Truck with Highest MPG
 

Hello Everyone,

I'm new here and I really like this site. I own a 2000 Dodge Dakota 2WD 5-speed and it is approaching 185,000 miles pretty much trouble free. I am looking at purchasing a used truck with a lot less miles. I want to get a small truck, probably with a 4 cylinder and 5-speed. Does anyone know which small truck gets the best mileage without hypermiling and aeromods? I was looking at the 4 cylinder Rangers and a Toyota Tacoma. I see that the new Rangers with the 4 cylinder is rated at 28 mpg on the highway. What other trucks get 25mpg or higher?

Thanks for the help!

fueleconomy.gov lets you do side-by-side mpg comparisons.

You can also look these up in the Ecomodder garage and see how folks who are trying to save gas are doing. I'd vote for the Tacoma, since my brother and father-in-law have had 5 or 6 between them and only one failed to hit 300K miles. That one did only 180K or so...

Finding one with a 4 cylinder and a 5 speed can take some effort...

If you can get by with 2WD, a Ford Ranger is your best bet. If you need 4WD,
the Chevy Colorado / GMC Canyon are the best. (4WD Ford Rangers aren't available
with 4 cylinder).

All I need is 2WD. I've been reading the forum about the 40+mpg Ranger on this site. Very cool. This looks like the way to go for me.

I went through the same exercise this past spring and ended up with a 2010 4 cylinder Ranger. I'm averaging about 29 mpg overall so far. But this is mostly city driving. The couple of times I did have it on the highway, I had a kayak and racks on top, though it still managed about 32 mpg like this. I take the racks off when I don't need to transport my kayak, which is most of the time.

Seeing as how my f-250 gets between 25 and 30 mpg
 

I would think a smaller truck could get a LOT more mpg.
My truck is probably twice the size of a ranger! It can't be just the motor or just the diff that makes one truck get more mpg than another can it? It just doesn't seem to add up because nothing is constant. I don't know if this is worded right but I tried....

I would love to put a I6 in a ranger and
 

put a 2:1 rear in it and tall tires and see what happened. I could probably idle down the road at 65 and get 45 mpg!

Thanks for the response guys. I've been looking at the Ranger pretty hard. I drive mainly HW to work and I could probably get pretty decent mileage out of it.

Car and trailer combos work well too...

Agreed. If I had the driveway space, I'd much rather own a good car that could tow ~1500 lbs and then get 30+ mpg without even trying (Chevy Impala comes to mind).

Need to think about how much work it can do (payload and towing) as a further basis of comparison. Makes no sense to have a 30-mpg truck if it takes two trips. Or, can't carry a payload AND tow a trailer. Etc. Otherwise, why have a truck?

And spend a lot more time comparing new and used. New almost never makes sense from pure dollars and sense. If I paid less for my three year old diesel than you will for a new Ranger, and I average 22 mpg lately (and not less than 19), but can also carry over 2,800#'s in the bed and/or tow a 10k trailer . . . which of our trucks get's "better" fuel mileage? If we both drive 200k to end-of-ownership, which will have cost more, and why? (mine was used with 120k on it at 3-years; so I'll have 320k when you have 200k).

Finance, depreciation, etc are all parts of the equation. As are repairs, maintenance, taxes and insurance. The safety record as well . . nothing out there on the road has the lousy safety record of small pickups (even when adjusting for under 30 drivers).

.

My F-250 was rolled over before I got it. There are a few dents and scratches, but it still looks good. The only bent part is the front corner of the driver door.
It doesn't quite touch the weather stripping anymore. No other damage. I don't know how fast it was going when it rolled and don't care. It doesn't matter. I get almost as good of mileage in the truck as I do in the car. Sometimes better if I have some hills to coast down, or if I get to drive in town.

Depends on what fraction of the time you need to make two trips. If 99% of the time you can haul everything in one trip in a smaller truck, then the smaller truck makes sense. Otherwise, why not carry your bigger truck logic to its conclusion, and drive around in an 18-wheeler just in case you might someday need to haul that much?

If I consider a truck to be body-on-frame (No Rabbit or Omni pickups) then the best N. American truck is probably the mid '80s Ranger diesel.

I would LOVE to have an 18 wheeler for hauling wood. :eek:
Unfortunately, they cost too much all around to be practical. I pay $22.50/year to keep my truck on the road. It costs so much just to get an 18 wheeler on the road it is not worth it. I can carry a cord of wood at a time, so I don't fret about how many trips it takes. If I have a trailer along, I can carry 3 or 4 cord and then it is really efficient. If I figure even a measly 15 mpg hauling 4 cord of wood, that comes out to about 25,000 lbs. So.....1 mpg/1,667 lbs! HAHAHA that sounds bad......:eek: HAHA...comes out to $0.15/mile!!!

In reality I would probably average about 18-20 with that kind of load.:rolleyes:

I mainly use my truck to haul camping gear and mountain bike gear. I also use it for trips to the hardware store and the landscaping place. I would really like to have a small car, but I can't get doors, loads of dirt, and plywood in a hatch (unless someone knows of one that can carry this stuff). Wish I could get my hands on an 80s diesel Ranger.

You can always put a diesel in a ranger
 

with a blown up motor. See what you can find at the junk yard. Any 95+ with manual tranny should work. Pull out all the electronics and put the diesel in. You might need an adapter plate/motor mounts, but the rest should be pretty much good to go.

The questions I posed were rhetorical. I paid less for the truck than for a mini-truck, it will do more work for the same fuel, it will (even used) last easily as long, and will just possibly sell for more at the end. The maintenance, repairs, insurance, etc will be the same or less.

Economy is more than just fuel. And the price of new will pretty much NEVER offset having bought a good used one (even at reduced total miles by owner #2) in terms of fuel. A new refrigerator or A/C system can pay itself off compared to energy used, but a vehicle -- especially a truck -- will not.

A truck is a whole other proposition as many of us have IRS deductible miles. When I take that number away (tax deduction) from the purchase price of the truck I am now down to 4, not 5, figures. And the resale price has flattened out so that my loss there is minimal.

A truck with no deductible miles is one EXPENSIVE vehicle is the way to look at it, I am suggesting.

Same is true for buying another vehicle every 3-7 years, new or used, if not more so.

We'll I don't buy a car worrying about resale because I plan to keep it as long as possible. If I didn't have a small truck I would be borrowing a truck from a friend alot to haul stuff around.

Is your last name Bunyan, by any chance?

I find it pretty hard to cut & load more than a couple of pickup loads in a day, myself, and that's just cutting logs that hang over the tailgate.

We need to get GM to actually bring the Chevrolet Montana over here. Imagine this thing with the Cruze's eco package or a small diesel. I am all about it. I am so tired of hearing how a truck can only be a monster body on frame rear drive contraption. I have hauled so much in my Element it probably puts 90% of truck owners to shame.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog....1285966417.jpg

2011 Chevrolet Montana compact truck unveiled in South America — Autoblog

I've hauled enough stuff in my Gold Wing to put 90% of truck owners to shame. :rolleyes:

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r...31310002-1.jpg

I'm biased, but the Ranger is the best option. Other mini trucks have grown larger and heavier. Unfortunately, the Ranger v6's are antiquated, but the 4cyl is actually pretty nice. They just started putting it in the extended cab within the last few years. If I were to buy a newer one, I'd pick up a used 4cyl extended cab.

Not bad, but I think it needs another foot or two on the bed in order to haul 4x8 sheets of plywood, insulation, etc.

I like it. Thats about the size I need.

When it was exported to South Africa a Diesel engine sourced by Fiat was available.


Considering this beauty is an unibody, your objection to the body-on-frame with a front engine makes some sense :D
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jIcDP-_XIt...to6395_001.jpg

Range Anxiety Driving a Gas Rig

A new blog at EV World I posted today titled "Rang Anxiety Driving a Gas Rig" about towing our 5th wheel trailer to California and back to New Mexico for a tennis vacation at Indian Wells. The weather conditions, and low mpg returns gave us range anxiety even with a 36 gallon tank. I end the blog talking about the possibility of towing such a rig with an electric truck and having a trailer that provides electric assist for the towing vehicle.

Toyota T-100
 

The 4-cyl,manual 5-speed,2WD,T-100 was good for around 26.4-mpg,naked,at a steady 65-mph,on Regular Unleaded.
With the aero kit I've seen 39.9 mpg three times.
With a modern GDI engine you could multiply that by 1.15.
With a modern turbo-diesel you could multiply that by 1.3.
'Hope to break 40 next year.:p

There's a Chevy 1500 diesel in our apt complex. What are those good fer?