[pdjim61]

miles driven divide by gas tank gallons. best mileage was driving no more than steady 60 MPH yo will not get the best over 65 MPH, so at 70-80 it will be low twenties

Mine has never gotten better than 17 and usually closer to 15.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[abnderby]

The mpg you all are reporting says 2 things, feet with lead shoes and cruising 80+ MPH. No worries I do my share of that too. And watch the gas tank empty right out before my eyes. I did also remove the air dam/valance/chin spoiler from my SV and watched hwy mpg plummet. So if you are driving the pro-4x or you took off the air dam then your mgp will go down more as well. I liked the looks either way and truthfully prefer it on. But I would rather help garner more mpg than looks. Just me and that is ok, you do you i do me and we all happy. just thought i would share that tidbit as well. running around town it really won't make a hill of beans, but if you do enough steady hwy driving you are better with it on than off., It would be nice if they had a quick disconnect for it they you can easily do both.

 

[Frontinator]

15... uphill both ways? Town only?

 

[beaverpainting1]

Thats always a possibility, Seems odd most get about 20mpg, then one guy gets 30mpg,but maybe math isn't that persons strongpoint......

the guy that gets 30 mpg can’t count!!!

 

[abnderby]

the guy that gets 30 mpg can’t count!!!

30 mpg on highway and running 60 MPH I-95 in Florida. Did similar in my 07 4.0l w/6spd MT 28+ mpg doing 55-60 MPH highway LA to Pheonix. It is possible, if you don't drive with lead foot and keep it 55-65 you will get good gas mileage. Why is that so hard to believe?

Oh, that's right all of you drive with lead feet and only believe in one way to master the pedal. Pedal to the metal. HMMM. can't count? Well, it is simple when I get gas i take miles driven divided by gallons filled. Oh, and by the way when i do that it is on my phone calculator so if that is wrong blame apple.

Now what I did not say is, that I get 30 mpg all the time everywhere. I have clearly stated the best mpg and where highway doing 60 mph. Please read more thoroughly.

Why don't some of you that have a decent drive sometime try it out? fill your truck up to the brim on your favorite gas, zero your trip meter, drive like an older person not having to get everywhere in 2 minutes. on the highway use your cruise control at 60 MPH and enjoy the ride. At the end fill it back up and do the math. then come back and share your results. And sure, around the town putting around I get dismal gas mileage like everyone else. It is a truck with a thirsty V6 DUH.

 

[HPRob]

I will never understand people who buy a pickup truck and complain about poor fuel efficiency.

You want fuel efficient? Buy a motorcycle or a compact car.

I'm not sure people are complaining about it not being fuel efficient. My complaint, and many others, centers on the truck computed fuel mileage versus manually calculated fuel mileage. In my case the mileage computed and displayed in the instrument panel is 22.8 mpg. Manually computed mileage (miles/gallons) equals 19.5 mpg with a mix of city and highway driving. That's a difference of over three mpg - outrageous! Generally, folks with the PRO 4X model and stock tires report more accurate vehicle computed mileage than folks with the SV 4X4. The PRO 4X is delivered with a larger tire (P265/70R17) than the SV 4X4 (P265/65R17). The PRO 4X tire is about 1" taller than the SV tire which results in a longer rolled distance per revolution than the SV P265/65R17. My belief is that Nissan has programmed all the Frontier computers with the PRO 4X tire size which results in inaccurate vehicle mileage and fuel mileage calculation in the SVs. This should be easily correctable through a dealer software update to program the correct tire size. I know that Toyota will do this for owners that have installed larger offroad tires. My Nissan dealer said that they can't do it and that the truck displayed fuel mpg and my own hand calculated mpg are within the advertised range so they don't need to do anything. Vehicle miles travelled is incorrect; truck calculated mpg is off; and speedometer display is wrong. But it's all good?

 

[shift_RUSH]

Don't trust - just verify. lol Love beating dead horses, don't we? 🤨🙃

What needs to be done by every vehicle owner everywhere is to verify that the odometer is reading accurately. Until one knows the margin of error, there will always be questions as to the legitimacy of calculated fuel economy...whether it is displayed on the dash or done by hand. The Frontier's fuel economy dash display tends towards warm & fuzzy. Not all Gen 2s came w/ this dash display function. ALL Gen 3s do. Again...don't trust - just verify. Do this for several tanks of fuel to arrive at a more statistically significant quantifiable value.

 

[Frontier14]

Wow. Today I took a nice long, leisurely Sunday drive, total of a 3 hour trip, to the lake where I drove most of it manually, not using cruise, and taking a windy, hilly, 2 lane back road on the way up, and took the highway on the way back, using cruise where I could on the highway. I got 26.1 MPG on the way up and 27.2 MPG on the way back. I thought I was doing good until I read this. But also, I did notice that I used almost 1/4 tank of gas and based on miles driven I thought it should have been less overall, so I was already questioning how accurate the calculated MPG was before I saw this. New plan! Fill up, count miles driven, then divide to see what I actually get.

Oh, by the way, the truck currently shows my overall average at 20.2, and I’ve put about 700 miles on it total.

 

[shift_RUSH]

This was a Gen 2 'rule of thumb' as determined between my '15 SV and another CF'ers '19 P4X w/ both riding on factory sized tires:
SV: ODO was correct while SPEEDO was over-reporting actual velocity
P4X: ODO was over-reporting while SPEEDO was correct
Since our trucks determine speed and distance traveled off of the ABS system, it makes a lot of sense that an SV on P4X-sized tires will then have an accurate SPEEDO while then attaining an over-reporting of ODO/distance traveled.

Does this also apply to Gen 3s? A couple of you all need to compare some notes and determine whether there's anything to this.

 

[abnderby]

Wow. Today I took a nice long, leisurely Sunday drive, total of a 3 hour trip, to the lake where I drove most of it manually, not using cruise, and taking a windy, hilly, 2 lane back road on the way up, and took the highway on the way back, using cruise where I could on the highway. I got 26.1 MPG on the way up and 27.2 MPG on the way back. I thought I was doing good until I read this. But also, I did notice that I used almost 1/4 tank of gas and based on miles driven I thought it should have been less overall, so I was already questioning how accurate the calculated MPG was before I saw this. New plan! Fill up, count miles driven, then divide to see what I actually get.

Oh, by the way, the truck currently shows my overall average at 20.2, and I’ve put about 700 miles on it total.

hmmm, looks pretty close to 30 folks, so maybe I wasn't falling off my rocker after all.

 

[bajasam]

hmmm, looks pretty close to 30 folks, so maybe I wasn't falling off my rocker after all.

No you haven't fallen off your barstool.....lol. It's a fact that any of these trucks can get 30-40mpg easily for a limited distance weather it be 1/4 mile or 5 miles. But if one states "hey my truck gets 30mpg" you'd assume that that 30mpg would be repeatable 24/7 on any road in the country, tank after tank for 100K miles. As an example, I have a ski lift on a nearby mountain that has a road to it that is 25 miles long, it starts in town at an elevation of 2500 feet, the ski lift is at 9500 feet, thats a climb of 7000 feet verticle. I get less than 15mpg on the way up but over 35mpg on the 25 mile trip down the mountain. So you could say you get 35mpg or you could say I get 15mpg, there both correct, but it would seem much more accurate to measure for an extended distance (say 1000 miles) and then see what that average is.

 

[abnderby]

No you haven't fallen off your barstool.....lol. It's a fact that any of these trucks can get 30-40mpg easily for a limited distance weather it be 1/4 mile or 5 miles. But if one states "hey my truck gets 30mpg" you'd assume that that 30mpg would be repeatable 24/7 on any road in the country, tank after tank for 100K miles. As an example, I have a ski lift on a nearby mountain that has a road to it that is 25 miles long, it starts in town at an elevation of 2500 feet, the ski lift is at 9500 feet, thats a climb of 7000 feet verticle. I get less than 15mpg on the way up but over 35mpg on the 25 mile trip down the mountain. So you could say you get 35mpg or you could say I get 15mpg, there both correct, but it would seem much more accurate to measure for an extended distance (say 1000 miles) and then see what that average is.

See folks "now thats how you count, from now on you count like that!"

thx thought i was beginning to go senile

 

[abnderby]

No you haven't fallen off your barstool.....lol. It's a fact that any of these trucks can get 30-40mpg easily for a limited distance weather it be 1/4 mile or 5 miles. But if one states "hey my truck gets 30mpg" you'd assume that that 30mpg would be repeatable 24/7 on any road in the country, tank after tank for 100K miles. As an example, I have a ski lift on a nearby mountain that has a road to it that is 25 miles long, it starts in town at an elevation of 2500 feet, the ski lift is at 9500 feet, thats a climb of 7000 feet verticle. I get less than 15mpg on the way up but over 35mpg on the 25 mile trip down the mountain. So you could say you get 35mpg or you could say I get 15mpg, there both correct, but it would seem much more accurate to measure for an extended distance (say 1000 miles) and then see what that average is.

Of course now just to clarify for others out there.

you were pedal to the metal going up hill thus 15 mpg
and coasted going downhill right? thus 35 mpg

 

[bajasam]

Of course now just to clarify for others out there.

you were pedal to the metal going up hill thus 15 mpg
and coasted going downhill right? thus 35 mpg

Bingo, you got it!!

 

[GreyFox]

It took me a half a tank of gas to do my daily routines for the week. I stopped monitoring the MPG a few weeks back and just watch the actual fuel gauge now It is what it is. I'm sure it was mentioned before, but I notice the first half tank of gas on the gauge goes down quicker than the latter half. My '02 Xterra was the opposite. Not sure if it's how the tank is formed or the position of the fuel sending unit? Either way after several months of ownership, I'm used to it now. I just fill er up with regular 87 and go. Truck starts right up and rides great Country roads and highway miles slow that fuel gauge. Otherwise, I've gotten to a good driving and refueling routine.

 

[shift_RUSH]

YMMV. LOFL

 

[PoMans4x4]

Here's an example of what the lie-o-meter always levels out to on my 2022. These trips are all my 80 mile round trip work commute, which is basically all highway, with speeds up to ~75mph. When I hand calculate average MPG, fill-up to fill-up, it's usually ~21mpg. This is in winter temps with winter blend from a top tier station.

 

[Frontier14]

I filled up a few days ago and reset my trip odometer to count miles driven. I had driven 123 miles when I saw that gas was on sale so I stopped and filled up again, putting in 7.1 gallons) and did the math to calculate mileage. 123 miles/7.1 gallons = 17.32 MPG. Yeah it was pretty terrible actually. I had a lot of around town driving and a lot of short drives moving all over the lot at work (doing apartment maintenance from building to building).

I still think the “lie-ometer” has potential though. It showed I had 18.5 MPG as an average, which isn’t that far off. I kind of wonder if the overall average calculated isn’t just based on the most recent few trips that are shown when you turn the truck off.

 

[abnderby]

lie o meter or not, we have something and if you know it is consistently 2 miles off then at least you have an easy visual of what you are getting. Could it be better sure. But then most of our feet could probably be lighter too, right?

 

[Frontinator]

"Current" is not an average. The average is still off, but closer.