E250 gas consumption 7/8 mpg
#31
02-14-2009, 11:54 AM
So your Dad's 351 "oddball" E350 can go "about" 700 miles on a tank, even with a "towed car"? WOW!!!! He must have one of those miracle magnetic fuel stabilizers that align the molecules of gas?
You realize it likely has the optional 35 gal tank & "1/4 tank" is a maximum of 8.75 gal, making a "175 mile round trip" 20 MPG, not "17mpg"? A '92 brochure only lists a 22 gal tank. Imagine 32 MPG!
In actual use the tank has expansion space & can't be filled completely so you only have "about" 32-33 gal max. Figuring on the low side "1/4 tank" is just 8 gal & would mean nearly 22 MPG. If you could burn every drop, w/o expansion space OR a gal or 2 left sloshing around, 35 gal at 17 mpg is only 595 miles, not quite 150 miles on "1/4 tank". Allowing for both expansion & gas left after fuel pump runs dry, let's say you can use 32 gal, gives a range of only 544, just 136 mi for "1/4 tank" at 17 mpg.
Sorry, but when MPG is presented based on, once upon a time "(about a 175 mile round trip) on 1/4 tank of fuel" I tend to be suspicious. I respectfully suggest there's some problem w/your numbers & they do not represent "consistant" MPG most owners can ever expect. Usually when something seems to good to be true, it isn't true.
You realize it likely has the optional 35 gal tank & "1/4 tank" is a maximum of 8.75 gal, making a "175 mile round trip" 20 MPG, not "17mpg"? A '92 brochure only lists a 22 gal tank. Imagine 32 MPG!
In actual use the tank has expansion space & can't be filled completely so you only have "about" 32-33 gal max. Figuring on the low side "1/4 tank" is just 8 gal & would mean nearly 22 MPG. If you could burn every drop, w/o expansion space OR a gal or 2 left sloshing around, 35 gal at 17 mpg is only 595 miles, not quite 150 miles on "1/4 tank". Allowing for both expansion & gas left after fuel pump runs dry, let's say you can use 32 gal, gives a range of only 544, just 136 mi for "1/4 tank" at 17 mpg.
Sorry, but when MPG is presented based on, once upon a time "(about a 175 mile round trip) on 1/4 tank of fuel" I tend to be suspicious. I respectfully suggest there's some problem w/your numbers & they do not represent "consistant" MPG most owners can ever expect. Usually when something seems to good to be true, it isn't true.
#32
02-14-2009, 05:53 PM
"Sorry," even if "it's a '93" it still sounds like an "oddball". "I know for a fact" both FORD's '92 & '93 specs/dimensions in my possession only list: standard 23.0 gal, optional 35.0 gal & 31 gal diesel tanks for all E-150/250/350-all 3 "single...midship" tanks. As far as I can tell there was no longer a 'dual tank option'. For Cutaways its 36 or 55 gal opt on long WB. See no FORD spec "38" at all.
Knowing somebody drives to see a sister in any state & "uses a little over half a tank" doesn't tell me anything about MPG. Have you considered stating Miles & Gallons?
Stupidity begets ignorance, ingorance begets hate, hate begets negativity. Don't be negative.
Stupidity begets ignorance, ingorance begets hate, hate begets negativity. Don't be negative.
#33
02-15-2009, 06:36 AM
I'm not sure on the actual mileage as I haven't been able to make the trip myself. I do know that he lives about 35 miles north of columbus. He works all over columbus, and when he's driving down there he's not using as much fuel as his '04 E150 with a 4.6 did. Like I said when he and I sat down and actually figured the mileage on the last trip he took he averaged a hair over 17.5. This was an actual number achieved using the real number and hard math. My '92 was an RV prep model so it had the 36 gallon tank. It's been over 4 years since I owned it. I do know that my fathers '93 has the same tank as he's put almost 36 gallons in it at least once.
From a 1996 owners manual the ONLY fuel tank option on any full size van not a cutaway is 35 gallon. In 1992 (first year for the body style) it was a 36 gallon tank at least according to the owners manual for my '92 E150. It's easy to forget small details, but I do know that I had put 36 gallons (and a little over at times) into my '92.
From a 1996 owners manual the ONLY fuel tank option on any full size van not a cutaway is 35 gallon. In 1992 (first year for the body style) it was a 36 gallon tank at least according to the owners manual for my '92 E150. It's easy to forget small details, but I do know that I had put 36 gallons (and a little over at times) into my '92.
#34
02-15-2009, 09:46 AM
OK, a '92 Cutaway has a 36 gal tank & regular E150/250/350's had 35 gal, just as I'd quoted. Let's you & I sit down & look at your claim again. You agree, there was NO "38" gal tank in these Econolines?
Let's go back to your post claiming "1/4 tank" to go "about" 175 mi & presume you CAN utilize all of a Cutaway's 36 gal capacity tank. That "1/4 tank" is 9 gal & you're suggesting "about" 19.4 MPG! That's not vaguely like your "using the real number and hard math" to arrive at "17.5" now is it? Still sounds like an "oddball" E350 Cutaway 351 either way.
I'm sorry, but an even higher MPG claim sounds even less likely. Is your Dad one of the competitive high MPG fanatics utilizing special techniques?
I'm sorry, but an even higher MPG claim sounds even less likely. Is your Dad one of the competitive high MPG fanatics utilizing special techniques?
#35
01-16-2012, 05:48 PM
#36
01-16-2012, 06:19 PM
Its an awesome truck tho looks like crap right now but ill do the rust repair & send it 2 macco I hope my garage guy can figure out y it dies when u pull 2 a stop it'll rev up & down at idle after a few minutes of run time it'll finaly die my buddy said maybe throttle positioning sensor I'm not a car guy per say I can replace part & tune em up little stuff but I'm no trouble shooter
#37
01-16-2012, 07:12 PM
#38
01-16-2012, 09:04 PM
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
rusty-ford
1973 - 1979 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
18
01-30-2014 03:44 PM
LarryP2
1968-Present E-Series Van/Cutaway/Chassis
4
09-05-2013 10:42 PM
