sgtsandman
Aircraft Fuel Tank Diver
TRS Forum Moderator
U.S. Military - Active
TRS 20th Anniversary
TRS Event Participant
Ham Radio Operator
GMRS Radio License
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2017
- Messages
- 12,804
- Reaction score
- 12,556
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Aliquippa, PA
- Vehicle Year
- 2011/2019
- Make / Model
- Ranger XLT/FX4
- Engine Size
- 4.0 SOHC/2.3 Ecoboost
- 2WD / 4WD
- 4WD
- Total Lift
- Pre-2008 lift/Stock
- Tire Size
- 31X10.5R15/265/65R17
On a recent road trip to MS from IA (about 1000 miles) plus a day of bopping around Hattiesburg, I got 18 mpg with my 2013 Ram Crew Cab 4x4 5.7 Hemi......if 21 mpg is the avg, I, for one, am not impressed at all.....pretty pathetic for a 4-banger. Highway needs to be at least 27+, especially with a 10-speed tranny. They should really start getting their highway MPG at 65 mph, since most highways are 65 and interstates are 70-80 mph for a more realistic average.
I believe the Explorer with the same engine is rated for 26 mpg. I don’t think any of the precious Rangers were rated for anything more than 27 with a four banger and typically, people don’t see those numbers in the real world. I know I haven’t come close with either of my Rangers. I would not be surprised if Ford is still basing their mpg numbers off of perfect conditions that the average driver almost never sees. Plus, the new Ranger is a bigger and heavier vehicle. I wouldn’t be surprised if the average driver would see something in the neighborhood of 24 mpg out of the truck.
Like others have stated, the Rangers that are available are being run through their paces or being demoed in parking lots with mounds of dirt. Not exactly ideal conditions for the best fuel mileage results.
Plus, if people are buying trucks and expecting fuel economy numbers like one would see in a car or crossover, they are really setting themselves up for failure.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk