are you trolling? Or do you actually believe that the physical location of a sensor (assuming that it was actually in a different location, which it is not) requires a different calculation?

Lets make it very simple for you; the distance the vehicle travels is measured by COUNTING the number of times the wheel turns, and MULTIPLYING that by the wheel's circumference. It makes ZERO difference where the sensor is, because you will break it down to number of wheel turns before you use it.

So sure, while a sensor on the transmission output shaft will read its shaft as spinning around FOUR TIMES FASTER, the computer knows to take that number and DIVIDE BY DIFFERENTIAL GEAR RATIO before multiplying by wheel circumference.

Or to put it another way, you have two vehicles driving exactly 150 miles per hour side by side. One is a manual, the other is an automatic. THEIR GAUGES READ THE SAME THING!

 

I've actually done this and no they don't read the same. Of course this was with larger tires than factory. Not trolling just telling you it makes a difference on calculations.