When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I was just curious if anyone has noticed a difference in their MPG with the ULSD we've had to start using? I don't check my mileage ( hand calculate) on every tank full but my truck sure doesn't seem go as far on a tank of fuel. Also the the on board MPG readout seems to have fallen a bit. I am going to start doing the calculations with this latest fill and subsequent fills to see if my assumptions are correct. Heck, it might just be a coincidence.
Last edited by Century Coronado; Jul 11, 2006 at 07:40 PM.
It may not be a coincidence. Articles I've read indicate the energy content of the ULSD is slightly less than LSD due to the process used to reduce the sulpher content. This would cause a negative impact on mpg in that you'd have to add more fuel to sustain the same acceleration/pulling rate. However, the articles also indicated that the difference was so small that only those that strictly monitor their mpg, such as trucking companies, would probably notice an impact.
Fortunately, ULSD hasn't come to my neck of the woods yet so I can't directly answer your question. However, when it does I'll find out real quick as I've tracked the mpg on my rig since the day I bought it. I hope what I read is wrong. But since when has any environmental "improvement" resulted in a benefit for the end user?
I have been using it but have not noticed a decrease. I seldom, if ever, burn an entire tank without pulling a trailer or 4x4 off road and this mpg has remained the same.
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Slideshow: Called the Fortress, the 850-horsepower pickup combines Raptor underpinnings with military-inspired features, survival equipment, and a starting price of $285,000.