Mileage

[1994xlt]

Hey yall, what do you guys get from your ranger I drive a 1994 ford ranger xlt extended cab with 4x4 an my god I’ve been getting 10!!!!!! 10 MILES A GALLON and I’m yes I’m not the easiest on the throttle but I’m not absolutely gunning it everywere like right now I’m at 52 miles and at a quarter tank so I think somewhere I’m loosing mpg if I’m getting 10 and the rated mpg for these was 14-16 mph I am driving mostly city driving and it is cold could that be why? I don’t know just curious about it. Thanks

 

[1994xlt]

Hey yall, what do you guys get from your ranger I drive a 1994 ford ranger xlt extended cab with 4x4 an my god I’ve been getting 10!!!!!! 10 MILES A GALLON and I’m yes I’m not the easiest on the throttle but I’m not absolutely gunning it everywere like right now I’m at 52 miles and at a quarter tank so I think somewhere I’m loosing mpg if I’m getting 10 and the rated mpg for these was 14-16 mph I am driving mostly city driving and it is cold could that be why? I don’t know just curious about it. Thanks

It does have no cats and it has the original muffler I do believe? Not sure on the original muffler part.

 

[gaz]

@1994xlt
The 4×4 Explorer 1994 OHV 4.0l was rated @ just over 22 mpg highway with an automatic and just over 23 mpg using a manual transmission (these numbers are for the sequential fuel injection OHV 4.0l version, not the Federal which are 10% lower)).

If your Ranger achieves lower fuel economy than the Ford Explorer's expected numbers, I believe that improvements in your vehicles fuel economy can be attained, due to horse power to weight ratios; the Explorer weighs significantly more than the Ranger with the exact same power output, hence the Ranger should appreciate improved fuel economy over the more massive Explorer.

Since there were two versions of the Ford OHV 4.0l in 1994, the Federal and the California Emissions versions (sporting sequential fuel injection worth +10% fuel economy) I would first determine which version your Ranger is using ..)

 

[1994xlt]

It’s got the federal emissions

@1994xlt
The 4×4 Explorer 1994 OHV 4.0l was rated @ just over 22 mpg highway with an automatic and just over 23 mpg using a manual transmission (these numbers are for the sequential fuel injection OHV 4.0l version, not the Federal which are 10% lower)).

If your Ranger achieves lower fuel economy than the Ford Explorer's expected numbers, I believe that improvements in your vehicles fuel economy can be attained, due to horse power to weight ratios; the Explorer weighs significantly more than the Ranger with the exact same power output, hence the Ranger should appreciate improved fuel economy over the more massive Explorer.

Since there were two versions of the Ford OHV 4.0l in 1994, the Federal and the California Emissions versions (sporting sequential fuel injection worth +10% fuel economy) I would first determine which version your Ranger is using .

 

[gaz]

@1994xlt
How did you determine this

 

[1994xlt]

@1994xlt
How did you determine this

Truck wasn’t sold in California, there’s probably a sticker under the hood too tell me 100% I assume if so I’ll check in a bit here

 

[pacstud]

98 2.5 RWD Manual

24mpg

I drive like an old person. I may also be an old person.

 

[gaz]

@1994xlt
While there are several identify features the simplest way is to look at the engine, driver's side...if you have the EGR system despite where it was sold, it is the California Emissions SFI version.

 

[1994xlt]

Okay I’ll check that out I’ll look up what it looks like and get back

 

[gaz]

@1994xlt
If you have the EGR system, there will be an approximately ¾" stainless steel tube branching off your exhaust manifold, connecting to the EGR sensor on the upper intake manifold (driver's side).