Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and 
RoidedRanger
Member
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2010
- Messages
- 196
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 18
- Location
- Lakeland FL
- Vehicle Year
- 93
- Make / Model
- Ford
- Engine Size
- 4.0
- Transmission
- Manual
i got rid of a 94 ranger single cab short bed 4x4 4.0 5spd that i tried to make the most fuel efficient truck i could. kept it bone stock motor wise, stock height, non-aggressive tires 31" tires, 3.73 gears, manual lockouts, synthetic fluids, good alignment, etc. best ive EVER gotten fuel mileage wise was 20mpg and that was rare, usually got 19 and rarely ever used AC.
i ve been driving this 93 4.0 5spd EXT cab short bed 4x4 with a leveling kit 31" tires, huge/heavy rear bumper, screwed up alignment, factory auto locking hubs,same 3.73 gears, does have a straight exhaust that splits into duals. truck didnt come with AC (in the process of converting now) and i filled up the tank the other day from when i filled it up when i bought it and hand calculated 24.5mpg!!!!
im definatly not complaining i just dont understand why this truck being an ext cab with more fuel consuming features gets SOOO much better fuel mileage. speedometer is accurate and as of now im at 75 miles from when i filled up and in between full and 3/4 tank.
i ve been driving this 93 4.0 5spd EXT cab short bed 4x4 with a leveling kit 31" tires, huge/heavy rear bumper, screwed up alignment, factory auto locking hubs,same 3.73 gears, does have a straight exhaust that splits into duals. truck didnt come with AC (in the process of converting now) and i filled up the tank the other day from when i filled it up when i bought it and hand calculated 24.5mpg!!!!
im definatly not complaining i just dont understand why this truck being an ext cab with more fuel consuming features gets SOOO much better fuel mileage. speedometer is accurate and as of now im at 75 miles from when i filled up and in between full and 3/4 tank.
