exsqueeze me? 39mpg ranger?

[85_Ranger4x4]

It's simply more efficient. Diesels crank around 40-45% efficiency (energy lost to heat, vibration, & sound, etc) as opposed to a gasoline's 18-24%.

It really just makes more sense.

A direct injected turbo diesel vs a indirect NA gas engine... try something like an Ecoboost that pretty much matches a modern diesel step for step aside from being more emissions friendly while burning cheaper more available fuel.

 

[darkspork]

A direct injected turbo diesel vs a indirect NA gas engine... try something like an Ecoboost that pretty much matches a modern diesel step for step aside from being more emissions friendly while burning cheaper more available fuel.

Most diesels make peak torque at lower rpm, but this is an extremely valid point. The ecoboost in the 2011 F-150 does kick butt (at least on paper). If they are overbuilt to handle the higher compression like most diesels are I'm all for it. Heck, if the ecoboost in the 2012 Focus ST has a similar torque curve it will probably be my next car.

But, where are our ecoboost engines that allow our cars EPA highway mpg ratings in the 40s (50mpg possible on long trips, like the VW Golf/Jetta TDI)? I don't want an electric motor to achieve those numbers.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Most diesels make peak torque at lower rpm, but this is an extremely valid point. The ecoboost in the 2011 F-150 does kick butt (at least on paper). If they are overbuilt to handle the higher compression like most diesels are I'm all for it. Heck, if the ecoboost in the 2012 Focus ST has a similar torque curve it will probably be my next car.

Have you seen the Ecoboost F-150 challenge they are going to do?

http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=33287

www.fordvehicles.com/2011F150

 

[Tb8983]

In my 10 2wd 5speed with 410's I get about 29-30 hey and about 25 in town

 

[--weezl--]

In my 10 2wd 5speed with 410's I get about 29-30 hey and about 25 in town

motor?

 

[AgPete139]

motor?

He mean his liters, "1.0".

 

[darkspork]

Have you seen the Ecoboost F-150 challenge they are going to do?

http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=33287

www.fordvehicles.com/2011F150

Not until now, but I have read about the torture tests. Apparently the ecoboost will offer similar longevity to NA gasoline engines, which in my mind is maybe 2/3 the longevity of a diesel (a lot of diesels never rev above 5k).

 

[Tb8983]

It has the 2.3 four banger

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Not until now, but I have read about the torture tests. Apparently the ecoboost will offer similar longevity to NA gasoline engines, which in my mind is maybe 2/3 the longevity of a diesel (a lot of diesels never rev above 5k).

Which is perfectly adaquate for most people.

Generally if natural selection hasn't thinned them out by 2-300,000 miles rust is well on its way to finishing the job.

 

[Ruffinit]

My 2003 2.3 DuraTec which is rated at 148hp gets 32mpg day in and day out. I commute 140 miles per day and it now has 98,000 miles on it (88,000 in the last 2 1/2 years). It's in the "Splash" with a 4:10 / 5 speed. The only time it's ever dropped below 20mpg is when I pulled a Grand Cherokee home at highway speed. In the Rockies or when pulling a 12 ft enclosed cargo trailer it will average around 25.

 

[--weezl--]

My 2003 2.3 DuraTec which is rated at 148hp gets 32mpg day in and day out. I commute 140 miles per day and it now has 98,000 miles on it (88,000 in the last 2 1/2 years). It's in the "Splash" with a 4:10 / 5 speed. The only time it's ever dropped below 20mpg is when I pulled a Grand Cherokee home at highway speed. In the Rockies or when pulling a 12 ft enclosed cargo trailer it will average around 25.

i don't like you very much

 

[Ruffinit]

i don't like you very much

Hey, what can I say? I love my Ranger.. The '96 4x4 supercab Splash doesn't come near this mileage. It's got a 4.0/5sp with 3.73s.

 

[--weezl--]

Hey, what can I say? I love my Ranger.. The '96 4x4 supercab Splash doesn't come near this mileage. It's got a 4.0/5sp with 3.73s.

that is true... but i still don't like you very much... all with my i don't know what i get right now, mileage...

 

[AgPete139]

32?!

I don't hink you know how to calculate mileage/economy correctly.

 

[Ruffinit]

32?!

I don't hink you know how to calculate mileage/economy correctly.

Well, you know what? You can make a mistake on a tank, maybe two or three tanks, but when I commute 140 miles per day every day and have put on 88,000 miles in 30 months, you kinda get a feel for it.. I even have it documented on the fueleconomy.gov website. So, like it or not, that's what I get.

The best mileage I've gotten is 34.2 on a 250 mile run from Muscatine Iowa to Ballwin Missouri.

The worst is 17.9 pulling a Jeep Grand Cherokee home for my son in law

32 is the average day in and day out.

In fact I just got back from a 2700 mile drive to Salt Lake City and back last week. Average consumption was 30.2.

I'll bet money anyone who knows how to drive a stick can get into any of the 2.3 DuraTecs (after break-in) and get the same. Mine is rock stock with a very slight advantage of a toneau.