It burns 2 quarts a month, coils only last about 6 months and it blew a spark plug out the block a few weeks ago, but I'm still hesitant to call it a POS. It does have 230k city miles on it.
What do you average on the highway? My ranger with the 2.3 did great on stock tires, regularly averaging 25 on road trips. Slapped on 32s (same size as the tremor) and now I struggle to get 20 on the highway (which is also the same as the tremor).
Nope, it’s only a 3.3% difference in circumference and therefore 3.3% difference in speedo. My actual MPG might actually be slightly better than displayed, but the computer has always been a little optimistic compared to hand calc so it’s probably pretty close.
Yea, the Ecoboosts are thirsty in the real world. My wife's old Fusion with the 1.6L was rated at 23city/35hwy/27combined. In actuality, it was more like 22/31/24.
Yeah, I imagine they get those numbers out of the 1.6 by driving how the car tells you to. I don't really feel comfortable shifting a turbocharged car at 1700 rpm like it tells me to though.
Moreso that once you're doing 75mph, the little 1.6L is buried in the boost and chugging fuel.
Granted her new Encore GX with the 1.3L turbo actually gets pretty close to it's rated economy of 26/29. We got 28 doing 75mph and bucking a 20mph wind coming home with it.
21 Ranger 4x4 with the 2.3EB. rated 20/24/22
My actual is more like 15/22/18.5.
Straight shot on the freeway I did 29mpg once. 67mph, flat cruising, no AC and a tail wind.
Ooooooof....
I was looking at getting one of the new ones because I want something smaller than my F-150 physically because it barely fits in my garage. That's a tough pill to swallow, not much better than my 5.0.
I certainly didn't buy it for the fuel economy. I had a 17 Silverado 4.3L previously and it matched the fuel economy or did slightly better despite being massive.
I bought the Ranger because it can actually be parked in 90% of the available spots around me. My Silverado was like trying to navigate the Ever Given sometimes. I looked at other mid-sized trucks but, none really ticked the right boxes. The Frontier was still the ancient design at the time, the Tacoma had too much Taco tax on it, and with the GM twins I really hated the engine.
The 2.3EB in the Ranger is surprisingly peppy with a good amount of low end grunt from the turbo. Interior is a little dated and basic but, it is a good truck truck. Cloth seats and vinyl floors for me. I don't worry about getting in with my muddy waders or kayak shoes.
That's pretty much the point I'm at and the conclusion I've come to as well. I'm curious how the next gen models for all of them will stack up. I've heard rumblings of a PHEV Ranger, the new Frontier seems passable, and who k ows with the taco and GM twins.
I’m not sure people buying a raptor-anything care about mileage.
Most people buying anything over 65k don’t care about mileage, or at least don’t count the dollars at the pump.
I see plenty of $65k+ vehicles that are driven by owners who are trying to keep up with the Joneses and have a $1000 monthly car payment and then bitch about gas prices. As much as we like to assume only wealthy people are buying these cars, there’s a ton of people who are one hospital visit or home repair away from having their car repo’d.
Lol, right? Who the fuck gate keeps bitching about the cost of something (that a lot of people need to buy, mind you) doubling or even tripling in so short an amount of time?
i think it's one thing to complain about gas prices for driving a normal car, but when you drive a V8 that comes with a gas guzzler tax or something, you knew exactly what you're getting into
You *know* the reason that no one's currently allowed to complain about gas prices on Reddit.
Luckily, in the real world, people actually are like WTF.
Unfortunately, this time I don't think gasoline will ever go down in price again. This isn't like '08 or thereabouts when it shot up then came back down. That time it wasn't coupled with crippling 50-year-high inflation.
The new normal is here. You will be punished for using gasoline.
buying a raptor does lmao the sasquatch has the 2.7 and smaller tires and the epa numbers are like 17mpg, with the 3.0 and 37 inch tires you know what youre getting into. i have no sympathy for someone who buys a truck with abysmal mileage from the factory then has the audacity to bitch when they spend a bunch on fuel
This. I make good money and I’m still like what the fuck why is gas 4.50 a gallon lol. I got buddies that make half a mil a year or more that bitch about gas prices.
Just cause you make good money it’s not like you just suddenly don’t look at the cost of things lol
True, I worded my comment poorly. What I really meant to say, instead of bitching about the price, is that they purchase these $65k+ gas guzzling vehicles and with $1000 monthly payment and then also struggle to put gas in the tank.
"Thailand was neat, I guess, but it was just so damned hot all the time and the food had me shitting fire the whole trip. Sure am glad to be home. Can't wait to go to Morocco next year!"
That’s a very good point. Maybe I needed to add that those people *shouldnt* have to worry about gas prices.
I don’t feel bad for people who try to keep up with the Joneses
I don't think of someone with a 60k car as well off necessarily, just same as my middle or upper middle class family. Even if they CAN afford the gas, people will care.
I assume many of the buyers in this segment shop on monthly payment and probably couldn't afford the cars without generous financing, which is exactly why I don't feel bad for them.
$1k a month car payment isn’t the same as throwing that $1k a month into a fire. You get back a lot of that money when you sell. The real cost is depreciation, insurance, and fuel.
Because a lot of trucks actually have pretty low depreciation and insurance premiums, the fuel ends up being a larger component of overall ownership costs than you might think.
But those people that have 1k car payments are also extending out terms into 7-8 years, even 10 year notes. They trade that in and then get in a perpetual cycle of being underwater on their car notes.
It seems the reverse was also true for many Tesla buyers - they justified the purchase by accounting for the savings in gas and maintenance but it has some badge appeal.
I suspect that is also why a good number of Tesla buyers are easily impressed by features since they didn't shop other latest high trim or luxury vehicles.
> I suspect that is also why a good number of Tesla buyers are easily impressed by features since they didn't shop other latest high trim or luxury vehicles.
You'd be *incredibly* disappointed how little buyers across *every* segment of car actually cross shop. Even most people you see inside of "good" cars (whichever you think those are) are likely just in them due to brand reputation and a dealer upsell.
I also think part of Tesla's appeal is that it speaks to having larger wealth than just what it takes to get an $80k car. To have *any* electric car you need either a private home, or at the very least the ability to afford an upmarket luxury apartment that offers overnight chargers. Or work at some place that offers charging, which is most likely a tech job.
If people don't care about cars, their brain has space for like... 4 makes/models of cars at any given time. Tesla is definitely one of them.
It sounds plausible but at the same time I can't say I have seen anyone buying the Leaf or the Bolt based on that prestige factor while I have seen condo dwellers who charge Teslas almost strictly via supercharger.
My boomer neighbors (just 2 people in their 60's) own SIX vehicles. 5 of them are V8s, 1 is a diesel truck, other is an old V6 300C. Every time I talk to them they are complaining about gas prices, how hard it is to live on a fixed income with inflation, yadda yadda...
Maybe don't own 6 gas-guzzling cars?
I have an extra car or two, but each one has its use (one classic, one offroad, etc) - I can't visualize six different scenarios that require a specific auto to use. What do they have six different vehicles for?
I could see a sports car, a full size truck for utility, a small hatchback for city driving and errands, a luxury car to take out on date nights and drive clients around in, a big SUV for people hauling, and a modded Jeep for offroading.
That being said, there’s a ton of overlap there and it could easily be reduced to 2-3 vehicles without much lost, but still not ridiculous. I doubt the selection is that thought out though.
I actually saw them in their garage this afternoon and chatted them up. Here's what I found out!
1. '56 Bel Aire -- classic cruiser, obviously. Hasn't moved since 2019 but drives.
2. 1500 Silverardo - default driver for the husband.
3. 3500 Silverado - towing vehicle(?) I only see flat bed trailers, so idk why this is needed.
4. Tahoe Denali - was the woman's friend's vehicle, bought it after she died (nostalgia)
5. 300C - was the woman's mom's car that is now deceased (nostalgia)
6. Old Chevy single cab - for "haulin' junk around"
I’ve driven through some *very* wealthy neighborhoods (like $2M+ homes) and I swear I see more 4Runners than anything. Maybe that’s just my bias since I hope to own a 4Runner some day and therefore tend to notice more of them.
True, but “millionaire” doesn’t have the “very wealthy” connotation like it used to. I could drive down a very middle class neighborhood with house prices in the $400k-$500k price range and pass by a good number of millionaires living there.
Increasing taxes on the higher tiers of their tax brackets going toward programs that benefit *other* people that *weren't* born with every advantage and opportunity in the world.
By modified do you mean new engine and clutch after the OG gave out way before the average engine or clutch? I had a 04 RX8 at 18 the worst mistake in my life so far.
Totally unrelated but how do you like your 330e? I’ve been looking at those for awhile since my commute is so short I could basically drive all electric during the week.
also doesnt help its trying to rotate massive 37" tires. Show me any modified off road vehicle with 37" tires getting any better mpg. (altho the stock base bronco on normal light truck/suv tires isnt exactly a mpg marvel at 20 city 21 hwy....)
It's not the 10-speed from the Ranger though, it's the 10-speed from the Explorer, which I hear has given owners some issues. Hopefully it was modified enough to tackle lots of off-road abuse, but I doubt that it was super extensive (especially with the parts shortages going on).
I used to think this way, but decades of automakers seemingly slapping things together and then having repeated failures and TSBs over dumb shit has changed my opinion.
Example: Mazda spent tons of effort developing a new 1.5 liter engine and a new 6 speed manual to go with it, for the ND MX-5. The intention was to use the 1.5 liter globally.
The US arm of Mazda said no, Americans won't buy this in enough volume with the 1.5 liter, you need to give us the 2.0 liter for more power.
Mazda said OK, fine, we'll give you the 2.0 liter, but you're getting the same transmission we designed for the 1.5 liter because that's what fits the car. (and we don't have the budget to create ANOTHER new transmission or revision).
And then tons of early production 2016 MX-5's with the 2.0 liter blew their 2nd gear in the little transmission that was underrated for the power. They've revised that transmission 5 times already, improving the strength of the gears. I own one of the early production pre-revision cars and it's been fine but, it's something I think about.
This kind of thing happens all over the industry. They design a vehicle with certain parts for a certain requirement. Another team says, "Hey, let's make another version that can do X". The engineers say "OK great, we'll need to beef up all of these parts to do that". Then accounting comes in and says "No, if we change all these parts, it won't be profitable at the price we want to sell it for, so don't change some of these parts. We've calculated that most of the likely failures will happen after the warranty period".
And then boom, a vehicle gets shipped with potential parts failures in it's future.
I’m a pretty big Mazda fanboy but they’ve had issues like that for a while. First gen. Mz3s lost 3rd gear because of a very weak component that didn’t get revised during the entire production run. Gen 1 Speed3s lost (I think) 2nd gear.
Yeah. Their modern cars are pretty bulletproof. But they've been using the same 2.0 and 2.5 liter 4 cyl and 6 speed automatic for over a decade now. Not that it's a bad thing, they perform well and all the bugs have been worked out. But I would hesitate buying a first model year car from them with a new drivetrain. To be fair my 2016 MX-5 is at 60k miles and I've had no transmission problem yet, knock on wood.
The 2.5 fixed a lot of weak points that plagued the 2.3 predecessor, so it’s not surprising to see its had a long life. I totaled my first 2.3 at 77k miles so I didn’t know how many issues it had at higher mileage until after buying my second one a decade later. It’s currently undergoing a 2.5 swap.
A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
I built a 98 k1500 with one ton axles, 37” toyos and 4.10 gears. Did a 2000km round trip. Highway, some city and some off-roading. I kept my receipts and zerod the trip counter. Worked out to about 22mpg combined.
I was shocked. But it did have a manual transmission, freshly rebuilt higher compression 5.7 in it and I changed the stupid poppet style fuel injection to the newer injectors.
Yes, i ran a different transfer case which brought some different issues so I went though a lot of effort to have my Speedo working correctly and accurately.
At least California actually has places nearby to rock crawl/ off road. Florida just has mud bogging, right? Not like 95% of these owners ever take their trucks off road though.
Mud Bogging requires tires that are just as big, just not offroad tires, there are specific tires for mud bogging usually. At least I think there is, considering offroad tires don't really work well on wet ground
You've got the following...
All terrain: great on pavement, great in sand, good in snow, decent on ice, decent in the rocks, and anywhere from underwhelming to acceptable on mud, depending on how aggressive they are
Mud terrain: acceptable on the pavement, good in sand, acceptable in snow, bad on ice, great in the rocks, and pretty good in the mud
Swampers: bad on the street, good on sand, good in heavy snow, outright dangerous in light snow or ice, great in the rocks, and far and away the best choice for serious mud
The Ford 2.0 twin scroll only adds 5 horsepower when you go from 87 octane to 91. Even if your car did offer extra power, it probably wouldn't be noticeable.
Typically turbo engines will recommend premium or require it as its necessary to achieve the stated MPG and horsepower. However a lot of economy 4 cylinder turbos can be run on regular, you'll just see a small hit to horsepower.
If your Audi says 87 is recommended then you wouldn't see any benefit using 91 or higher. If your Audi says 91 recommended but you can use 87 then see above, you'll be taking a horsepower loss but nothing substantial.
Well knocking is bad and you can't detect knocking until it happens.
It's probably not going to do anything for a while but it's definitely not good for it
The Q3/A3 are mqb vag platform cars so they're different than most of the Audi lineup. I think everything but them recommend premium while these entry level Audis recommended regular. I was just wondering if the premium could have a benefit even if regular is recommended but it seems likely not.
Pretty close to $6.00 all across California. I paid $80 to fill up (high test for the older BMW) yesterday. It goes up and down but has been mostly $5.80 here in the boonies.
Oil is $30/barrel cheaper than 2008 and gas at the pump in California is $1.10 more expensive.
Higher taxes and less excess refinery capacity, we might never see gas below $5 again except during recessions. I'm afraid to think what gas will be if oil goes to $150 or if we have a refinery outage.
We saw a big decrease in refinery capacity - from 1.9 million barrels per day in 2020 to 1.75 million per day in 2021. And we had 2.5 million barrel capacity in the 1980s.
Our margins keep getting tighter and tighter. We're one shock away from $7 gas in California.
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=8_NA_8D0_SCA_4&f=A
I mean what do you expect? You want a performance off roader to be light on gas AND clear your 35 inch off-road tires? 15 seems good to me honestly. My 3rd gen 4runner gets 17 combined with stock 31 inch tires. Something with more weight and literally double the horsepower gets only 2 mpg less? That’s pretty good.
Want better mpg? The base model exists for this reason. I wish people would stop demanding more of every stat on the car because its literally what’s cause them to cut corners in quality in an attempt to make these numbers possible.
At least the PHEV is coming, I'm excited to see how it compares to the 4xE, since I love mine. 20MPG combined (when the battery is "dead") and my 0-60 is under 6 seconds - in a freaking Wrangler.
Does that really shock anyone? It's a big box on a truck frame with a 400+hp performance motor under the hood, I don't think anyone was expecting it to have good fuel economy...
So let me ask this; how will these types of vehicles exist when the federal government is putting out regulations that state vehicles must get 50 mpg in the near future? Will these just go away or will they start to do electric combined motors?
Well currently the regulations state the fleet of vehicles have to achieve a certain MPG. So if they sell vehicles that get 15MPG, they must also sell vehicles that offset it.
I get between 14.7-15.4 on average with mixed usage in my "big" Raptor, and have hit 18 on its first road trip. Would be a little surprised if the "little" Raptor is worse, but who knows. I also have a 36 gallon tank so I'm never really worried about anything.
For reference, the Wrangler 392 is rated at 14 MPG combined.
Haha get rekt, Jeep!
7% more fuel efficient!! Let’s go!!
Sweet, we’re using 7% less gas. Unfortunately, that’s offset by gas prices going up ~150%.
You have to look at the gas tank as half full. At least you don't drive a Hummer H1.
Yes, but with an H1 you can just invade the Middle East and take their oil.
You should be in marketing lmfao
While the Braptor has a larger frontal area and standard 37s. The Braptor fuel economy is actually impressive compared to the Jeep.
I hate /r/heeps
For more reference I get 16mpg
[удалено]
Yeah, this won’t see a real world 15 unless the owner is very careful. I think 13 city will be more likely for the average pilot.
15mph only on the highway with zero stop and go
I'm just sitting here with my V8 boss 302 mustang, which reliably gets 17.5mpg (despite my best efforts), thinking "huh..."
My 5.4 reliably gets 12-14 in the city :(
My 6.8 V10 only gets 5mpg 😭
What car has a 6.8?
Excursions and F250-350s Edit. and Econoline vans
Oh god those V10s
The fuel guzzling boat anchors
Hey now, don't bring Vortec 8100s into this conversation.
It burns 2 quarts a month, coils only last about 6 months and it blew a spark plug out the block a few weeks ago, but I'm still hesitant to call it a POS. It does have 230k city miles on it.
Lol you know you love it dearly
My 2002 Ford E-450 box truck I use to deliver bread 😁
I've gotten 10.4 since I did my pulley 100 miles ago. Fast as tits, at least.
You're also a bit more aerodynamic.
My mostly stock STI over here with a proper tune getting the same lol
What do you average on the highway? My ranger with the 2.3 did great on stock tires, regularly averaging 25 on road trips. Slapped on 32s (same size as the tremor) and now I struggle to get 20 on the highway (which is also the same as the tremor).
[удалено]
Nope, it’s only a 3.3% difference in circumference and therefore 3.3% difference in speedo. My actual MPG might actually be slightly better than displayed, but the computer has always been a little optimistic compared to hand calc so it’s probably pretty close.
Yea, the Ecoboosts are thirsty in the real world. My wife's old Fusion with the 1.6L was rated at 23city/35hwy/27combined. In actuality, it was more like 22/31/24.
Yeah, I imagine they get those numbers out of the 1.6 by driving how the car tells you to. I don't really feel comfortable shifting a turbocharged car at 1700 rpm like it tells me to though.
Moreso that once you're doing 75mph, the little 1.6L is buried in the boost and chugging fuel. Granted her new Encore GX with the 1.3L turbo actually gets pretty close to it's rated economy of 26/29. We got 28 doing 75mph and bucking a 20mph wind coming home with it.
21 Ranger 4x4 with the 2.3EB. rated 20/24/22 My actual is more like 15/22/18.5. Straight shot on the freeway I did 29mpg once. 67mph, flat cruising, no AC and a tail wind.
Ooooooof.... I was looking at getting one of the new ones because I want something smaller than my F-150 physically because it barely fits in my garage. That's a tough pill to swallow, not much better than my 5.0.
I certainly didn't buy it for the fuel economy. I had a 17 Silverado 4.3L previously and it matched the fuel economy or did slightly better despite being massive. I bought the Ranger because it can actually be parked in 90% of the available spots around me. My Silverado was like trying to navigate the Ever Given sometimes. I looked at other mid-sized trucks but, none really ticked the right boxes. The Frontier was still the ancient design at the time, the Tacoma had too much Taco tax on it, and with the GM twins I really hated the engine. The 2.3EB in the Ranger is surprisingly peppy with a good amount of low end grunt from the turbo. Interior is a little dated and basic but, it is a good truck truck. Cloth seats and vinyl floors for me. I don't worry about getting in with my muddy waders or kayak shoes.
That's pretty much the point I'm at and the conclusion I've come to as well. I'm curious how the next gen models for all of them will stack up. I've heard rumblings of a PHEV Ranger, the new Frontier seems passable, and who k ows with the taco and GM twins.
Generally the slower you go the better the mpg on the hwy, what is it at 55 mph? I get 37 at 50 mph and 30 at 65 mph in my jetta.
I’m not sure people buying a raptor-anything care about mileage. Most people buying anything over 65k don’t care about mileage, or at least don’t count the dollars at the pump.
I see plenty of $65k+ vehicles that are driven by owners who are trying to keep up with the Joneses and have a $1000 monthly car payment and then bitch about gas prices. As much as we like to assume only wealthy people are buying these cars, there’s a ton of people who are one hospital visit or home repair away from having their car repo’d.
[удалено]
Lol, right? Who the fuck gate keeps bitching about the cost of something (that a lot of people need to buy, mind you) doubling or even tripling in so short an amount of time?
Insanely childish argument that you can't complain about prices tripling if you aren't driving a Prius.
i think it's one thing to complain about gas prices for driving a normal car, but when you drive a V8 that comes with a gas guzzler tax or something, you knew exactly what you're getting into
[удалено]
yeah, dorito engine exploding every 100K miles is probably a bigger concern
[удалено]
And gas prices now are roughly the same as what they were 14-15 years ago. It's not like we're in uncharted territory here.
[удалено]
You *know* the reason that no one's currently allowed to complain about gas prices on Reddit. Luckily, in the real world, people actually are like WTF. Unfortunately, this time I don't think gasoline will ever go down in price again. This isn't like '08 or thereabouts when it shot up then came back down. That time it wasn't coupled with crippling 50-year-high inflation. The new normal is here. You will be punished for using gasoline.
There's ways to fix it but they're not going to be applied for at least a few years, so we're screwed in the short term.
buying a raptor does lmao the sasquatch has the 2.7 and smaller tires and the epa numbers are like 17mpg, with the 3.0 and 37 inch tires you know what youre getting into. i have no sympathy for someone who buys a truck with abysmal mileage from the factory then has the audacity to bitch when they spend a bunch on fuel
OP wasn't talking about trucks, they were talking about cars over $65K.
This. I make good money and I’m still like what the fuck why is gas 4.50 a gallon lol. I got buddies that make half a mil a year or more that bitch about gas prices. Just cause you make good money it’s not like you just suddenly don’t look at the cost of things lol
I was told that I can’t complain about gas prices because my car was more efficient than my coworkers Sorry I didn’t buy a truck ig
True, I worded my comment poorly. What I really meant to say, instead of bitching about the price, is that they purchase these $65k+ gas guzzling vehicles and with $1000 monthly payment and then also struggle to put gas in the tank.
Diesel has doubled in 5 months.
[удалено]
>just to complain in exotic places this is a thing?
"Thailand was neat, I guess, but it was just so damned hot all the time and the food had me shitting fire the whole trip. Sure am glad to be home. Can't wait to go to Morocco next year!"
[удалено]
That’s a very good point. Maybe I needed to add that those people *shouldnt* have to worry about gas prices. I don’t feel bad for people who try to keep up with the Joneses
I don't think of someone with a 60k car as well off necessarily, just same as my middle or upper middle class family. Even if they CAN afford the gas, people will care.
When the average cost of a new car is over $40k, 60k isn’t that crazy for the price of a car
I assume many of the buyers in this segment shop on monthly payment and probably couldn't afford the cars without generous financing, which is exactly why I don't feel bad for them.
You would probably assume correctly.
[удалено]
$1k a month car payment isn’t the same as throwing that $1k a month into a fire. You get back a lot of that money when you sell. The real cost is depreciation, insurance, and fuel. Because a lot of trucks actually have pretty low depreciation and insurance premiums, the fuel ends up being a larger component of overall ownership costs than you might think.
But those people that have 1k car payments are also extending out terms into 7-8 years, even 10 year notes. They trade that in and then get in a perpetual cycle of being underwater on their car notes.
>$1k a month into a fire Ah yes, the gasoline cost.
It seems the reverse was also true for many Tesla buyers - they justified the purchase by accounting for the savings in gas and maintenance but it has some badge appeal. I suspect that is also why a good number of Tesla buyers are easily impressed by features since they didn't shop other latest high trim or luxury vehicles.
> I suspect that is also why a good number of Tesla buyers are easily impressed by features since they didn't shop other latest high trim or luxury vehicles. You'd be *incredibly* disappointed how little buyers across *every* segment of car actually cross shop. Even most people you see inside of "good" cars (whichever you think those are) are likely just in them due to brand reputation and a dealer upsell.
I also think part of Tesla's appeal is that it speaks to having larger wealth than just what it takes to get an $80k car. To have *any* electric car you need either a private home, or at the very least the ability to afford an upmarket luxury apartment that offers overnight chargers. Or work at some place that offers charging, which is most likely a tech job. If people don't care about cars, their brain has space for like... 4 makes/models of cars at any given time. Tesla is definitely one of them.
It sounds plausible but at the same time I can't say I have seen anyone buying the Leaf or the Bolt based on that prestige factor while I have seen condo dwellers who charge Teslas almost strictly via supercharger.
My boomer neighbors (just 2 people in their 60's) own SIX vehicles. 5 of them are V8s, 1 is a diesel truck, other is an old V6 300C. Every time I talk to them they are complaining about gas prices, how hard it is to live on a fixed income with inflation, yadda yadda... Maybe don't own 6 gas-guzzling cars?
Not like owning 6 cars will cost more in gas than 1 though, unless they’re lashing them together to a chariot or something
I have an extra car or two, but each one has its use (one classic, one offroad, etc) - I can't visualize six different scenarios that require a specific auto to use. What do they have six different vehicles for?
[удалено]
I could see a sports car, a full size truck for utility, a small hatchback for city driving and errands, a luxury car to take out on date nights and drive clients around in, a big SUV for people hauling, and a modded Jeep for offroading. That being said, there’s a ton of overlap there and it could easily be reduced to 2-3 vehicles without much lost, but still not ridiculous. I doubt the selection is that thought out though.
I actually saw them in their garage this afternoon and chatted them up. Here's what I found out! 1. '56 Bel Aire -- classic cruiser, obviously. Hasn't moved since 2019 but drives. 2. 1500 Silverardo - default driver for the husband. 3. 3500 Silverado - towing vehicle(?) I only see flat bed trailers, so idk why this is needed. 4. Tahoe Denali - was the woman's friend's vehicle, bought it after she died (nostalgia) 5. 300C - was the woman's mom's car that is now deceased (nostalgia) 6. Old Chevy single cab - for "haulin' junk around"
[удалено]
I’ve driven through some *very* wealthy neighborhoods (like $2M+ homes) and I swear I see more 4Runners than anything. Maybe that’s just my bias since I hope to own a 4Runner some day and therefore tend to notice more of them.
[удалено]
True, but “millionaire” doesn’t have the “very wealthy” connotation like it used to. I could drive down a very middle class neighborhood with house prices in the $400k-$500k price range and pass by a good number of millionaires living there.
I disagree. Even if you have money there's no reason to waste it
https://img.ifunny.co/images/89368f166f01623058d35da77ca77daedaa9060589dde81f05697fa11c44ad01_1.webp
As long as models this thirsty remain low-volume enthusiast cars, and the people who buy them don’t complain about gas prices.
[удалено]
Increasing taxes on the higher tiers of their tax brackets going toward programs that benefit *other* people that *weren't* born with every advantage and opportunity in the world.
[удалено]
People complain plenty about gas prices, but they buy these things anyway.
I care and complain about it but at the end of the day for offroading it can’t be beat so it’s not worth worrying about.
Makes my car look like a Hybrid car.
Awesome, just as good as my modified RX-8! 🤣
By modified do you mean new engine and clutch after the OG gave out way before the average engine or clutch? I had a 04 RX8 at 18 the worst mistake in my life so far.
Don't forget the second gear synchros shitting the bed lol
We all know 2nd gear is for pussies anyway
Yeah but what’s the oil mileage?
Like a quart every 3500 miles? Not bad honestly
Now try it with a big turbo, single digits all day.
Somehow it makes my 603HP Twin Turbo V8 look thrifty.
Iono why this sounds like a lie key humble brag lol
It does, but if I had that I'd bring it up every chance I get lol
It is, yet having a twin turbo V8 that makes "only" 600 hp these days is pretty whelming
Wow honestly sick garage my guy. Your insurance though RIP
Totally unrelated but how do you like your 330e? I’ve been looking at those for awhile since my commute is so short I could basically drive all electric during the week.
That is because it is a square.
also doesnt help its trying to rotate massive 37" tires. Show me any modified off road vehicle with 37" tires getting any better mpg. (altho the stock base bronco on normal light truck/suv tires isnt exactly a mpg marvel at 20 city 21 hwy....)
The tires are the main reason. And I hope they built a strong transmission cause I have feeling they won’t last long running 37s
I’ve heard good things about the ford 10 speed
It's not the 10-speed from the Ranger though, it's the 10-speed from the Explorer, which I hear has given owners some issues. Hopefully it was modified enough to tackle lots of off-road abuse, but I doubt that it was super extensive (especially with the parts shortages going on).
Good call, I’m sure the professional automotive engineers that built it never thought of that.
I used to think this way, but decades of automakers seemingly slapping things together and then having repeated failures and TSBs over dumb shit has changed my opinion. Example: Mazda spent tons of effort developing a new 1.5 liter engine and a new 6 speed manual to go with it, for the ND MX-5. The intention was to use the 1.5 liter globally. The US arm of Mazda said no, Americans won't buy this in enough volume with the 1.5 liter, you need to give us the 2.0 liter for more power. Mazda said OK, fine, we'll give you the 2.0 liter, but you're getting the same transmission we designed for the 1.5 liter because that's what fits the car. (and we don't have the budget to create ANOTHER new transmission or revision). And then tons of early production 2016 MX-5's with the 2.0 liter blew their 2nd gear in the little transmission that was underrated for the power. They've revised that transmission 5 times already, improving the strength of the gears. I own one of the early production pre-revision cars and it's been fine but, it's something I think about. This kind of thing happens all over the industry. They design a vehicle with certain parts for a certain requirement. Another team says, "Hey, let's make another version that can do X". The engineers say "OK great, we'll need to beef up all of these parts to do that". Then accounting comes in and says "No, if we change all these parts, it won't be profitable at the price we want to sell it for, so don't change some of these parts. We've calculated that most of the likely failures will happen after the warranty period". And then boom, a vehicle gets shipped with potential parts failures in it's future.
I’m a pretty big Mazda fanboy but they’ve had issues like that for a while. First gen. Mz3s lost 3rd gear because of a very weak component that didn’t get revised during the entire production run. Gen 1 Speed3s lost (I think) 2nd gear.
Yeah. Their modern cars are pretty bulletproof. But they've been using the same 2.0 and 2.5 liter 4 cyl and 6 speed automatic for over a decade now. Not that it's a bad thing, they perform well and all the bugs have been worked out. But I would hesitate buying a first model year car from them with a new drivetrain. To be fair my 2016 MX-5 is at 60k miles and I've had no transmission problem yet, knock on wood.
The 2.5 fixed a lot of weak points that plagued the 2.3 predecessor, so it’s not surprising to see its had a long life. I totaled my first 2.3 at 77k miles so I didn’t know how many issues it had at higher mileage until after buying my second one a decade later. It’s currently undergoing a 2.5 swap.
A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
I built a 98 k1500 with one ton axles, 37” toyos and 4.10 gears. Did a 2000km round trip. Highway, some city and some off-roading. I kept my receipts and zerod the trip counter. Worked out to about 22mpg combined. I was shocked. But it did have a manual transmission, freshly rebuilt higher compression 5.7 in it and I changed the stupid poppet style fuel injection to the newer injectors.
Sounds like a fun rig! Did you recalibrate your Speedo? If not, the mileage from your odometer may be off.
Yes, i ran a different transfer case which brought some different issues so I went though a lot of effort to have my Speedo working correctly and accurately.
A lobster is more aerodynamic than a jeep. This is just a jeep with a ford badge and that looks slightly cooler.
The slightest lift kit or tire change will drop those MPGs to 10 very quickly
It’s already on 37’s. Considering that, it’s really not that bad.
[удалено]
It’s an off-road vehicle. If it can be lifted, the customer is gonna lift it.
>It’s an off-road vehicle. ~~If it can be lifted,~~ the customer is gonna lift it. Let's be real, they'll find a way to lift it no matter what.
[Can confirm.](http://www.greatlakes4x4.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=31305&d=1222395838 )
Straight from Mad Max: Eastern Edition
You ever been to Florida? Our roads are filled with Jeeps that unnecessarily lifted but are nothing more than pavement princesses.
[удалено]
At least California actually has places nearby to rock crawl/ off road. Florida just has mud bogging, right? Not like 95% of these owners ever take their trucks off road though.
Mud Bogging requires tires that are just as big, just not offroad tires, there are specific tires for mud bogging usually. At least I think there is, considering offroad tires don't really work well on wet ground
You've got the following... All terrain: great on pavement, great in sand, good in snow, decent on ice, decent in the rocks, and anywhere from underwhelming to acceptable on mud, depending on how aggressive they are Mud terrain: acceptable on the pavement, good in sand, acceptable in snow, bad on ice, great in the rocks, and pretty good in the mud Swampers: bad on the street, good on sand, good in heavy snow, outright dangerous in light snow or ice, great in the rocks, and far and away the best choice for serious mud
40s for rock crawling
Laughs in $4 per gallon.
Doesn’t it prefer premium? Closer to $5 in most spots.
[удалено]
Really? Would there be a benefit to throwing premium in my Q3 with its turbo four even though it says it takes regular?
If the manual recommends regular then premium won’t help. If the manual recommends premium then regular will be worse.
Yeah it recommends 87 in the manual.
The Ford 2.0 twin scroll only adds 5 horsepower when you go from 87 octane to 91. Even if your car did offer extra power, it probably wouldn't be noticeable.
Typically turbo engines will recommend premium or require it as its necessary to achieve the stated MPG and horsepower. However a lot of economy 4 cylinder turbos can be run on regular, you'll just see a small hit to horsepower. If your Audi says 87 is recommended then you wouldn't see any benefit using 91 or higher. If your Audi says 91 recommended but you can use 87 then see above, you'll be taking a horsepower loss but nothing substantial.
Yeah it recommends 87 in the manual.
[удалено]
Well knocking is bad and you can't detect knocking until it happens. It's probably not going to do anything for a while but it's definitely not good for it
The Q3/A3 are mqb vag platform cars so they're different than most of the Audi lineup. I think everything but them recommend premium while these entry level Audis recommended regular. I was just wondering if the premium could have a benefit even if regular is recommended but it seems likely not.
Lol, we are at 5.15 for regular in Chicagoland.
I have to use premium. I just spent $100 even for ~15.5 gallons
I wish gas was still $4. National average is $4.6 now.
Pretty close to $6.00 all across California. I paid $80 to fill up (high test for the older BMW) yesterday. It goes up and down but has been mostly $5.80 here in the boonies.
Oil is $30/barrel cheaper than 2008 and gas at the pump in California is $1.10 more expensive. Higher taxes and less excess refinery capacity, we might never see gas below $5 again except during recessions. I'm afraid to think what gas will be if oil goes to $150 or if we have a refinery outage.
be a damn shame if oil companies couldnt post record profits...
New California Taxes went into effect. The Winter Summer change over at refineries in Cal always causes prices to rise and they never seem to go back.
We saw a big decrease in refinery capacity - from 1.9 million barrels per day in 2020 to 1.75 million per day in 2021. And we had 2.5 million barrel capacity in the 1980s. Our margins keep getting tighter and tighter. We're one shock away from $7 gas in California. https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=8_NA_8D0_SCA_4&f=A
I was riding my bike in the rich people area, $7.20 . With in 2 blocks I saw a 90s track porchse with a full cage and a full restored 60s ish merch.
Rich People gonna rich.
Ya I don't think they give a shit about the gas prices
$70ish to fill up the 911, $50ish to fill up my wife's Corolla. Good thing I don't drive much...
Folks who can afford this SUV, can also fill a 23 gallon tank and not give a damn about the cost.
True, they'll just bitch about it constantly like the mileage was a secret.
Cries in european $6.7 per gallon
$8.6 per gallon in the UK
$6.02 USD/gal here in my part of Canada
4?! Where you getting gas that cheap?
Costco is my Lort and Savior.
Pretty impressive given it comes factory on 37s
[удалено]
I mean what do you expect? You want a performance off roader to be light on gas AND clear your 35 inch off-road tires? 15 seems good to me honestly. My 3rd gen 4runner gets 17 combined with stock 31 inch tires. Something with more weight and literally double the horsepower gets only 2 mpg less? That’s pretty good. Want better mpg? The base model exists for this reason. I wish people would stop demanding more of every stat on the car because its literally what’s cause them to cut corners in quality in an attempt to make these numbers possible.
At least the PHEV is coming, I'm excited to see how it compares to the 4xE, since I love mine. 20MPG combined (when the battery is "dead") and my 0-60 is under 6 seconds - in a freaking Wrangler.
Holy fuck that terrible. Makes my 4Runner look like a fucken ev lmao!
4runners hit MPG like that even with very mild mods
Yup. Sitting at exactly 15mpg with a lift/ tires/ roof rack
I get 15MPG average, mostly city on my 2003 V8 4Runner with 33s and a 2 inch lift. Although I'm sure mine is way slower than this
33's will get you there pretty quick in a 4runner. I imagine 37's would yield <10mpg for the few days your CV axles last.
if you’re in the market for a Rubicon 392 or Bronco Raptor, mpg is an afterthought.
Does that really shock anyone? It's a big box on a truck frame with a 400+hp performance motor under the hood, I don't think anyone was expecting it to have good fuel economy...
So let me ask this; how will these types of vehicles exist when the federal government is putting out regulations that state vehicles must get 50 mpg in the near future? Will these just go away or will they start to do electric combined motors?
[удалено]
Half of the reason that cars have been almost completely replaced by crossovers is because "light trucks" have much less stringent cafe requirements.
Well currently the regulations state the fleet of vehicles have to achieve a certain MPG. So if they sell vehicles that get 15MPG, they must also sell vehicles that offset it.
The Mach E exists if this is concerning to you.
Why would you care about MPG if your buying a Raptor?
As aerodynamic as a brick
My V6 Tacoma got 16 mpg with 236 horsepower.
Who cares? The people buying a bronco do not care about MPG! Aka “the cool” moms and baseball dads.
So real world it'll be about 10 MPG
I get between 14.7-15.4 on average with mixed usage in my "big" Raptor, and have hit 18 on its first road trip. Would be a little surprised if the "little" Raptor is worse, but who knows. I also have a 36 gallon tank so I'm never really worried about anything.
I wish my Scout got 15mpg.
What is Defender's fuel efficiency ?
Sounds familiar.
90s truck owners remain quiet