Hello Everyone (student with Mustang LX 2.3L 14-18 mpg looking for help)

[UltArc]

One small concern from someone with a little experience with oils, be careful putting a synthetic oil in your engine. Newer vehicles are almost always fine, but older vehicles can start leaking oil pretty bad. Oen it is with vehicles that are prone to have that problem, but before one switches oil to synthetic on a 10+ year old car, be careful.

Also, old age can do this, too. Such as a rusted oil pan, but I live in a place with a rough winter.

So it is a good idea, but in case this wasn't mentioned, I thought to include it. I didn't read the second page through the fifth, just first and last.

[Grant-53]

The Honda PCX 125cc EFI scooter is rated at 110 mpg and costs $3400 with ABS as an option. A homemade fairing and some extra lights would be helpful. I would seriously consider making the Mustang a restoration project for a student auto body class at the local community college as funds are available. The car should be capable of 30 mpg and aero mods plus hypermilling could yield twice that. A bike motor and fairing may allow you to go 30 mph if legal. Calculate the value of your time and the cost of the bike at 200 mpg and 300 mpg with a good fairing system. Welcome to the mix. What's with Frank? Spring fever?

[Allch Chcar]

Originally Posted by Christ

When that engine wears out, Some Rangers came with a milder version of the 2.3 that has better emissions and 8 spark plugs (4 in the exhaust ports), and a 1.9 will also bolt in place of your existing 2.3, as will a 3.0V6. The added torque of the 3.0 will give you cruising power at much lower RPM, and may or may not give you a chance to get better FE (I'm gonna say no, though.)

My ex's father is getting 22-24 in his Ranger under "normal" driving, that has a 3.0 EFI in it. I'm not sure if there was a carb version of the 3.0, but AFAIK, the 2.8 carb will also bolt up, but I'm not positive on that.

Both the Ranger 2.3L and the Mustang 2.3L had twin spark plugs in '93. The Mustang got the new head in '91. I had a 2.3L Ranger with a 5spd and it got 25 highway and 19-20 mpg on a rural paper route. The 3.0L Vulcan gets crap for fuel economy from what I've heard from Ranger owners, nothing like the 4 banger. The Lima 2.3L was basically the same engine until they increased the displacement to 2.5L in '96 when they converted it to OBDII and was still used with minor changes until MY 2001.5 when they switched over to the DOHC "Duratec." The Ranger got the new aluminum engine 4 years before the Focus did.

I have a '91 Mustang GT now but in retrospect I should have waited for a 2.3L Mustang. My first tank was mostly highway and I only managed 16mpg, last tank was all city and 11mpg. I'm just glad I haven't had a commute, I've owned it for 3 months and only filled it 3 times, once when I bought it.

[Mustang Dave]

I should have waited for a 2.3L Mustang.

Or a 2005+ V-6

[UltArc]

Originally Posted by Grant-53

The Honda PCX 125cc EFI scooter is rated at 110 mpg and costs $3400 with ABS as an option. A homemade fairing and some extra lights would be helpful. I would seriously consider making the Mustang a restoration project for a student auto body class at the local community college as funds are available. The car should be capable of 30 mpg and aero mods plus hypermilling could yield twice that. A bike motor and fairing may allow you to go 30 mph if legal. Calculate the value of your time and the cost of the bike at 200 mpg and 300 mpg with a good fairing system. Welcome to the mix. What's with Frank? Spring fever?

Am I reading this right, you believe this Mustang can be capable of 30 mpg? Before mods? 60 after?

I am going to have to check fuelly, but Mustang Dave and the White Pony work HARD to get there, and I have to really push it, and we are more efficient with less wear and tear.

My 95/6 Escort, three door, with 40k miles couldn't get 30 regularly, I must be misreading this somehow.

Originally Posted by Mustang Dave

Or a 2005+ V-6

Or a 2011+ V6. Almost 42 mpg on my way to work, yesterday. I wish my exhuast didn't sound SO good.

[Allch Chcar]

Originally Posted by UltArc

Am I reading this right, you believe this Mustang can be capable of 30 mpg? Before mods? 60 after?

I am going to have to check fuelly, but Mustang Dave and the White Pony work HARD to get there, and I have to really push it, and we are more efficient with less wear and tear.

It's capable of 30mpg stock. But you have to go easy on it.

Checkout the original MPG.
1993 Mustang 2.3L AT

And there are only two 4 banger Mustangs on Fuelly.
The only one with more than 1k miles seems to consistently get 24-29mpg. Link

[UltArc]

Originally Posted by Allch Chcar

It's capable of 30mpg stock. But you have to go easy on it.

Checkout the original MPG.
1993 Mustang 2.3L AT

And there are only two 4 banger Mustangs on Fuelly.
The only one with more than 1k miles seems to consistently get 24-29mpg. Link

I see your point as to it being possible to get 30. I think for myself, to not hold up traffic, and not take an excessive amount of time to get somewhere, it wouldn't happen.

I mean, brand new they are saying 29 on the highway. I am supposed to get 29 highway, and I saw 31-34 stock. With all the years passed, and being an auto, I don't think he will see those numbers completely stock, no eco modifications. My 95 auto was terrible at being efficient and changing when I wanted it to, and it was in an Escort. I could only imagine the Mustang being worse. Possible under perfect circumstances and not having any social traffic obligations? Yes. Probable? No.

Mustang Dave, what do you think of him being able to bang out 30 mpg?

[Mustang Dave]

I'd say it's possible, but unlikely without discipline and attention to detail.

A lot of my friends are really impressed that I've been able to squeeze 30s and 31s out of a Mustang with an EPA combined estimate of 20 MPG. But most of them are not interested in trying to get better fuel economy with their own vehicles. The discipline and attention to detail are "too much trouble". A lot of them don't even know what kind of fuel economy they're getting because logging their fuel consumption is "too much trouble". To some, driving the speed limit is "too much trouble".

To me, it's a fun challenge.

Once a co-worker asked me, "Why don't all Mustangs get that kind of gas mileage?"
I said, " 'Cause I'm not drivin' 'em!"

I wish the OP the best of luck in improving his fuel economy.

On edit, the reason the fuel log for my truck only goes back to 2003, and not 1996 (when I bought it) was because adding all those fuel log entries seemed like "too much trouble".