I don't believe half the posts in here. Those mileage numbers seem insane for old, high mileage trucks like that. I think their speedos are all outta whack or something from any number of changes they've made.

I like people bumping old threads like this so I can read them. No way I'd ever find or see them otherwise.

 

The previous MPG claims do seem high overall, but probably not all of them are impossible to achieve. My newly purchased '95 F150 XL Longbed with dual tanks, 5 speed, highway gears, a Dynomax catback and K&N drop in filter would get 19 mpg highway at 60 mph in 4th gear. Set cruise at 60 mph in 5th gear and mpg would drop to 17. I would consistently get 14 city.

I purchased a '94 Lightning in 2009 and drove it from OK to AR, and I received 17.7 mpg at 60-65 mph. This was with a slipping transmission, factory 4.10 gears, factory 17" wheels/tire size, 2 loose plug wires, one loose plug, two 40 series FM mufflers and a fab'd CAI with a dirty 11" cone filter. Of course, this was on 93 octane, non Ethanol blend fuel. The best mpg since then, has been 15.3 on 93 Octane E-blend, and driving 60 mph to and from work.

 

what gears do you have???



I like the bump by the way

 

My 1991 Eddie Bauer Bronco, 5.0 with an E4OD, 3.55 gears and 11.50x 31 LTX tires gets ME and my girl about 17-18 town driving. We both can get close to 22 hiway. The girls mother gets about 13 town and she's lucky to break 15 hiway. It's all about the driver when you have little power pulling a heavy load. I never let the tach go over 1800 RPMS. Mom has the old 5.0 sounding like a vacuum cleaner. Truth be known the truck is a land slug and driving it hard gets you no where except to a gas station quicker. But it will go places in 4x4 most folks won't or can't walk. Locking axles help a lot.

 

Got to call BS on that. No one is getting >20, or even 20 on the highway with the 300/6. The '87-96 era F150, the best fuel mileage combo was the 302/5.0 with the auto overdrive tranny.

The 6 was a good truck motor for working, had good torque, not a fuel mileage motor. I owned several.

 

With the right tranny and axle a 2wd 300/6 can get up to 25 if driven carefully, using non-ethanol gas.

 

I dont believe that. Unless you are driving down an 8% grade the entire way. And I have owned several of them.

You can think that all you want, but you are wrong. And it's disingenuous to even be spreading rumors like that.

To get anywhere close, you would also have to pull the cats, have an obnoxiously loud exhaust, different throttle body, etc

These engines just do not have the ability to produce decent mileage. That's why Ford gave up on them in 1996...

The old pushrod 302's and 351's had more possibilities, especially the roller motors, but not the 300/6

 

Just because none of yours got close doesn't mean that there aren't any out there that do. I'm not spreading any rumors.

 

I bought my '88 F150 w/302 five speed way back in 2000 (the good ol days). It had about 140,000 miles on it. Funny how I thought it was old then when I look at it now. It would get a solid 22mpg on the highway with an ATV in the bed. Gas was certainly better back then. I think age is getting to it also as mpg is down to 15 on a good day. Down on power also. It's at 240,000 miles now. I actually came here to make a post when I found this thread. I am curious if the catalytic converter could be clogging up. The older she gets, the slower we go.

 

I used to have a 96 5.0 with 3.55 gears 2wd longbox and drove it back and forth 135km a day goin 125km/h on hi way and bit of town driving, i would get 22mpg canadian. weird thing is when went into the mountains and back the 2 times it got better then it ever got 24mpg canadian, also had a hard cover on most of the time. still got a 93 5.0 same but supercab short box and it best i think was around 20 canadian.