Pickup topper is 3 inches higher than cab top - ideas?

[bestclimb]

How fast do you cruse? How much time in stop and go?

[Saskwatchian]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

If an F150 V8 4x4 used only for hauling and/or towing gets better than 16, then I'd say it is too bad...

Well 4x4 Rangers with the SOHC 4.0L V6 get notoriously poor fuel economy even with standard sized tires. The fact that a smaller truck burnt more fuel than a full sized F150 was one of Fords excuses for discontinuing them in NA. He is on-par with the EPA combined number despite the big meats.


Come on, give me at least 2.5/4

[Frank Lee]

2.25!

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Saskwatchian

Well 4x4 Rangers with the SOHC 4.0L V6 get notoriously poor fuel economy even with standard sized tires. The fact that a smaller truck burnt more fuel than a full sized F150 was one of Fords excuses for discontinuing them in NA. He is on-par with the EPA combined number despite the big meats.


Come on, give me at least 2.5/4

I visited with a guy with a 2WD Ranger in Dona Ana,New Mexico.He was reporting 28 MPG HWY actual.He'd worn out an Isuzu pickup which he said was good for 29 MPG.
Looks like there is fruit to pluck!

[Smurf]

I can personally vouch for an Isuzu 2WD doing 40MPG at 60MPH.

And that was gas with only a four speed manual. With a 5th gear, would have been quite impressive.

[Saskwatchian]

Originally Posted by aerohead

I visited with a guy with a 2WD Ranger in Dona Ana,New Mexico.He was reporting 28 MPG HWY actual.He'd worn out an Isuzu pickup which he said was good for 29 MPG.
Looks like there is fruit to pluck!

Completely different beasts. The 4-bangers in the 2wd models were designed with fuel efficiency in mind, and are very good in that respect. Ford was claiming to have the most fuel efficient truck on the market with the 2wd ranger. The V6 on the other hand is a rock solid engine that works very well except that it burns a lot of fuel. So much so that it burnt more in a ranger than the new 3.7L in a 4x4 F150


There are many things that can be done to make sdecoman's truck more fuel efficient but there is no point if it can then no-longer get him where he wants to go.

[Varn]

I frequently listen to semi rigs as the pass by. Yes I drive 55 mph. The quietest ones in particular have a smooth junction between the trailer and the cab. Frequently they are very well matched and have have smooth rounded contours. at the front. They also have strakes between the back of the cab and the trailer wheels.

I can only assume that quiet equals efficient.

BTW my 99 Ford mini van with 170,000 miles has the 3.8 engine in it. I see 27mpg many times on the ultragauge.

[sid]

Just some points of reference for comparison:

My present Ranger is a 2.3 L 4 cylinder and I get about 30 mpg around town.

My last Ranger was a 3.0 L 6 cylinder 4WD and I got about 21 mpg around town, 25 mpg on the highway.

I would expect the 4.0 L to be worse than this, but don't know how much.

None of my vehicles have had much ecomodding done to them, just the way I drive.