29.4 MPG

[Biggfoot44]

1994 standard cab long bed , 2wd . 3.0L , auto , 195/ 75- 14 , GPS verified to be within 1% of Speedo . A/C not blowing cold , so windows .

2nd owner , and 1st owner used my same mechanic the entire time , so I am assured of both well maintained , and stock .

Highway , the whole time at speed limit , variously between 55mph and 70mph depending on stretch of road . Empty bed , just somewhat beefy driver .

And I was pleasantly shocked ! With my limited experience ( yet l with this truck I was expecting about 26mpg .

Added - 3.45 open gears

 

[Dirtman]

42

 

[RonD]

Yes, 42 indeed

19.4mpg on a 3.0l Ranger would be on the higher side, and with an automatic to boot, maybe its a typo???

29.4mpg.......................maybe...........if you started the test at the top of Pikes Peak and turned engine off 1/2 way down

I think its great you got that high of MPG just not sure the Laws of Physics can support it, I know the 3.0l automatic Ranger can't, lol

 

[racsan]

must of been level ground, or downhill.
The 3.0 likes to be running at fairly high rpms to be at its peak tourque/hp. 3.45’s /55 mph would be 1600 rpm im guessing. the 3.0 likes 2500-3000 rpm. The slightest hill would have a downshift happening. a big hill would possibly have you in 2nd.
My ‘88 supercab hit 29 once, 2wd with 205/14 tires, 3.73’s, 2.3-4cyl/ 5 speed manual and it hated hills even with a empty bed & 3.73’s

 

[Uncle Gump]

That's really about 8.4 MPG's better then anything I've ever got out of any of the 11 Rangers I've owned since 1988.

 

[Curious Hound]

I wouldn’t dream of putting 3.45 gears behind a 3.0l, especially with an auto.

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

I wouldn’t dream of putting anything behind a 3.0l, especially with an auto.

FIFY

 

[Biggfoot44]

No tach on the base model dash. yes , essentially level terrain . Yes , road trip with pure highway driving .

Yes,it certainly surprised me , certainly much more than any 4.0 Explorer , or various GM 4.3 in various pickup and SUVs . No , given my druthers , I would certainly have other than 3.45 .

It still has the non- functional sending unit for the gas gage as purchased , so I am in the protocols of very carefully watching trip odometer , and fuel used .'

 

[scotts90ranger]

I would double check it on the next tank, I've gotten all excited before and turned out I got like 3 gallons less gas on one fillup... the following tank was like 10 mpg less.

That said, back in the day when my '90 was a spring chicken on 195 75 14's and a 3.08:1 axle and still 4x2 would get 28mpg fairly regularly but that was before the days of ethanol fuel and such...

 

[Dirtman]

Wouldn't say it's impossible to get 29+ with a 3.0.

BUT if you changed gears/axles your not getting accurate info. With no fuel guage your also guessing a bit. Could be 29mpg, maybe a little inaccurate measurement but on a good highway trip I can see it being close to that. I've gotten 26-27 with my 2.3 and 4:10's.

I honestly think you got great mileage but probably not quite what you think.

 

[Biggfoot44]

• Stock gears going by the door tag , and I know the original owner didn't change anything , and speedometer verified by GPS . The fuel gage is on the short list , but I put the paint & bodywork ahead of the miscellaneous repairs . That said , depending upon odometer and dead reconing makes you more aware of actual fuel usage , instead of using the gas gage as a crutch . And this was " rural" formulation gas .

But when I pick it up from the out of state paint shop , I will bring a notebook to record multi tank cumulative numbers , and probably stretch it into an extended road trip .

Dag gum , I just did some kind of indentation thing , and I have no idea how that happened .

 

[1990RangerinSK]

I wouldn’t dream of putting anything behind a 2.9l, especially with an auto.

FIFY

Much better!

 

[Dirtman]

• Stock gears going by the door tag , and I know the original owner didn't change anything , and speedometer verified by GPS . The fuel gage is on the short list , but I put the paint & bodywork ahead of the miscellaneous repairs . That said , depending upon odometer and dead reconing makes you more aware of actual fuel usage , instead of using the gas gage as a crutch . And this was " rural" formulation gas .

But when I pick it up from the out of state paint shop , I will bring a notebook to record multi tank cumulative numbers , and probably stretch it into an extended road trip .

Dag gum , I just did some kind of indentation thing , and I have no idea how that happened .

You're good people.

 

[Ramcharger90]

The only vehicle we own that gets that kinda mileage is a 2011 lancer. It use to get 38mpg about until it hit 164k now its hanging out at 26-29 mpg at 196k.

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

The only vehicle we own that gets that kinda mileage is a 2011 lancer. It use to get 38mpg about until it hit 164k now its hanging out at 26-29 mpg at 196k.

Ceratec.