Horrific Gas Mileage Hemi eTorque

[Spikefoof]

3.92’s are killlers! I’m getting better mileage on a 6in lift and 35X12.50 tires with the 3.21 gears![/QUO How do you like 3.21 with 35s now that youve drove it more?I put 285 285 65 20 on mine and feels like it might be a little too much tire.any suggestions

 

[ExcursionDiesel]

Spikefoof's post got jumbled. He asks:

"How do you like 3.21 with 35s now that you've driven it more? I put 285/65/20 on mine and it feels like it might be a little too much tire. Any suggestions?"

 

[Zinger]

I'll throw my hat in the MPG ring. Yesterday I did a 62 mile drive. No major hills, just rolling ones. Some stops on the way. The entire route was 55 MPH maximum, with a bunch of 35 MPH zones. Myself and my family and a half tank (33 gal) of gas. I drove it in total "granny" mode, as easy on the throttle as I could be. The Eco light was on a ton. At the end of it all I did 19.2 MPG in those 62 miles. This is a Rebel with 3.92s, and at the end of the ride I now have a whopping 296 miles on the odometer. My truck does not have any of the new flashes, whatever was in it as of November 26th is what I have.

For comparison, the other 234 miles that were on the truck were mostly short trips around town, and up to that point I had 13.5 MPG on the computer.

I think the reality is that the short trips kill these trucks, but it does seem possible to get decent mileage if you REALLY baby the throttle and concentrate on an efficient ride.

 

[Ortiz7983]

I'll throw my hat in the MPG ring. Yesterday I did a 62 mile drive. No major hills, just rolling ones. Some stops on the way. The entire route was 55 MPH maximum, with a bunch of 35 MPH zones. Myself and my family and a half tank (33 gal) of gas. I drove it in total "granny" mode, as easy on the throttle as I could be. The Eco light was on a ton. At the end of it all I did 19.2 MPG in those 62 miles. This is a Rebel with 3.92s, and at the end of the ride I now have a whopping 296 miles on the odometer. My truck does not have any of the new flashes, whatever was in it as of November 26th is what I have.

For comparison, the other 234 miles that were on the truck were mostly short trips around town, and up to that point I had 13.5 MPG on the computer.

I think the reality is that the short trips kill these trucks, but it does seem possible to get decent mileage if you REALLY baby the throttle and concentrate on an efficient ride.

I agree. I have the 3.21s and it does great on gas for a truck. The only thing is the eco light goes away really fast with just any touch of the pedal. Would like for it to stay on with just a tad acceleration.

 

[cruz-in]

"I agree. I have the 3.21s and it does great on gas for a truck. The only thing is the eco light goes away really fast with just any touch of the pedal. Would like for it to stay on with just a tad acceleration. "

I think this is where the 3.92 rear gains back some of its ileage disadvantage. I have etorque with a 3.92 rear and am surprised that "eco" stays on during slight accelerations and slight inclines.

 

[Bram2019]

Is this for the non etorque engines as well?

There are updates for the non etorque 5.7 dependent on the build date and where your software currently is. The updates are for pcm and tcm genrally built before Oct 1, 2018

 

[Gman]

The only thing is the eco light goes away really fast with just any touch of the pedal. Would like for it to stay on with just a tad acceleration.

I'm not seeing this and my truck has the 3.21. Light throttle input stays in ECO, but when it starts heading toward moderate input, ECO goes off (as expected).

 

[Ortiz7983]

I'm not seeing this and my truck has the 3.21. Light throttle input stays in ECO, but when it starts heading toward moderate input, ECO goes off (as expected).

You know, I tested it today. I think because there was a slight elevation and with the slow acceleration, it kicked off. If it was a flat surface, I can accelerate very marginal and the eco light will still stay on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Zinger]

I'll throw my hat in the MPG ring. Yesterday I did a 62 mile drive. No major hills, just rolling ones. Some stops on the way. The entire route was 55 MPH maximum, with a bunch of 35 MPH zones. Myself and my family and a half tank (33 gal) of gas. I drove it in total "granny" mode, as easy on the throttle as I could be. The Eco light was on a ton. At the end of it all I did 19.2 MPG in those 62 miles. This is a Rebel with 3.92s, and at the end of the ride I now have a whopping 296 miles on the odometer. My truck does not have any of the new flashes, whatever was in it as of November 26th is what I have.

For comparison, the other 234 miles that were on the truck were mostly short trips around town, and up to that point I had 13.5 MPG on the computer.

I think the reality is that the short trips kill these trucks, but it does seem possible to get decent mileage if you REALLY baby the throttle and concentrate on an efficient ride.

80 mile trip last night. This time I actually had some highway, but I kept it under 60MPH. The result was 19.72 MPG.

I've concluded I can achieve the realistic EPA numbers for a Rebel. Driving to achieve them is an absolute chore, and from here on out I'm not looking at MPG any longer and I'm going to drive "normal" and enjoy the ride!

 

[kjn86]

80 mile trip last night. This time I actually had some highway, but I kept it under 60MPH. The result was 19.72 MPG.

I've concluded I can achieve the realistic EPA numbers for a Rebel. Driving to achieve them is an absolute chore, and from here on out I'm not looking at MPG any longer and I'm going to drive "normal" and enjoy the ride!

Completely agree! I am sold that it can get the advertised numbers just not in all situations, most of which I am driving in.

 

[Electrical]

Great to see all of this! I saw one report of 22 mpg, anyone else getting that?

 

[Zinger]

Great to see all of this! I saw one report of 22 mpg, anyone else getting that?

When I'm in Eco mode just lumbering along barely on the throttle the instant gas meter shows 22.5, so I'd say it's possible.

 

[cmdr bobert]

That is probably part of it, but it's not all of it.

I ran a test on a nearby stretch of highway where it is flat or gradually declines over a period of 10 miles in no traffic at 55 mph. I drove in the right lane, generally foot off gas or light gas except when I initially merged onto traffic, and over that stretch in the trip gauge I achieved 17.1 mpg.

There is definitely something amiss with some of the eTorque V8 Hemis.

I had the chance to drive the same stretch of highway after rush hours ended in Maryland this morning. Everything was the same - I refueled again using 89 from the same station, reset the trip gauge from the same starting point, weather was the same.

Results did improve. What was 17.1 last time was 19.8 this time.

So improvements are noticeable. That’s a good thing.

At the same token, I’m not an apologist for the eTorque, and it sure seems like a waste of an option *for now*. That $1500 you pay for barely discernible benefit over the regular 5.7 is in hindsight really hard to justify (IMO).

And at least speaking for myself, that could’ve been $1500 worth of more useful features instead.

Maybe it’s performance gets improved over time through software updates, but IDK.

 

[Futta112]

Just an FYI. 4th gen could be driven normal and achieve very close to advertised. Not babied like the new ones.

 

[Gman]

Is happiness just in a lower EPA estimated MPG?

 

[Futta112]

Happiness isn’t spending 50k+ for worse milage lol

 

[Gman]

In another thread about MPG, I just checked and posted the top gear for 4th Gen 6-speed and 5th Gen 8-speed, and the ratio is exactly the same. So where is the reduced MPG coming from?

 

[cmdr bobert]

Is happiness just in a lower EPA estimated MPG?

It’s at a minimum - better defining the value proposition and the marketing for a mild hybrid engine upgrade if improved fuel economy is not the primary benefit.

It also, based on what one reads on this site, not a $1500 engine upgrade.

 

[Zeronet]

In another thread about MPG, I just checked and posted the top gear for 4th Gen 6-speed and 5th Gen 8-speed, and the ratio is exactly the same. So where is the reduced MPG coming from?

Larger/heavier brakes/rotors? Heavier 6 lug axles/hubs? Refreshed transmission? Software changes? We just don’t know.

On the other hand we have improved aerodynamics, some weight reduction overall, removal of the clutch cooling fan, ...

The epa ratings remained the same (for non eTorque) so there were some trade-offs but really shouldn’t be lower mileage.

On fuelly.com, when comparing gas 5.7 engines the 2019 is down .5 mpg vs the 2017. 2019 is actually .1 better than the 2018. Maybe due to break-in the 2018 and 2019 are lower?

I see 338k miles logged there for 2019 5.7 gas trucks so there’s quite a body of evidence that these trucks, on average, are delivering similar mpg to the previous generation. That said I have noticed that the 2019 crew cab is returning about 1mpg less than the 2017 and .2 less than the 2018 crew cabs. Maybe that longer cab?

ETorque is getting the 2019 back to about 2017 mpg levels. Not much improvement based on fuelly.

 

[Reduxalicious]

I'll have to say Driving home from Corpus Christi Wednesday at 75, I was getting 14-13, Sometime's drops to 12, But again HIGH cross-winds and driving directly into the wind, As soon as I get into Houston (I guess just away from heavy winds) it shot back up to 16-15, That's at 75 Cruise still.

So the Driving into the wind can be explained but total 455 Mile round trip averaged 15.8 MPG even with those abysmal ratings coming back home.