How about 48.5 MPG w/V-6 Mustang?

[Mac]

Well, Ford just did it at Bristol Raceway. Now if they could just find a way to put that 300 hp motor into a Ranger!
Dave
http://www.allfordmustangs.com/arti...ang-v-6-runs-1-457-laps-at-bristol-1341.shtml

 

[mp3deviant721]

Kewl.

 

[2813josh]

That's awesome!

 

[wahlstrom1]

Hmm.... a 300hp mustang sounds like a lot more fun at 48mpg then my GF's toyota Yaris, but on the nice side it got 47.5mpg at 130kph, 553km on 33L of gas.

I'd like to see any V6 manage that kinda mileage in normal conditions vs. 'ideal'....

 

[Original_Ranger84]

Thats awesome... If only they could squeeze that out on the road. I would buy one in a heart beat.

 

[martin]

Track conditions change things a little. The top gear guys got 17.5 out of a prius.

 

[superds]

They went 533 miles in 17.67 hours. That averages out to 30.2 miles per hour, including driver change stops. That would be painful to watch, let alone drive that slow around a race track.

Still impressive, nonetheless.

 

[TheTopher]

They went 533 miles in 17.67 hours. That averages out to 30.2 miles per hour, including driver change stops. That would be painful to watch, let alone drive that slow around a race track.

Still impressive, nonetheless.

Actually 1000 laps and 533 miles was their goal. They surpassed it and went 1457 laps and 776.5 miles in 17.67 hours.


That works out to about 44mph. A little more reasonable for every day driving, but they still had ideal conditions.

 

[kemo]

That engine and/or the ecoboost is actually being debated to be dropped into the F150... making it the replacement for the ranger.

 

[superds]

Actually 1000 laps and 533 miles was their goal. They surpassed it and went 1457 laps and 776.5 miles in 17.67 hours.


That works out to about 44mph. A little more reasonable for every day driving, but they still had ideal conditions.

Oops. Silly me. That's twice this week I've made a math mistake. The other was the time lapse between 14:00 to 18:00, I said three hours, later to correct myself and say four. I think I'm done with math for the week. And I swear I read the whole article, twice. The second time I was looking for what the average speed was, they could have just written it into the article and I wouldn't have had to calculate it.

 

[LittleHorse]

isn't it EPA rated for 31mpg highway? Even though it's not 48.5, that's still damn good, better than anything I can think of with 300hp.

And yeah, I know I know, EPA isn't real-world accurate either but it's pretty close, at least with the way I drive. I had a car that was rated 22 city/30 hwy and I regularly averaged 27-28mpg so I could expect to get 28 out of the V6 Mustang in real-world driving.

 

[TheTopher]

The EPA estimation system actually got revamped a few years ago to take into account the fact that nobody knows how to drive anymore. So my Ranger that had a window sticker of 23/28 got switched to 20/26 and all other vehicles were recalculated accordingly.

But go figure I still get 23 or so in town if I'm driving more than 10 minutes and I get 28-29 on the highway on the few times I year I go far away. I wouldn't be surprised if a little common sense could pull 35mpg out of that Mustang.

 

[trader007]

i have serious doubts how well made a 40mpg F150 truck will be though... there is no way they make up all that mileage in just engine improvements. the frames on these trucks are already as light and thin as you would want them, i would have to imagine these new eco-boost trucks will be totaled in even the smallest of wrecks.

i dont know anything for sure though, maybe you guys can prove me wrong.

 

[Mac]

That 44 mph includes the driver changes made every hour. How they changed drivers is a question I'd like to know. Did they come to a complete stop or do a rolling change.
Dave

 

[99RangerOffRoad]

They probably just had the cruise set at exactly 45 and then driver change accounts for the 1 mph difference in average speed