2.3: RPMs vs mileage
Thread Starter
|
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,314
Likes: 35
It is a 3-speed auto. Yeah, I am aware that the ideal range of RPMs is about 2500. At these rpms, I am going about 50. I get decent mileage up to about 3,000 rpms but higher than that and it drastically declines. It is a Topaz with 2.3L auto, and 3.23 axle standard for '87.
For my 7.5, the best mileage would be achieved at 2200 rpms but then that means going 45mph. It has 4.10 axle.
Also, it seems the higher the rpms, the more oil it burns.
For my 7.5, the best mileage would be achieved at 2200 rpms but then that means going 45mph. It has 4.10 axle.
Also, it seems the higher the rpms, the more oil it burns.
Elder User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 859
Likes: 0
From: philly pa
i just gave my 88 topaz 2.3L auto to my brother. it only had 50k mikes on it but it just cant handle the highway speeds. i upgraded to a 92 ranger with the same 2.3L engine, but a 5spd manual. u wouldn't believe the difference when you have overdrive. i get about 2mpg better with the ranger. my recommendation: use the 3spd auto for local driving. if you do alot of highway, get something with overdrive -Jesse
Thread Starter
|
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,314
Likes: 35
I just drove on interstate highway the other day, mostly at 3500 rpms. It is possible, but your MPG goes to 23, it is noisy and probably shorters the engine life.
I have a vehicle with 5.7L in it, but then it is only gets 20 mpg.
It will go pretty fast, but acceleration is abysmal. 0-60 = yes.
I have a vehicle with 5.7L in it, but then it is only gets 20 mpg.
It will go pretty fast, but acceleration is abysmal. 0-60 = yes.
Last edited by carpe_diem; Oct 26, 2003 at 07:56 PM.
Elder User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 859
Likes: 0
From: philly pa
u get 20mpg with a 5.7L holy crap the topaz will handle the highway. the 2.3 is a strong engine. it lasts about 250k in a manual and maybe 150 in an auto (these are just approximations). as long as u can deal with the noice 3500 rpms makes i say go for it. it could easily last you years.
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
|
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,314
Likes: 35
Some people on tempotopaz.com claim that they have gotten as high as 250,000 miles on T/T. The engine is fine, but it is usually other stuff which falls apart around it.
Last edited by carpe_diem; Oct 27, 2003 at 09:49 PM.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
10 Ugly Ford Trucks That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
New User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
its all in how you drive
In my ranger i average 24/25 mpg. On the highway I can get 27+. I lost the exact figures but the average was cumulative over nearly 3500 miles and multiple tanks to eliminate as much error as possible. I drive about 70 on the highway, tailgate up.
In my ranger i average 24/25 mpg. On the highway I can get 27+. I lost the exact figures but the average was cumulative over nearly 3500 miles and multiple tanks to eliminate as much error as possible. I drive about 70 on the highway, tailgate up.
Senior User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Originally posted by Al Bennett
If I got got 30 mpg with my 2.3L 5 speed I wouldn't feel so bad about it's guttless nature. 50mph, approx 28 mpg. Go 75mph, approx 20 mpg. Go 85mph, only with a tail wind (no hills in SWF to go down)
If I got got 30 mpg with my 2.3L 5 speed I wouldn't feel so bad about it's guttless nature. 50mph, approx 28 mpg. Go 75mph, approx 20 mpg. Go 85mph, only with a tail wind (no hills in SWF to go down)
since i'm having to rev at least 1500rpms for first anyways, i'm thinking about increasing my gear ratios, something to the effect of getting about 1500 rpms at 65-70mph. i have to look into the cost and mechanics (hopefully something i can do myself on a weekend).
Elder User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 859
Likes: 0
From: philly pa
Originally posted by hyepwrd
i haven't had my truck long enough to calculate highway miles but that sounds about right from results of city driving. i agree 100% with you.
since i'm having to rev at least 1500rpms for first anyways, i'm thinking about increasing my gear ratios, something to the effect of getting about 1500 rpms at 65-70mph. i have to look into the cost and mechanics (hopefully something i can do myself on a weekend).
i haven't had my truck long enough to calculate highway miles but that sounds about right from results of city driving. i agree 100% with you.
since i'm having to rev at least 1500rpms for first anyways, i'm thinking about increasing my gear ratios, something to the effect of getting about 1500 rpms at 65-70mph. i have to look into the cost and mechanics (hopefully something i can do myself on a weekend).
if you have the 2.3 you wont have enough power to go 65 mph at 1500 rpm's, unless you drive off a cliff or something. in theory it would work, if there was no air/wind resistance. at 1500 rpm's you probably only have like 50 horses(w/the 2.3), because you are so far from your peak power, which is a whoping 100 or so houses. at 65 mph it would take just about 50 hp to overcome the wind. now add friction from all the moving parts and tires to slow you down and you get the idea. i'd keep it above 2000 rpm's when over 60, you'll save gas(engine wont have to struggle while ur injecters just shoot large amounts of gas in) -jesse
