Please delete

[Deleted member 59498]

Best I could do is 28.8 with the 2.0L turbo this summer on our 3000 mile road trip to the Grand Canyon. Lots of cruise control at highway speed helped, I think. Since then, I've been getting 26 or so with my daily commute and I'm happy with that. So far, the Wrangler has been getting better mpg than the Renegade I traded in for it. I wasn't expecting that.

That is really good.

Sponsored

 

[Flip]

Um, that’s a Bronco, this is a Jeep forum.

If it's any consolation, the Bronco goes up in flames! ?

 

[Deleted User 38384]

 

[Opus]

That is really good.

I was happy with it. And even the 26 that I'm getting now had been a pleasant surprise. With my commute I go two full weeks between fill-ups and that's okay with me.

 

[Opus]

I mean I knew this was going to be a controversial thread. But I was hoping at least one person would actually read my first post, and then provide the two things I asked for as proof.

View attachment 806025

Does everybody just think that the dash of the Wrangler is super accurate?

I mean if we're providing BS numbers provided from the dash of the Wrangler, why not just edit them. Photoshop them. I mean same difference at that rate. They're not accurate, what does it matter at that point really.

I guess I've assumed that if there was something inherently wrong with the onboard mpg calculator that made it seem like we were getting better mpg than we actually were... somebody smarter and more litigious than I would have figured it out by now and sued Stellantis over it...

 

[MayThe4x4BWU]

I mean I knew this was going to be a controversial thread. But I was hoping at least one person would actually read my first post, and then provide the two things I asked for as proof.

View attachment 806025

Does everybody just think that the dash of the Wrangler is super accurate?

I mean if we're providing BS numbers provided from the dash of the Wrangler, why not just edit them. Photoshop them. I mean same difference at that rate. They're not accurate, what does it matter at that point really.

It isn't, hence my photoshop post ? Not that I get 40+ mpg ?, but the 20ish mpg I've gotten (at best) doesn't add up to the mileage I seem to get, unless that thing is also misreporting...

You may have actually convinced me to go do the long math on this just for the heck of it lol

 

[aldo98229]

Today did a road trip of 277 miles in the Fiat 124 Spider; minus 11 of those miles that were on the ferry. Burned half a tank, which is a whole of 5 gallons. It works out to be 43 MPG.

Shot of Mount Baker from the ferry crossing this morning

 

[Zandcwhite]

I don't get how this is hard to understand.

If you weren't already aware, the 4xe's are horrendously inefficient when compared to what they're being advertised as. The actual MPGs you are achieving with a 4xe are lower than the numbers you would get with an EcoDiesel or a 2.0 Turbo.


The only time the 4xe's are efficient is when you improperly calculate the MPG's or blindly trust what the dash says.

Whenever you want to come back to reality, you should watch this video:

I don't care if it gets 10mpg in gas only mode, if they drive 26mi, 25 of that is all electric. How hard is that to understand. At most they'd use a tenth of a gallon to go 26 miles or an average of...260 mpg.

 

[Deleted User 38384]

 

[Zandcwhite]

I like you in all @Opus , but this right here just tells me that clearly no one read my initial post. I've since changed it because this threat has become a joke unfortunately.

View attachment 806031

Hey look guys I drove 206.9 mi, and I got 40.3 MPGs on that trip.

View attachment 806032

Oh wait, never mind...

View attachment 806033

How much more horribly inaccurate do you need it to be?

I'm still trying to wrap my head around a "95% highway" trip that averaged just 41 mph, the tractors around here drive that fast?

 

[Deleted User 38384]

I don't care if it gets 10mpg in gas only mode, if they drive 26mi, 25 of that is all electric. How hard is that to understand. At most they'd use a tenth of a gallon to go 26 miles or an average of...260 mpg.

Your logic is this:
I got 260 mpgs and I only had to drive 25 mi to do it.

If we're just pulling numbers out of our butt today, bro I just got 6,141 MPGs.

 

[Opus]

I like you in all @Opus , but this right here just tells me that clearly no one read my initial post. I've since changed it because this threat has become a joke unfortunately.

View attachment 806031

Hey look guys I drove 206.9 mi, and I got 40.3 MPGs on that trip.

View attachment 806032

Oh wait, never mind...

View attachment 806033

How much more horribly inaccurate do you need it to be?

I'll be honest, @Tredsdert, I've never really understood the "old school" way of calculating mileage and I'll be the first to admit that math has never been my forte. If it was, I doubt I'd be driving a Wrangler...

 

[Deleted User 38384]

I'm still trying to wrap my head around a "95% highway" trip that averaged just 41 mph, the tractors around here drive that fast?

I got 10,686 MPGs.

 

[Deleted User 38384]

@Zandcwhite

 

[Deleted User 38384]

Well... time to kill some puppies!!

Sponsored