Bad MPG, ran codes
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
From: Iowa
My '88 got 17-18 MPG on short trips- I think the 3.55's are a better overall ratio.
I would get a code reader if I could afford it.
You're right, it is LS, not posi, but I'm more of a GM guy.
I would get a code reader if I could afford it.
You're right, it is LS, not posi, but I'm more of a GM guy.
Lead Driver
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,555
Likes: 40
From: Concord, NC
you are not going to get much better then that mileage at 60 mph.
There's nothing wrong with not having a code reader. I've been pulling the codes from my truck (and about every other EEC-IV Ford I've had opportunity to work with) without any code reader and never once had any difficulty. Yes they might make things a little easier, but don't feel like you have to go out and spend money on a reader to get the same codes you get using a paperclip.
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
From: Iowa
I didn't know they were that inexpensive- the cheapest one at o'reillys was $200.
Agreed. My friend has a '95 F150 reg. cab with a flatbed. 300 I6 5spd 3.55 gears and he gets 21 on the highway. I get first chance to buy it when he gets rid of it
A 3.08 rear end with a 5 speed and six cylinder should get darn near 20 mpg at 60...
Post Fiend
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,473
Likes: 4
From: Lafayette, IN
A $200 code reader is likely a generic OBD-II reader, which is incompatible with these trucks (except for the '96 F150s and under-8500 GVW F250s). OBD-I readers are much less, but I've always done fine with the paperclip method.
Jason
Jason
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Django92
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
5
Jan 19, 2011 05:52 PM
EMD_DRIVER
Pre-Power Stroke Diesel (7.3L IDI & 6.9L)
14
Sep 2, 2008 05:28 PM
