Nissan Frontier Forum banner
1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So on the highway going about 70 mph I average just under 27 and coming off I actually hit 27.0, that’s the highest I ever got my mileage. The only thing I did was that a K&N filter but I don’t think that made much of a difference if any. I typically average around 19 sometimes a little less if there’s traffic. But I have a pretty light foot
Car Speedometer Vehicle Tachometer Odometer

Land vehicle Vehicle Car Speedometer Odometer
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Looks like since he filled the tank, it wouldn’t jump that from 26.5 to 27.0 after only one mile if you drove it off a cliff. There’s only a quarter of a tank used too.
I specifically said that I average 19 miles per gallon or less, this was just on a 30 mile highway trip, I was just saying I never saw it get this high.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
So on the highway going about 70 mph I average just under 27 and coming off I actually hit 27.0, that’s the highest I ever got my mileage. The only thing I did was that a K&N filter but I don’t think that made much of a difference if any. I typically average around 19 sometimes a little less if there’s traffic. But I have a pretty light foot View attachment 356126
View attachment 356125
No I average 19 miles per gallon, all I was saying is I’ve never seen it get up to 27 miles per gallon, this was just from a 30 mile highway trip
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Even with the computer calibration being 2-3mpg generous that's still really good mpg for a truck. On a recent 300 mile road trip I was reading 28+ when drafting behind an 18wheeler. I was curious if the sensors would actually measure the drag difference and sure enough when I pulled away from the back of the truck my mpg immediate dropped to 27. I wanted to get closer and try for 29mpg but not when the wife is with me. 😁
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,929 Posts
I wonder how many accidents will be caused by that little MPG display in the gauge cluster. I can already see that for some its like a little video game for them to see how high of a number they get, even taking pictures of it while trying to drive at 70mph on a busy hi-way. And it's in no way representative of the actual mileage your truck gets. And to think the government is worried about talking on a cellphone while driving is dangerous, now they can come up with a new traffic violation "Driving while playing with your instruments".
 

·
Registered
2022 Frontier S 4x4
Joined
·
399 Posts
Dude, seriously. I think about that a lot… I play games with myself trying to keep that blue bar pegged out to the right. I need to stop that. That and I need to cancel my XM radio subscription, I’m constantly reading what’s on there, and I’m a channel flipper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
I wanted to get closer and try for 29mpg but not when the wife is with me. 😁
Getting closer can actually drop your mileage behind an 18 wheeler. The reason is that the trailer is about as high off the ground as your hood. Air rushes in from the sides and creates a back wind from under the trailer to fill the vacuum behind the truck. As a result, if you get into this back wind, you will get more headwind than if you were out in front of the truck.

The vacuum that develops behind the trailer gets closest to the ground about 5 to 10 time the height of the trailer. So if the top of the trailer is 11 feet off the ground, then you want to be 55 to 110 feet behind the trailer. Somewhere between the two distances but usually closer to the rear part is the ideal.

If you ever drove an under powered car with poor aerodynamics, you could actually feel the sweet spot and it is a little further back than you would think. I used to have a 79 Dodge Colt with the 1.4L engine and 8 speed transmission (dual 4 speed) and in the high range (econo) that I used to drive between Memphis and Norfolk, VA when I was in the Navy. In clear air, it would average 37 mpg as measured by miles between gas statins and gallons to fill, no computer in the dash. If I got into the sweet spot for a majority of a leg on one of these trips, and I often did, it would get 47 mpg.

If I got too close, I'd almost have to floor it to keep that position but if I fell back into the sweet spot, I could feel the truck dragging me along. If I fell back to far, it took a lot of gas to catch up. I would actually change lanes to catch up because of the wind that comes off the top of the truck. I haven't had a vehicle since that I could feel the sweet spot in.

Edit: trucks did not have side skirts back then. The side skirts may change everything because there should be less wind under the truck and thus the vacuum that is generated behind the truck may be closer to the ground. I don't know for sure but that would be my guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
707 Posts
So on the highway going about 70 mph I average just under 27 and coming off I actually hit 27.0, that’s the highest I ever got my mileage. The only thing I did was that a K&N filter but I don’t think that made much of a difference if any. I typically average around 19 sometimes a little less if there’s traffic. But I have a pretty light foot View attachment 356126
View attachment 356125
What's more realistic is posting the TRIP screenshot, showing miles traveled, time used, and actual average MPG of those miles traveled.

Someone else could say they got 29MPG, and that could have been for 5 miles @ 50mph on level ground.

Posting that screen is basically useless for actual/average mpg. But if it makes you feel good.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benchimus

·
Registered
Joined
·
707 Posts
Looks like since he filled the tank, it wouldn’t jump that from 26.5 to 27.0 after only one mile if you drove it off a cliff. There’s only a quarter of a tank used too.
GOOD CATCH! Fuel level appears the same. But you're right, actual AVERAGE MPG would not have increased/decreased after only 1 mile (however, he did go from 67 to 7 mph in that 1 mile, which would hike the mpg UP.......BUT we still do not know how many miles he had already driven when he took that screen shot.) Like I said, that display is actually useless for mpg bragging rights.
Posting the TRIP screen is much more realistic. MJDEAN89, reset your TRIP mpg, come back in 100 miles, and then post a screen shot. 100% chance won't be anywhere close.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,998 Posts
Getting closer can actually drop your mileage behind an 18 wheeler. The reason is that the trailer is about as high off the ground as your hood. Air rushes in from the sides and creates a back wind from under the trailer to fill the vacuum behind the truck. As a result, if you get into this back wind, you will get more headwind than if you were out in front of the truck.

The vacuum that develops behind the trailer gets closest to the ground about 5 to 10 time the height of the trailer. So if the top of the trailer is 11 feet off the ground, then you want to be 55 to 110 feet behind the trailer. Somewhere between the two distances but usually closer to the rear part is the ideal.

If you ever drove an under powered car with poor aerodynamics, you could actually feel the sweet spot and it is a little further back than you would think. I used to have a 79 Dodge Colt with the 1.4L engine and 8 speed transmission (dual 4 speed) and in the high range (econo) that I used to drive between Memphis and Norfolk, VA when I was in the Navy. In clear air, it would average 37 mpg as measured by miles between gas statins and gallons to fill, no computer in the dash. If I got into the sweet spot for a majority of a leg on one of these trips, and I often did, it would get 47 mpg.

If I got too close, I'd almost have to floor it to keep that position but if I fell back into the sweet spot, I could feel the truck dragging me along. If I fell back to far, it took a lot of gas to catch up. I would actually change lanes to catch up because of the wind that comes off the top of the truck. I haven't had a vehicle since that I could feel the sweet spot in.

Edit: trucks did not have side skirts back then. The side skirts may change everything because there should be less wind under the truck and thus the vacuum that is generated behind the truck may be closer to the ground. I don't know for sure but that would be my guess.
I used to do this in my old shitbox Chevy Cavalier. You could feel the buffeting and if you snuck in just a few feet closer you could feel it smooth out. I would run the tourque app and set the engine % and sure enough, I'd see the engine using a little less power. As you mentioned, it was much further back than you thought it would be.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,998 Posts
What's more realistic is posting the TRIP screenshot, showing miles traveled, time used, and actual average MPG of those miles traveled.

Someone else could say they got 29MPG, and that could have been for 5 miles @ 50mph on level ground.

Posting that screen is basically useless for actual/average mpg. But if it makes you feel good.....
This. You always get great readings filling up on road trips. Warm engine, fill and get right on the interstate....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
707 Posts
Well sheeeet I can play this game too. Only hand calculated full tank averages mean anything.
View attachment 356159
That screen shot really doesn't mean anything either. That 26MPG could have been achieved over 20 miles or 200 or 2,000. Up for guesses?
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top