3rd Gen Engine and Drivetrain -> 2003-2007 5.9 liter Engine and drivetrain discussion only. PLEASE, NO HIGH PERFORMANCE DISCUSSION!

2004.5 MPG really that bad??? What can be done?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 3, 2007 | 09:17 AM
  #46  
wadediesel's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Just Went on a 425 Mile trip. Truck ran for 8hrs straight, heavy rain High Winds for about 25-30 Miles, Slightly hilly terrain. Drove on average 69MPH,sometimes as high as 77MPH sometimes as low as 64MPH.
I hand calculated and got 17.2 MPG. Dog Carrier in back of truck and wife and daughter up front. Was hoping for a little higher average but 17MPG is pretty good I guess.

I also plan to get a TSB reflash. Is there a specific TSB I should request?
Also I have a Airaid air Intake, does the Airaid Filter Help or hurt the overall MPG?
Reply
Old Sep 3, 2007 | 10:58 AM
  #47  
Dangerous Dave's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
From: Shepherd, TX
Whoever said "drive 65 and have stock 2WD" was talking about me!

My '03 is bone stock. It has a bone stock auto tranny and 3.73 rear.

It has a RK Headache rack, a cross bed and two side boxes and a Tommy Lift.

It weighs right at 8K before I get in.

I've kept mileage records since I got it at 24,799 and it now has 119K on it.

My average which includes highway, city, towing (not terribly heavy) and all other use. It probably spends 70% of the time on the highway.

I rarely ever floor it, and don't usually go more than 1800rpm.

The average stands at 19.067 hand calculated.

Granted it's apples to plums as y'all are talking 2004.5

But a stock 2WD will get better mpg than a stock 4WD and MUCH better than a lifted big tired 4WD.
Reply
Old Sep 3, 2007 | 11:25 AM
  #48  
wadediesel's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Dave, If your getting 19mpg w/2WD then I can't see how I could do much better w/4WD. I just can't see how some guys are saying they are getting up to 800 Miles per Tank. Mine is stock except for the Airaid.

22-24MPG seems out of reach?
Reply
Old Sep 4, 2007 | 11:54 AM
  #49  
sqrl$$'s Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 351
Likes: 1
From: Lexington, NC
Dangerous Dave sounds right on the money. I can see averaging 19 with a 2wd running mostly highway. My truck is 4wd and generally either used to take the kids to school or to pull my camper or jeep. Neither of which is very good on mileage. Alot of these posts seem to be guys with 5 or 6 speed tranny, not autos. The auto is where the mileage drops, and especially on the 2004.5's. Not sure if mine is so bad because of the model, tires, crappy stock tranny and torque converter, or just a compliation of all the above. Like I have said, with stock tires my truck still sucks down the fuel. I love the power and just realize that I am not getting much more benefit over a gas motor other than just power. If mileage were the reasoning behind my purchase, I wouldn't have bought a truck that is nearly 8000 lbs. It's a love and hate kinda thing.
Reply
Old Sep 4, 2007 | 09:55 PM
  #50  
Spooler's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,902
Likes: 5
From: Claxton, GA
Mine is an auto and I get 16-18 MPG in the highway/city driving depending on speed. It's better than my 04 1500 Quad cab Hemi. It only got 15 MPG at best. Never could get any better than that.
Reply
Old Sep 4, 2007 | 10:16 PM
  #51  
PourinDiesel's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,352
Likes: 0
From: Southern, Indiana
Originally Posted by nvr-enuf
Guys - After extensive searching of trucks, I just bought a 2004 (maybe it's a 2004.5) with the HO motor and a 48RE transmission & 3:73 rear end.

From my understanding, the 2004.5 has a smog cat on the vehicle and that the 2004 did not have this cat.

I did a quick search on mpg and some are claiming 12 to 14 mpg for a 2004.5 where as guys with a 2004 state they get 16 to 18 mpg. Is the 2004.5 that much worse? Is so, what can be done? Can improved, less restrictive exhaust help the MPG? How much will a smarty do for me?

Thanks for all your help.

Scott

I get 17.2 mpg mixed with a huge laggy turbo.
Reply
Old Sep 19, 2007 | 10:46 PM
  #52  
kinghomes's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Don't drive with tailgate down to save MPG University Mich. wind tunnel testing determined fuel savings to be completely insignificant. Their testing did reveal however, that the tailgating being up helps hold the rearend on the grond. Improves handling and safty. My son said mythbuster shot it down as well. Saw a guy take it in the tailgate just the other day. Other driver didn't see it - got too close. May as well take it on the bumper
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2007 | 05:59 AM
  #53  
Mark Hodowanec's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
From: VA
Originally Posted by Dangerous Dave
Whoever said "drive 65 and have stock 2WD" was talking about me!
At Last someone who keeps accurate long term fuel logs like me -

Originally Posted by Dangerous Dave
My '03 is bone stock. It has a bone stock auto tranny and 3.73 rear.

It has a RK Headache rack, a cross bed and two side boxes and a Tommy Lift.

It weighs right at 8K before I get in.
Mine is a '04.5 w/ a Quad XZT & 315/70-17. Muffler & Silencer ring is MIA. It is a 6 speed & a 3.73 rear.

Mine has a toolbox in back but no headache rack or Tommy lift.

It weighs 7500 lbs before I get in.

Originally Posted by Dangerous Dave
I've kept mileage records since I got it at 24,799 and it now has 119K on it.
I've kept mileage records since I got it new and it now has 71K on it.

Originally Posted by Dangerous Dave
My average which includes highway, city, towing (not terribly heavy) and all other use. It probably spends 70% of the time on the highway.

I rarely ever floor it, and don't usually go more than 1800rpm.
My driving conditions, speed, etc. almost exactly match yours!

Originally Posted by Dangerous Dave
The average stands at 19.067 hand calculated.
My Average stands at 19.350, also hand calculated

Originally Posted by Dangerous Dave
Granted it's apples to plums as y'all are talking 2004.5

But a stock 2WD will get better mpg than a stock 4WD and MUCH better than a lifted big tired 4WD.
Mine is a 2004.5

It is not lifted, but does have 'big tires' & is a 4WD. My motivation for the big tires was to drop the revs (almost 200 RPM @ 70 MPH). There was no net gain, but there was no loss either (gain of dropping revs offset by more drag).

Without question, a 4X4 will have more aero & gear drag than a 2WD. Likewise, an auto will not be as efficient as a 6 speed.

Our MPG & driving style is identical . You pay a penalty for the auto, me for the 4WD!
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2007 | 07:55 AM
  #54  
Dangerous Dave's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
From: Shepherd, TX
I have managed to get my average up a couple tenths.

Stands at 19.278

Total miles are 122,3xx or maybe 4xx. It stays on trip most of the time.
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2007 | 08:05 AM
  #55  
kinghomes's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
I have an 04 HO 2wd 3.72 I got 19 on hwy pulling empty 1.8-2.1K trailer@74mph. I put 5k on trailer and got 14-15 at about 68mph. All this while dealing with rough idle issue? Engine has now quite working and I get -MPG while trying to start it?

Filter is clean. Lift pump 11.5 during engine off key turn?
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2007 | 08:08 AM
  #56  
kinghomes's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Is anyone driving a 2500 4speed automatic 2wd short quad cab with 3.4 rears stock. If so please forward your performance results. I would like to run at lower rpm but am afriad of blowing tran when I need to pull??
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2007 | 11:15 AM
  #57  
SSminnow's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 1
From: Pearland, TX
[QUOTE=kinghomes;1704389]Is anyone driving a 2500 4speed automatic 2wd short quad cab with 3.4 rears stock. QUOTE]

No such thing in a common rail, not stock anyways, the 3.73 and 4.10 are your only option.
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2007 | 11:17 AM
  #58  
SSminnow's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 1
From: Pearland, TX
Originally Posted by kinghomes
Engine has now quite working and I get -MPG while trying to start it?
?


What did you just say?
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2007 | 11:20 AM
  #59  
SSminnow's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 1
From: Pearland, TX
Originally Posted by wadediesel
I just can't see how some guys are saying they are getting up to 800 Miles per Tank. Mine is stock except for the Airaid.

22-24MPG seems out of reach?


They are the infamous "Big Foot" guys, you know, teh one that you never see in person, but onlly hear about it over the intenet. Don't worry, if you drive faster than 40 MPH, you too will not get 22+ MPG either, no fear, you are normal and telling the truth

In town, highway unloaded my truck is from 15-18MPG depending on how much driving I do of one or the other.
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2007 | 11:27 AM
  #60  
Pav1973's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
From: Shamokin Pa
I got around=
25-30mpg @70 highway
15-18mpg @55 on a main Road

I have noticed since I removed the Cat and muffler it is going up about 2 mpg so far,I also use cruise controll alot.

Auto,48re,3:73rear,Tonage cover,empty.

Pav
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:14 AM.