Poor gas mileage

[BigD]

Is yours 2wd or 4wd?

4WD

 

[Zeronet]

No e-torque?

No eTorque

 

[Birdman_2000]

I drove across the state of Missouri, All highway and pretty flat. 18.9 was what i got running about 72. I am ok with that. My Highlander AWD would have gotten 21-22, but it couldn't tow anything. So far the worst thing i have seen for gas mileage is sitting idling. Waiting to drop my kid off for school you can just watch it tick down.

 

[chrisnack]

No eTorque

More proof that those of us with e-torque are screwed. Clearly.

 

[SilverNight2020]

4WD

I would love to know what you are doing to achieve that gas mileage, because if my memory of all these posts serves me correctly, you are the only one with a 4x4 eTorque actually touching highway mpg that high. Also 55-60 mph has been shown to be the sweet spot for these trucks, but how many of us actually have the ability to drive that slowly on a highway. If the sticker says highway mpg, it should reflect mpg ratings at a speed that would be equivalent to most highways. That average speed would likey be 70 mph,and all MPG ratings would tank.

 

[chrisnack]

If you look at Fuelly the avg with etorque is about 16mpg..

Go back a couple years and it’s 18-19 solid.

So it’s pretty clear the new gen is much worse.

Here is just etorque:

 

[CrazyWorld]

Lots of people on here are getting in the low 20’s with the 5.7 and 5.7 w/etorque. Maybe you just have a more aggressive driving style that ur not really aware of.

Has to be....heavy foot is the issue....I get 20+ consistently.

 

[J-Cooz]

I baby the hell out of mine and can only touch 20s on very long highway drives if I keep the speed down. Around town I get about 16-17mpg and that's with an extremely light foot.

 

[BigD]

I would love to know what you are doing to achieve that gas mileage, because if my memory of all these posts serves me correctly, you are the only one with a 4x4 eTorque actually touching highway mpg that high. Also 55-60 mph has been shown to be the sweet spot for these trucks, but how many of us actually have the ability to drive that slowly on a highway. If the sticker says highway mpg, it should reflect mpg ratings at a speed that would be equivalent to most highways. That average speed would likey be 70 mph,and all MPG ratings would tank.

I drive nice to achieve 23 mpg. In Minnesota we have lots of highways where the max speed is 55 mph. We also have freeways where the max speed is 70, but not until u get out of the metro. Most freeways are max speed 60 or 65 in town. Basically I just drive the speed limit. Even hitting the gas hard around town having a little fun with the Hemi I still get like 15.7 or so. I think a big difference is I got a big horn which weighs about 600 lbs less than a limited. Driving a limited is like have 4 big dudes in your truck all the time compared to a big horn.

 

[J-Cooz]

I drive nice to achieve 23 mpg. In Minnesota we have lots of highways where the max speed is 55 mph. We also have freeways where the max speed is 70, but not until u get out of the metro. Most freeways are max speed 60 or 65 in town. Basically I just drive the speed limit. Even hitting the gas hard around town having a little fun with the Hemi I still get like 15.7 or so. I think a big difference is I got a big horn which weighs about 600 lbs less than a limited. Driving a limited is like have 4 big dudes in your truck all the time compared to a big horn.

Definitely. It's crazy how much heavier the Limited's are. I guess that's the price to pay for luxury.

 

[ktl5005]

I baby the hell out of mine and can only touch 20s on very long highway drives if I keep the speed down. Around town I get about 16-17mpg and that's with an extremely light foot.

That Is actually pretty darn good. That is what MY Jeep Grand CHerokee Trailhawkiwht V6 that I am trading in gets.

 

[ktl5005]

And just to say a point....

NEVER have I owned a car that came close or met what the EPA sticker on the window says I should be getting. NEVER. LOL.
MY wife's Durango R/T with 3.92s averages 13 around town and 19 on the highway. I am not complaining. We didn't buy it for the mileage.
Same will be for the Limited.

 

[PowerJrod]

I hear ya, I wish I could've found at least a 3.55...oh well guess I'll just soak up the gas savings....for when I buy a new one in a few years hehe

 

[kuba]

I did a little experiment and I think the MDS (and lack of it at high speeds) has a lot to do with poor highway MPG.

I just did a 400 mile trip (200 back and forth), and I tested out two different speeds. I went 68 on the way there and 65 on the way home.
I have a 5.7 rebel without e-torque.

On the way up, at 68mph, I got 16 mpg by computer.
On the way back, at 65mph, I got 20 mpg by computer.

I doubt the drag alone is responsible for a 4 mpg difference for just a 3 mph difference
The truck tended to go into MDS (eco) mode way more often at 65. I think the range between 65-70mph, the MDS system really starts dropping out, significantly hurting highway MPG.

Flat terrain was the biggest culprit. Obviously at both speeds, big down hills would always trigger eco. At 68, flat terrain would rarely activate eco. Going 65 on flat ground, I was occasionally going into eco.

Also, at 65 mph, I was often able to trick the truck into going into eco on flat terrain when it wasn't doing so itself. If I override the cruise control to 1-2 mpg faster, then let go of the gas, I was often successful in getting the truck to go into eco on a flat stretch, when it otherwise wouldn't want to go into eco on its own. I wounder if software optimization is possible?
I wonder if the small extra drag by the e-torque system further prevents MDS activation.

The trip up (68 mph) was about 10F degrees colder, and a net gain of about 1000 feet elevation. But I've done this drive about a dozen times in this truck, and 16-17 mpg in either direction is my typical average going 68-70 mph.

Now for the conspiracy theory: MDS is a pseudo-defeat device. What benefit would it be for the device to be working beyond the EPA testing speed range (which it sounds like is sub 70). Decreasing the instances that MDS activates could theoretically decrease the number of things that mechanically break (therefore less repairs cost for FCA), and it would also improve satisfaction with vehicle power/towing (imagine the harm reviews would have if they mentions "weak" or "acceleration lack"). The one down side is the complaints from the rare person that cares about mpg in a truck lol.

 

[SilverNight2020]

Has to be....heavy foot is the issue....I get 20+ consistently.

I looked back at your previous posts and, because you do not have a signature, I cannot tell if your truck is an eTorque or not and if you are 2wd or 4wd. With that said if your truck is a nearly apples to apples comparison of the OP's truck and others, including myself, on here complaining of bad gas mileage with specifically the eTorque engine, then thank you for your input. If the only thing similar to the OP's truck that you have is the 3.92, then this is getting away from the original reason this thread was started, thus the rabbit trail. Not trying to sound mean, however your input is not valid in this thread if your truck is not an eTorque Hemi with at least 4wd like mine and others complaining are. This is frustrating because there is definitely a problem with the eTorque motor and it needs to be addressed. You can see in my signature I have the lightest crew cab setup, with the exception of 4wd, and I am struggling to get 17 mpg on the freeway with non-adaptive cruise control set at 65 mph. Heaven forbid I increase my speed to 70 mph, it quickly drops to 16 mpg. I drove a 2020 CC sport 4wd with the 3.21 no eTorque for 3 days while they found the one I bought and it was easily getting 2-3 mpg better than my eTorque gets now. Silly me, I thought getting a truck that claimed better gas mileage was a better choice, thus the eTorque, but boy was I wrong.

 

[BigD]

Just an update. I've got 1,200 miles on my truck now. 1 month old. I'm averaging 18.9 mpg since I bought it. I got 19.1 mpg this week driving to work. Good mix of 70 mph, then stop & go in traffic & construction zone. On my 45 min commute, 15 minutes was sitting in the construction zone never going over 10 mph. I'm extremely impressed with 19 mpg considering how long I was idling in traffic plus I was going 76 mph for about 15 minutes ! I've got the 3.92 & hemi etorque.

 

[JF19Longhorn]

Crossed 3k miles otw out to the mother-in-laws for mother's day. Roughly 200 miles eachway from South Jersey to bumfuck PA. Ninety percent of the drive is 74-77mph on the PA Tpk and the rest is rolling back country roads in the 40-55mph range. Nothing out there is flat..

Otw to bumfuck PA = Lie-o-meter 16.4 mpg / Actual 15.7mpg
Otw home = Lie-o-meter 17.7mpg / Actual 16.9mpg

The two best tanks I've had yet.

**89Oct

 

[BacktheBlue00]

I looked back at your previous posts and, because you do not have a signature, I cannot tell if your truck is an eTorque or not and if you are 2wd or 4wd. With that said if your truck is a nearly apples to apples comparison of the OP's truck and others, including myself, on here complaining of bad gas mileage with specifically the eTorque engine, then thank you for your input. If the only thing similar to the OP's truck that you have is the 3.92, then this is getting away from the original reason this thread was started, thus the rabbit trail. Not trying to sound mean, however your input is not valid in this thread if your truck is not an eTorque Hemi with at least 4wd like mine and others complaining are. This is frustrating because there is definitely a problem with the eTorque motor and it needs to be addressed. You can see in my signature I have the lightest crew cab setup, with the exception of 4wd, and I am struggling to get 17 mpg on the freeway with non-adaptive cruise control set at 65 mph. Heaven forbid I increase my speed to 70 mph, it quickly drops to 16 mpg. I drove a 2020 CC sport 4wd with the 3.21 no eTorque for 3 days while they found the one I bought and it was easily getting 2-3 mpg better than my eTorque gets now. Silly me, I thought getting a truck that claimed better gas mileage was a better choice, thus the eTorque, but boy was I wrong.

Hey brother I just recently picked up a used 2019 1500 4x4 5.7 with etorque. I verified it today that at highway speed ie 65 mph cruise control, the computer is reading 22-23 mpg. I do have the air suspension so it does lower at highway speeds and the ac was running. I will say at 80 mph I believe it was only 16-17mpg. Then 70-75 it went up to 18-19 mpg. City driving without aggressive acceleration is about 15-16 for me. Assuming the computer is a little off, highway mpg at 65 mph would be 22, which is what the sticker says. I'm also only running 87.

(Side note: I was able to squeak out 30+ mpg in a '19 Mustang GT 6 speed MT on a drive from Florida to Pennsylvania. That was a very tame drive, but since it was for distance I didn't care)

Reading on EPA.gov's website the highway test is 60 mph. But they also claim a top speed of 80 mph, yet don't elaborate on how long that top speed is held. Manufacturers are supposed to use the EPA tests in a controlled setting to get their numbers, but since EPA can only test 10-20% cars a year (their numbers), the mpg provided is done so by the manufacturer. According to their website, they will test vehicles due to consumer complaints.

 

[BigD]

Hey brother I just recently picked up a used 2019 1500 4x4 5.7 with etorque. I verified it today that at highway speed ie 65 mph cruise control, the computer is reading 22-23 mpg. I do have the air suspension so it does lower at highway speeds and the ac was running. I will say at 80 mph I believe it was only 16-17mpg. Then 70-75 it went up to 18-19 mpg. City driving without aggressive acceleration is about 15-16 for me. Assuming the computer is a little off, highway mpg at 65 mph would be 22, which is what the sticker says. I'm also only running 87.

(Side note: I was able to squeak out 30+ mpg in a '19 Mustang GT 6 speed MT on a drive from Florida to Pennsylvania. That was a very tame drive, but since it was for distance I didn't care)

Reading on EPA.gov's website the highway test is 60 mph. But they also claim a top speed of 80 mph, yet don't elaborate on how long that top speed is held. Manufacturers are supposed to use the EPA tests in a controlled setting to get their numbers, but since EPA can only test 10-20% cars a year (their numbers), the mpg provided is done so by the manufacturer. According to their website, they will test vehicles due to consumer complaints.

I agree . I'm getting the same mileage. I'm averaging 19 overall with a good mix of city & highway. That's right between the 17/22 that the EPA says. I think these people who are complaining slam on the gas at every light, then race to the next light just to slam on the brakes. I see so many people who drive like that. I don't remember the last time I bought brake pads. My Silverado had 98,000 miles & original brake pads ! My Ram had 73,000 miles on original pads.

 

[CrazyWorld]

I looked back at your previous posts and, because you do not have a signature, I cannot tell if your truck is an eTorque or not and if you are 2wd or 4wd. With that said if your truck is a nearly apples to apples comparison of the OP's truck and others, including myself, on here complaining of bad gas mileage with specifically the eTorque engine, then thank you for your input. If the only thing similar to the OP's truck that you have is the 3.92, then this is getting away from the original reason this thread was started, thus the rabbit trail. Not trying to sound mean, however your input is not valid in this thread if your truck is not an eTorque Hemi with at least 4wd like mine and others complaining are. This is frustrating because there is definitely a problem with the eTorque motor and it needs to be addressed. You can see in my signature I have the lightest crew cab setup, with the exception of 4wd, and I am struggling to get 17 mpg on the freeway with non-adaptive cruise control set at 65 mph. Heaven forbid I increase my speed to 70 mph, it quickly drops to 16 mpg. I drove a 2020 CC sport 4wd with the 3.21 no eTorque for 3 days while they found the one I bought and it was easily getting 2-3 mpg better than my eTorque gets now. Silly me, I thought getting a truck that claimed better gas mileage was a better choice, thus the eTorque, but boy was I wrong.

I was merely telling you my experience. My truck is not eTorque.....it is a 2019 Tradesman....crew cab...4wd....3.92....tow package....with a Lear hard Tonneau cover....8 speed...MDS.....great truck....great gas mileage for the size. Never even looked at the eTorque option....sounds like that was a good thing......apparently you think my input is not valid....sorry.....no offence.....just sharing my experience. Good luck.....