5thGenRams Forums
Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Leveling...does it hit Highway MPG?
- Thread starter Andymax
- Start date
Good to know...thanks. I'm back on the fence. did you level with bilsteins or another method?
He has the MotoFab 2” leveling puck like I do according to his description.
jljbtm
Active Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2021
- Messages
- 144
- Reaction score
- 46
Ya know, the engineers designing these trucks try to figure out how to get all the power you need all the while trying to have the best MPG over Ford & Chevy they think of every possible "ioda" and then some.
Everything from "normal operating temp." which is up from 185 in the 80's to now running at 205 degrees, Aero dynamics, oil viscosity, rounded body styles, Active shutters? wow. And I'm sure there are a dozen more!
Everything you do aftermarket is for looks or more power and will rob you some MPG's. Lets see who can add to the list.
Everything from "normal operating temp." which is up from 185 in the 80's to now running at 205 degrees, Aero dynamics, oil viscosity, rounded body styles, Active shutters? wow. And I'm sure there are a dozen more!
Everything you do aftermarket is for looks or more power and will rob you some MPG's. Lets see who can add to the list.
JC4041
Active Member
You know how I said I only had 1 highway trip after the level to use as a gauge and didn't trust it?
Well today we went to visit the in-laws in PA and I tracked mileage out and back. It's roughly 4.5 hours (300 ish miles) each way and I got 19.0 mpg on the way into the mountains, and 18.8 on the way home in the rain. That's per the truck's trip page, not hand calculated, but I've found it to be pretty accurate in the past especially when looking at longer intervals.
With that, I'd say you're not affected by a small lift/leveling enough to matter.
A few notes:
I still have 1.25" of rake because I put a 1.5" spacer on the rear to go along with the 2.5" up front.
I've got 33" Duratrac's instead of the stock 32" highway tires
I'm running 87 octane fuel, not the 89 that is recommended for "optimal" performance and efficiency.
So even with slightly larger/heavier tires, a lift/level and 87 octane fuel I'm only 1 mpg below the advertised efficiency. I think you're good to level it without worries.
Well today we went to visit the in-laws in PA and I tracked mileage out and back. It's roughly 4.5 hours (300 ish miles) each way and I got 19.0 mpg on the way into the mountains, and 18.8 on the way home in the rain. That's per the truck's trip page, not hand calculated, but I've found it to be pretty accurate in the past especially when looking at longer intervals.
With that, I'd say you're not affected by a small lift/leveling enough to matter.
A few notes:
I still have 1.25" of rake because I put a 1.5" spacer on the rear to go along with the 2.5" up front.
I've got 33" Duratrac's instead of the stock 32" highway tires
I'm running 87 octane fuel, not the 89 that is recommended for "optimal" performance and efficiency.
So even with slightly larger/heavier tires, a lift/level and 87 octane fuel I'm only 1 mpg below the advertised efficiency. I think you're good to level it without worries.
I forgot to set the trip until we were about 30 minutes in, but this shows the majority of the trip out. I didn't take a photo of the display when we got back, I just wanted out of the truck at that point.
I'm not sure why the display in the bottom left shows 18.4 avg and the trip avg shows 19.0 though. All I can figure is because the photo was taken after having exited the freeway and zig-zagged a little to a parking lot. Maybe the non-trip counter is averaging a smaller sample size and reflects the less efficient stop/go. IDK, maybe someone who knows can tell us, but I figured it was nice to show some actual numbers rather than an unsubstantiated claim. Besides, this gives us time and temp too.
And yes, for those who will inevitably notice, I've only got 4K miles on my truck (and 1200 of that is this trip and a prior one to PA shortly after I bought it in July). I don't drive a whole lot, as you can tell.
I'm not sure why the display in the bottom left shows 18.4 avg and the trip avg shows 19.0 though. All I can figure is because the photo was taken after having exited the freeway and zig-zagged a little to a parking lot. Maybe the non-trip counter is averaging a smaller sample size and reflects the less efficient stop/go. IDK, maybe someone who knows can tell us, but I figured it was nice to show some actual numbers rather than an unsubstantiated claim. Besides, this gives us time and temp too.
And yes, for those who will inevitably notice, I've only got 4K miles on my truck (and 1200 of that is this trip and a prior one to PA shortly after I bought it in July). I don't drive a whole lot, as you can tell.
Attachments
AngelPhoenix
Ram Guru
Gonna do this too, got the Revel Lift/Lower package, basically it will raise the front by about an inch, and drop the rear by about an inch, making it level. Thinking I won't see any difference in MPGs, especially once the truck goes into aero.
Per what the op asked, yes it will affect mpgs. The rake design is to keep as much air as possible from underneath. Wether it is .5 or 1 or whatever. Also said drive alot of highway miles, so to get an answer what it will cost just assume 1mpg and take that and figure your fuel cost, miles driven, mpg and you will find out how much it costs you per year. Good luck.
moparleo51
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2019
- Messages
- 446
- Reaction score
- 173
Yes it does hit the mpg. I have the bilstein level and running the rebel wheels ,3.92 gears .now with colder weather. Im getting about 13mpg on average. before I would get about 16 without.
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
Yes, I think we established early on that it DOES have an effect. You are absolutely correct that the rake is designed to help with efficiency. The subsequent responses were addressing the extent of that effect.
I like the idea of a cost analysis too. Using the industry standard 12,000 miles per year, the current average fuel cost $3.38 per gallon (as published by eia.gov for 11/29/21) and the advertised 15 cty 20 mpg hwy (as published by FCA on the window sticker) we can calculate the cost of losing 1 mpg.
12000 miles / 20 mpg = 600 gallons of fuel used per year. 600 gallons x $3.38 = $2,028 per year.
12000 miles / 19 mpg = 631 gallons of fuel used per year. 631 gallons x $3.38 = $2132 per year.
Therefore, a 1 mpg loss from the advertised 20 mpg will cost you $104 every year on average.
Since nobody drives entirely on the freeway, we should also look at city and combo.
12000 miles / 15 mpg city = 800 gallons of fuel used per year. 800 gallons x $3.38 = $2704
12000 miles / 14 mpg city = 857 gallons of fuel used per year. 857 gallons x #3.38 = $2896
If all your driving is in the city, you pay an extra $192 per year if you lose 1 mpg.
And finally since a realistic analysis would be a combo of both freeway and city, I'll use the advertised 17 mpg for a baseline.
12000 miles / 17 mpg combo = 705 gallons of fuel used per year. 705 gallons x $3.38 = $2383
12000 miles / 16 mpg combo = 750 gallons of fuel used per year. 750 gallons x #3.38 = $2535
The cost of losing 1 mpg is $152 annually, assuming average mileage, average fuel cost, and combined driving conditions.
I like the idea of a cost analysis too. Using the industry standard 12,000 miles per year, the current average fuel cost $3.38 per gallon (as published by eia.gov for 11/29/21) and the advertised 15 cty 20 mpg hwy (as published by FCA on the window sticker) we can calculate the cost of losing 1 mpg.
12000 miles / 20 mpg = 600 gallons of fuel used per year. 600 gallons x $3.38 = $2,028 per year.
12000 miles / 19 mpg = 631 gallons of fuel used per year. 631 gallons x $3.38 = $2132 per year.
Therefore, a 1 mpg loss from the advertised 20 mpg will cost you $104 every year on average.
Since nobody drives entirely on the freeway, we should also look at city and combo.
12000 miles / 15 mpg city = 800 gallons of fuel used per year. 800 gallons x $3.38 = $2704
12000 miles / 14 mpg city = 857 gallons of fuel used per year. 857 gallons x #3.38 = $2896
If all your driving is in the city, you pay an extra $192 per year if you lose 1 mpg.
And finally since a realistic analysis would be a combo of both freeway and city, I'll use the advertised 17 mpg for a baseline.
12000 miles / 17 mpg combo = 705 gallons of fuel used per year. 705 gallons x $3.38 = $2383
12000 miles / 16 mpg combo = 750 gallons of fuel used per year. 750 gallons x #3.38 = $2535
The cost of losing 1 mpg is $152 annually, assuming average mileage, average fuel cost, and combined driving conditions.
Last edited:
AngelPhoenix
Ram Guru
Wait, you lost 3 MPG's from a level? Same tires? How much did you come up?
Idahoktm
Spends too much time on here
The rake of a pick-up is not an aerodynamic design, it's to compensate for carrying a heavy load.
AngelPhoenix
Ram Guru
That actually makes me wonder, I know the air suspension can level you out when you hook up to a trailer but will it do the same thing if you've got something really heavy in the bed?
moparleo51
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2019
- Messages
- 446
- Reaction score
- 173
Idahoktm
Spends too much time on here
If that was the case, all cars and SUV's would have a stinkbug attitude and Aero Mode would just lower the nose.
