Maddison: Lower fuel consumption = more play time, and I have yet to find a gas station, let alone a working gas station on any trails.
Waggonman: That may have as much if not more to do with the whole engine tuning. Similarly Chrysler has a 3.8l V6, a 3.3l flex fuel V6, and a 4.0l V6 that they put in the town and country minivan. The 3.8 puts out nearly as much HP as the 4.0, but at a higher RPM. The 4.0 also gets 1mpg better city and 2mpg better highway mileage. The 3.3 when running gas is supposed to get the same city mpg, and 1 less highway compaired to the 4.0. Possably because it is a little underpowered for highway speeds. Unfortunately Chrysler decided to put the 3.8 into the current line of Wranglers, off roaders have been complaining about its lack of power at lower RPM's.
Beatr: The engine has 158k hard miles on it, its due for if not past due for a rebuild. Are those the rings that circle twice kind of like keyrings, if so I have been considering those, they should seal as good if not better than a double or tripple conventional ring, with the added bonuses of not having the time consuming task of setting the gap on the rings, and not increasing the gap as the engine wears.
Several of the local Auto-X guys report peak MPG in the low to mid 30's, and they are generally not easy going on the skinny pedal. It shouln't be too hard to get one into the high 30's or low 40's and still perform decent on the track.