Mpg

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 30, 2006 | 04:15 PM
  #1  
RED WING NUT's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,061
Likes: 0
From: Detroit Rock City
Unhappy Mpg

This post is my personal experience. This is not an endorsement nor a slam of any product.
My truck is an '04 regular cab 4x4 5.4. All of my driving is city driving.
When my truck was new, I could get almost 14 mpg driving relatively slow. For the last 6 months I have had an Xcal2 with 87 performance, 89 performance and 93 performance tunes. From the first tank of gas with the Xcal2, I've had a decrease in mpg no matter which tune I use. For the last couple of the months I have been using the 89 performance tune. I was getting around 11.7-12 mpg. Then I tried using the 'keep it under 2000 rpms' method that some people say to use. On that tank I got 12.7 mpg. Then I switched to the stock tune and drove normal, no hot rodding and no grannying. On that tank I got 13.7 mpg.
I always read on here about people that have an increase in mpgs with the Xcal2. Unfortunately that's not my experience.
 
Reply
Old Apr 30, 2006 | 04:53 PM
  #2  
chester8420's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,835
Likes: 0
From: Vienna, Georgia
Originally Posted by RED WING NUT
This post is my personal experience. This is not an endorsement nor a slam of any product.
My truck is an '04 regular cab 4x4 5.4. All of my driving is city driving.
When my truck was new, I could get almost 14 mpg driving relatively slow. For the last 6 months I have had an Xcal2 with 87 performance, 89 performance and 93 performance tunes. From the first tank of gas with the Xcal2, I've had a decrease in mpg no matter which tune I use. For the last couple of the months I have been using the 89 performance tune. I was getting around 11.7-12 mpg. Then I tried using the 'keep it under 2000 rpms' method that some people say to use. On that tank I got 12.7 mpg. Then I switched to the stock tune and drove normal, no hot rodding and no grannying. On that tank I got 13.7 mpg.
I always read on here about people that have an increase in mpgs with the Xcal2. Unfortunately that's not my experience.
Yeah. Just goes to show, that if ford could increase mileage by chipping or retuning their trucks, they would.

Granny it with the stock tune and you might get 15.2 mpg. It's my personal best!!! I drove like a corpse for a day and kept it under 2000 rpm and under 70mph.
 
Reply
Old Apr 30, 2006 | 04:54 PM
  #3  
Krohbar's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,141
Likes: 1
From: HUSKER COUNTRY, USA
Last tank on 87 Max was 14.72 mpg. I ran between 12.5 - 14 mpg before the XCal2. I would only get about 14 if I had any signifigant highway time. Did you datalog yet? (I haven't yet, so MT, don't shoot me, I'm gonna get the AF1 later this year...) I really have no idea, just putting letters on the page...

Next tank I'm switching to the 91 Max and see how that runs.
 
Reply
Old Apr 30, 2006 | 06:38 PM
  #4  
gobra's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 798
Likes: 0
not trying to start anything here, but i picked up almost 2 mpg with the edge (premium vs superchips premium). This is similar to other claims made by other edge owners. The "majority" of responses back by xcal2 owners (TP and others) that i have seen is the same or worse mpg. There have been a few better mpg claims by xcal2 owners but that doesnt seem to be the trend, imho...
Im "sure" that there will be plenty of replies to refute or baxk up my "highly" unscientific analysis. But that is what this forum is about anyway....
 
Reply
Old Apr 30, 2006 | 07:14 PM
  #5  
jpdadeo's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 5,409
Likes: 1
From: Sunny FL
I get a solid 16mpg local driving; flooring it at will. That’s about a 1mpg increase over stock
 
Reply
Old Apr 30, 2006 | 08:47 PM
  #6  
FX4ME2's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,156
Likes: 0
From: S.E. Michigan
There are several factors that need to be figured out before i would blame anyone for bad mileage. Intake, exhaust, Fuel blend, driving habits, maintenance, and did you datalog. Datalog is probably the most important thing to do. I went down to Troyers and had my truck dyno tuned/datalogged. That is where he found problems with my air fuels. This goes to show that these trucks can be off from the get go. I do recall another member having bad mileage and his truck needed some adjustment and his truck picked up like 3 mpg's after that. Call Troyer.
 
Reply
Old Apr 30, 2006 | 09:04 PM
  #7  
RED WING NUT's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,061
Likes: 0
From: Detroit Rock City
Originally Posted by FX4ME2
There are several factors that need to be figured out before i would blame anyone for bad mileage. Intake, exhaust, Fuel blend, driving habits, maintenance, ...
Once again, not 'blaming' anyone, just posting my experience.
1. Stock intake
2. Stock exhaust
3. Good 'Citgo' fuel for ALL tanks run with Xcal tunes, Cheap 87 octane from Sam's Club for stock tune.
4. Driving habits. Look at first post.
5. Maintenance. Truck only has 13k miles on it. Oil changed every 3000. What other maintenance needs to be done in that mileage?
 
Reply

Trending Topics

Old Apr 30, 2006 | 10:12 PM
  #8  
gonecampin's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
From: Columbus, Ohio
Hey Red Wing FWIW my truck got 13 to 14 until 30,000 miles. Then I was able to get 15-15.5 if I tried. But NEVER before it had 30,000 miles on it.
 
Reply
Old Apr 30, 2006 | 10:46 PM
  #9  
FX4ME2's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,156
Likes: 0
From: S.E. Michigan
Originally Posted by RED WING NUT
Once again, not 'blaming' anyone, just posting my experience.
1. Stock intake
2. Stock exhaust
3. Good 'Citgo' fuel for ALL tanks run with Xcal tunes, Cheap 87 octane from Sam's Club for stock tune.
4. Driving habits. Look at first post.
5. Maintenance. Truck only has 13k miles on it. Oil changed every 3000. What other maintenance needs to be done in that mileage?
Hey Red Wing, My Bad, i meant anything not anyone. What are your feelings on getting an intake and exhaust? These go hand and hand with tuning. Maintenance should not be an issue with that mileage. Fuel blends are a factor, the refineries are switching formulas now and the winter fuel blends should be disapearing now, and that will change mpg's. Datalogging is a must also. You might have something way off that needs to be corrected. Even you could have a bad o2 sensor too and that would show up in the results of datalogging. call troyer for help with this too.
 
Reply
Old Apr 30, 2006 | 11:11 PM
  #10  
cottonhead's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
nevermind.
 
Reply
Old May 1, 2006 | 01:41 PM
  #11  
Rochester's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
From: Detroit, Michigan
I purchased an edge. Set it on level two, and drove the same. The gas mileage is identical to stock. I do drive a little more aggressive now though. I am in the Detroit area so I’m sure we are on the same type of fuel. I get a very consistent 14.5 –15.0 city & 15.0 – 16.0 hwy. I have no other performance mods. (Except my K&N, which is not installed and has been sitting in my garage since December. Maybe this weekend I will put it on) :o

Oh, I have a 5.4, 3.73 rear, FX4 Scab, 87 Octane.
 
Reply
Old May 1, 2006 | 01:43 PM
  #12  
vader716's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,079
Likes: 0
From: Pikesville, MD
I've not a slight .1 to .2 on normal driving, granted that may be offset by the heavier foot (even when I try not to).

Only on my first tank of 93 though. Time will tell.

Didnt really buy it expected the MPG increase though
 
Reply
Old May 1, 2006 | 02:39 PM
  #13  
RED WING NUT's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,061
Likes: 0
From: Detroit Rock City
Originally Posted by vader716
Didnt really buy it expected the MPG increase though
Me either. Didn't think it would get worse, though. Just pointing out that no matter which tune I use or how much I drive like a granny, I get worse mileage with any of the Xcal tunes over the stock tune.
 
Reply
Old May 1, 2006 | 02:58 PM
  #14  
Bluejay's Avatar
Global Moderator &
Senior Member
20 Year Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 26,080
Likes: 85
From: Burleson/Athens/Brownsboro, TX
Originally Posted by RED WING NUT
This post is my personal experience. This is not an endorsement nor a slam of any product.
My truck is an '04 regular cab 4x4 5.4. All of my driving is city driving.
When my truck was new, I could get almost 14 mpg driving relatively slow. For the last 6 months I have had an Xcal2 with 87 performance, 89 performance and 93 performance tunes. From the first tank of gas with the Xcal2, I've had a decrease in mpg no matter which tune I use. For the last couple of the months I have been using the 89 performance tune. I was getting around 11.7-12 mpg. Then I tried using the 'keep it under 2000 rpms' method that some people say to use. On that tank I got 12.7 mpg. Then I switched to the stock tune and drove normal, no hot rodding and no grannying. On that tank I got 13.7 mpg.
I always read on here about people that have an increase in mpgs with the Xcal2. Unfortunately that's not my experience.
The risk of worse gas mileage is one of the reasons I have not purchased one. Also, since I got the reflash at about 3000 miles, my truck runs great. I am sure a tune could get a little more umph out of it, but not sure where I would use it and I get fantastic mileage out of it. Just afraid I would spend the money and wish I had not done so. However, I do like all the guages that the Edge offers. been able to resist the temptation so far.
 
__________________
Jim
Reply
Old May 1, 2006 | 04:29 PM
  #15  
kr1mson k1ng's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
From: My House
Maybe the reason you Edge owners are getting 2mpg gains is because you're running lean.

Trust Troyer!
 
Reply



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:48 AM.