Bronco II gas mileage

[The Fonz]

I just wanted to show a website I use religiously to track my fuel economy
http://www.fuelly.com/car/
I noticed there are only 6 other Bronco II's archived. The website has helped figure out when I get the the most efficient fuel economy which occurs @ around 67 mph and remains almost the exact same @ 60 (grant it it's an automatic). I realize these trucks aren't meant for fuel efficiency and I mostly cruise in my Miata for that reason, just interested to know how other bronco's fair.

http://www.fuelly.com/driver/volkswesty/bronco-ii
^my log

 

[MeanMark87]

Yeah they are not meant to be gas sippers but they still can do surprisingly well considering their age and construction.

I've heard some highly suspect reports of high 20's on the highway, which I guess is possible under super ideal conditions. Granted I have not even had my BII a week but I did drive it about 300 miles to get it home from buying it, and it did get 23 MPG.

 

[wildbill23c]

Low 20's sounds reasonable with the bronco 2, considering you are driving a box on wheels down the road LOL. My 84 ford ranger was lucky to hit 20mpg, however it had California SMOG crap on it which robbed it of power and kind of kept the engine from breathing properly. My 84 Bronco 2 averages 15.6mpg 100% around town which isn't too bad for all the stop and go, and dealing with idiots who can't drive worth crap and think that 25mph isn't doable for them and decide to drive 15mph around town.

Anyhow I don't really worry about fuel economy anymore as I don't own a car so it kind of sucks having to drive a truck wherever I need to go, but it beats walking LOL.

 

[4x4junkie]

Mine was getting around 26 mpg on the highway @ 60 or so mph before I lifted it.
2.9L, FM146 5-speed, 3.73 gears, 205/75R15 tires.

When I had my 35" BFG MTs (with 5.13:1 gears), it dropped to around 22-23 at the same speed. Now with Goodyear MT/R-Ks and a M5OD it's down in the 20-21 range.

 

[wildbill23c]

Why wouldn't my 84 Ranger get over 20mpg? 2.8L V6, 2WD, 3 speed auto. Never understood that. Does the manual transmission make that big of a difference? I wouldn't think so since it was a 2WD. Just seems strange that my B2 with 4WD gets better fuel economy than the 2WD ranger.

 

[fix_or_repair_daily]

Yep, I would think it's the auto trans. My '84 2wd short bed with a 2.3 and c3 auto NEVER got better than 19-20 no matter what I did to it or how I drove it. Not to mention it was a complete turd. When I swapped in a 2.3 turbo out of a Merkur and a M5OD out of a newer Ranger I could get 24 if I stayed out of the boost.

 

[wildbill23c]

Yep, I would think it's the auto trans. My '84 2wd short bed with a 2.3 and c3 auto NEVER got better than 19-20 no matter what I did to it or how I drove it. Not to mention it was a complete turd. When I swapped in a 2.3 turbo out of a Merkur and a M5OD out of a newer Ranger I could get 24 if I stayed out of the boost.

So just mainly due to the power loss through an automatic transmission causing the reduced fuel economy. Thanks for the input.