2.0 stock JLUR 35 mile trip to work at 27.6 mpg

[DENT1325]

I have been averaging around 20 mpg for my commute to work. 35 miles from Rowan county to uptown Charlotte mostly flat i85 and i77. Traffic runs 70 to 75 mph most of the way. Today I set my cruise to 60 and was really light on the accelerator in town to see what was possible. Trip average was 27.6 mpg. I am running 93 octane. It’s not really realistic for me to drive like this every day but wow can’t believe this big brick can do that. Give it a try let me know what you all get.

Sponsored

 

[cbrenthus]

I set my cruise to 60

This. I think most people don't realize what a difference going over 55/60 makes in fuel mileage. I used to sustain 33mpg in my 2011 Camaro SS on 301 in north florida. I also once was in my '13 Mustang GT driving up 79 to pittsbugh in a construction zone, cruise set to 55, getting sustained almost 40mpgs! I did check though when I got there and I had a pretty good tail wind, but still.

Want to see our countries collective MPGs go through the roof? Bring back the national 55mph. I don't want to see that happen, but I'm sickk of people whining about fuels consumption when I get out on I75 and you have to do 80+ just to keep up.

 

[Ralph2018JL]

I have been averaging around 20 mpg for my commute to work. 35 miles from Rowan county to uptown Charlotte mostly flat i85 and i77. Traffic runs 70 to 75 mph most of the way. Today I set my cruise to 60 and was really light on the accelerator in town to see what was possible. Trip average was 27.6 mpg. I am running 93 octane. It’s not really realistic for me to drive like this every day but wow can’t believe this big brick can do that. Give it a try let me know what you all get.

Last weekend I filled up in Colchester VT and drove through the Adirondacks to Syracuse, about 240 miles. The computer said 27.1! Add this weeks commute brought it down to 24.1, and the low fuel warning has not come on yet. 3.6L V6 with automatic.

 

[unixfool]

You guys are relying upon the trip computer figures and those things are notoriously wrong and highly optimistic. I'm sure if you do the math on your own, you're going to see much lower (and realistic) figures.

 

[Rhinozeroone]

We are averaging about 1 MPG less than the computer when we do a hand calculation. Currently averaging about 23 MPG overall with the first tank on 87 and 4 follow on tanks at 93 octane. We have been steadily improving since we got it.

 

[Ralph2018JL]

You guys are relying upon the trip computer figures and those things are notoriously wrong and highly optimistic. I'm sure if you do the math on your own, you're going to see much lower (and realistic) figures.

How much lower are your realistic figures? Or you just guessing?

 

[unixfool]

How much lower are your realistic figures? Or you just guessing?

You can answer your own questions by manually checking. It's stupid-simple to check. If you need help, there's this. I trust that over some black box telling me what it thinks I want to hear. I haven't done it with this vehicle but I've done it with various other vehicles over the past 15 years (one of those was a Mopar product, too). I'm not so gullible to believe I'm getting 27 MPG in a 4000+ lb Jeep that has a 2.0L 4-cyl engine constantly in boost to work like a 3.6L V-6.

 

[ormandj]

You can answer your own questions by manually checking. It's stupid-simple to check. If you need help, there's this. I trust that over some black box telling me what it thinks I want to hear. I haven't done it with this vehicle but I've done it with various other vehicles over the past 15 years (one of those was a Mopar product, too). I'm not so gullible to believe I'm getting 27 MPG in a 4000+ lb Jeep that has a 2.0L 4-cyl engine constantly in boost to work like a 3.6L V-6.

Trip computers are rarely off more than +-2mpg. There is no reason to continue being so hostile. We get it, you think the 2.0 is terrible and turbos eat fuel Perhaps you had a bad experience before with a small displacement turbo (I have too). Do you own the current 2.0 Jeep? Just a post or two above someone did hand calculated mileage. There is an 8 speed transmission on these vehicles, there is no reason for them to constantly be in boost, as you say. Modern turbocharged engines aren't the same as those from even ten years ago.

 

[Ralph2018JL]

You can answer your own questions by manually checking. It's stupid-simple to check. If you need help, there's this. I trust that over some black box telling me what it thinks I want to hear. I haven't done it with this vehicle but I've done it with various other vehicles over the past 15 years (one of those was a Mopar product, too). I'm not so gullible to believe I'm getting 27 MPG in a 4000+ lb Jeep that has a 2.0L 4-cyl engine constantly in boost to work like a 3.6L V-6.

I guess I should have used sarcastic font with my response

 

[VNT]

Wife has been driving it now, but I did a manual check on first tank, my calc was 24.5 Mpg based on miles vs number gallons vs evic 23. On my SRT 392, avg about 24 mpg and the Evic is with .5mpg of my manual calculations, ditto on my 5.7 in my Overland. The comp calcs are pretty accurate now.

I agree the faster one drives these bricks, the worse the fuel economy. When wife drives to work it drops to 21 mpg because she is doing highway and I know she is doing 70-75, when I get to drive on back roads on weekends, probably doign 55 or so it is getting 23sh.

 

[Rhinozeroone]

I got an anomaly last night. My trip computer showed 23.7 MPG. I filled 15.446 Gallons. and drove 333.2 miles which is 21.57 MPG. 2.1 MPG is about 10% optimistic. I'm not happy with that much error but I am still happy with the turbo. We chose the turbo for usable torque and feel and the extra range was a bonus. Hopefully we don't have that much disparity on the next fill up.

 

[DENT1325]

No way I’ll ever drive that conservatively for a whole tank to test it. I coasted when possible, accelerated very slowly and drove 15 mph slower than everyone else. I usually have a lead foot and get around 20 according to the cpu. I like to know the limits of my vehicles, did the same thing with my 392 Challenger and with the STI. I didn’t buy any of these vehicles for the gas mileage. Ha, I just brought the kids home from a nice dinner out and ended the night by hotrodding around in the acerage behind my house. I tried to jump a hill on the way back up to the house. We had a blast! Lighten up everyone and enjoy these awesome vehicles. Love it...

Sponsored