• Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and Register for our forum. Even if you don't want to post, you can still 'Like' and react to posts.

Gas saving tips


Aerodynamic shells are worth the money, if you're planning on getting a shell anyways. A sun visor that redirects the airflow back to the top of the vehicle may be worth it too. Next tire change, you may want to get more efficient tires. I'd only make modifications if you're going to be getting a part or replacing one anyways, otherwise, like Wicked_Sludge said, it's probably not worth the time and money. If you're thinking of doing a modification do the math to see if it's worth it. If gas is $3.659 a gallon and you buy a mod for $100 which boost your mpg by 1 mpg it's going to take you driving your truck roughly 6559 miles to pay for the mod. Which would cost me about $1599.96 worth of fuel anyways at $3.659 per gallon and my truck getting about 15 mpg. Things to consider when making a modification or buying a new vehicle.
 
Except a 1 MPG (5%) improvement is MASSIVE and none of the modifications mentioned here will get anywhere near that.

Aerodynamics IS rocket science, and I wish I understood why every redneck with a body kit thinks they can guess what the answers are or how the vehicle will behave. "Aerodynamic" mirrors? Bullshit. To a large extent, the leading edges don't matter, and the trailing edges do. How the F are you going to deal with a trailing edge AND have a flat mirror you can actually use? It needs to be 7 deg or less from horizontal to prevent flow separation, and that would be a truly useless mirror.
 
I don't use my Ranger as my daily anymore, since I drive 500 miles a week for work alone. The best I've gotten to date in my Ranger is 25mpg.

I get 40 in my Saturn.
 
MAKG because "the average redneck" doesn't spend time in the wind tunnel studying the aerodynamics of their truck.
 
Aerodynamics is complicated, yes, when you consider that your vehicle isn't quite "tear drop" shape. Every little thing like mirrors and the wheels, are going to affect how the wind reacts with your vehicles shape, even if the main body is a perfect tear drop. Wind tunnel tests have proven that aerodynamic shells will drastically increase mileage. Not at slow speeds, but a highway speeds it'll save you plenty. The sun visors, although they could be better, are proven as well. As for the leading edges, they'll matter once trucks start breaking the sound barrier in the future, but for now at subsonic wind speeds a more blunt, rounded front end with a tapered back end will do the trick. Aerodynamic mods are only useful if you drive at highways speeds often. They don't do much for you, other than make you look like a smug, tree hugger at slower speeds. And yes, MAKG I agree with you, many rednecks are just blowing shit out their mouths when they're trying to explain aerodynamics.
 
Umm, it's "proven" that hard bed covers make SMALL improvements IN DRAG COEFFICIENT for very long wheelbase vehicles, and HURT very short wheelbase vehicles. But a lower drag coefficient isn't the same thing as better fuel-efficiency. It doesn't take into account increased weight, for instance.

SOME "shells" increase the profile the vehicle presents to the wind. Which means WORSE drag even with the same drag coefficient. It may help in some cases, but it isn't nearly as simple or clear-cut as you make it out to be.

RBV wheelbases run the gamut from very short (Bronco IIs) to very long (crew cab longbed). You can't make the blanket statement you have been.

And the ONLY ways you are going to get significant improvement from useful mirrors is to make them smaller (reducing their function) or put them inside the vehicle (which is illegal). You can't remove flow separation from a mirror, and that's mostly what determines the drag.

Even if you removed them, the effect wouldn't be significant. The vehicle presents orders of magnitude more profile to the slipstream with the SAME flat trailing edge. It's not going to be measurable.
 
RBV wheelbases run the gamut from very short (Bronco IIs) to very long (crew cab longbed). You can't make the blanket statement you have been.

You can't get a longbed Supercab (they don't even make a crewcab Ranger in the states) unless you cut two trucks apart and make it yourself. You can have a Supercab or a long box from the factory, but not both.

I agree with the topper killing you in a crosswind, going from my Ranger to my parents '94 Explorer is quite an experiance in a good crosswind. Just for that reason I deem them not worth getting just for milage, a truck catches the wind bad enough without one. Although depending on your needs they (and a bed cover) can be very usefull for other things.
 
the only ranger that might gain gas mileage above what we all get is one thats dropped on its nuts and gutted....even then gas mileage would only be a minute increase
 
The shell I'm talking about, streamlines the sides and top of the vehicle's cab back to the top of the tailgate. I've seen claims that wind tunnel tests have proven it to improve fuel efficiency by as much as 4 mpg. I haven't done the tests myself, but I think it's something to consider. These shells really cut back the drag caused by turbulence. As for the parasite drag caused by the mirrors, I haven't seen anything that looks too promising, but I have a few ideas I've been toying with.
 
From my own back-of-the-envelope analysis, I don't see any difference in turbulence between a topper and an empty bed. The flat back edge of the topper behaves just like the flat back edge of the cab. Not 25% smaller.

You haven't been believing manufacturer's claims, have you?

Turbulence is nearly synonymous with flow separation. Explain how a topper changes that.

Honestly, if a topper made THAT much difference, why do Explorers get slightly worse mileage than Rangers with the same year and equipment? They aren't anywhere near 25% heavier.
 
Last edited:
rangers with caps get worse mileage then without, on larger vehciles with say a 8cyl it may not be the case, but on rangers(been there) every single time ive had a cap on mine, or any of the other trucks ive worked on and then removed the cap mileage went up 2mpg, YES up 2 MPG without a cap
 
lol, I think there's a failure of communication here. I'd have to show you what I'm talking about. As for a regular shell, I've heard claims increase and claims they reduce your fuel mileage. With my personal experience, my shell on my truck doesn't make any noticeable difference with or without it, and yes I constantly check my mpg. I have a regular shaped fiberglass shell, which pretty much gives my truck the same shape as a bronco. The shells I've been looking at would make my truck's shape similar fuselage of an piper cub.
 
I agree, Ranger owners shouldn't expect too much from their rangers; a nice old accord, civic or prism would be a much easier fix to the fuel problem.
 

Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

TRS Events

Member & Vendor Upgrades

For a small yearly donation, you can support this forum and receive a 'Supporting Member' banner, or become a 'Supporting Vendor' and promote your products here. Click the banner to find out how.

Latest posts

Recently Featured

Want to see your truck here? Share your photos and details in the forum.

Ranger Adventure Video

TRS Merchandise

Follow TRS On Instagram

TRS Sponsors


Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad


Amazon Deals

Sponsored Ad

Back
Top