GAS MPG

[H3HUMVEE]

Originally Posted by RubHer Yellow Ducky

" OK - GIRLS,,, LISTEN !!!

WHO - meaning you all out there---

BESIDES H3HUMVEE is getting 20+ A V E R A G E city/highway...???

ANYONE ? remember AVERAGE!

HUH?

I didn't think so... remember math skills are important here!!!

RYD

From someone that can't even figure out how to post there aviatar I think your the one that needs to check there math skills
http://www.elcovaforums.com/forums/s...ad.php?t=16717

[NEOCON1]

thats why i get 12-15 around town thanx 5

[RubHer Yellow Ducky]

OK...

U shamed me... I mad the correction

RYD

[KB7TCV]

4800 Miles on H3 16 tanks fuel. Averaging 15.44 MPG. running regular 85 Octance. altitude of 6200 ft. Driving 90% city with hills 10% highway.

Reed
KB7TCV
North Eastern Utah

[wpage]

Originally Posted by H3HUMVEE

I'm consistently getting 20+ MPG out of my H3... Best tank that I have checked was 21.6 and the worst was around 17 during "break in". this is with mixed driving and speeds under 65 MPH.

H3HUMVEE
Curious if you are still running this above average MPG. If so could you share some of your secrets with us

[H3PAC]

I've been keeping a log over the past 3000 miles. Mostly country roads in rolling hills, with some city and some freeway driving. I don't race it, but I occasionally cruise at about 75 or so on the turnpike to avoid too many 18-wheel enemas. No long trips so far. I drive about 1500 miles a month. Use regular fuel. So far, the range is 14.2 to 16.4 mpg per tankfull, with an average of 15.4 mpg.

[RubHer Yellow Ducky]

Originally Posted by wpage

H3HUMVEE
Curious if you are still running this above average MPG. If so could you share some of your secrets with us

OK !

I do not want to cross swords with anyone...

Is there someone on the forum is is AVERAGING (city/highway)
20 + MPG ?

other then h3humvee and the gay guys that(?) is getting their under chassis protection on a trade out.

with an H-3 (not a 1, 2, 4, jeep or any other vehicle)

RYD

[f5fstop]

Recent trip back from TN, I averaged 18.29916931 on one leg of the journey from Centerville TN to Columbus, IN. That was with speeds of up to 80-85 in TN, 75 in KY and back to 80s in IN. Other legs were around 17.5-17.9.

[nychot]

Originally Posted by NJHummerGuy

Just got my tank filled up for 1st time since getting the new wheels.....got 18mpg!
What are others getting?

FYI

December 24, 2006
Motoring
New Federal Fuel Economy Ratings Set a Double Standard

By MATTHEW L. WALD
GOVERNMENT regulators, along with most American drivers, have long understood that the fuel economy estimates on the window stickers of new cars can be laughably optimistic. Even the federal fuel economy label serves notice that the actual mileage will depend on options, driving habits and other conditions.

So this month the Environmental Protection Agency revised its method for calculating mileage, an effort to provide more realistic numbers for shoppers considering a new vehicle. The change, which takes effect on 2008 model year vehicles, will be considerable; miles per gallon in city driving may drop by as much as 30 percent for gas-sippers like hybrids, the agency says. On average, city mileage for all vehicles is expected to be about 12 percent lower; highway estimates could be as much as 8 percent lower.

The new method of calculation recognizes that Americans drive faster, accelerate more quickly and use the air-conditioning more frequently than the federal mileage tests have been taking into account. It also takes into consideration changes in the ways Americans now buy and use vehicles, especially as large S.U.V.?s have evolved from work trucks to family haulers.

For the first time, trucks with a gross (fully loaded) weight rating of more than 8,500 pounds will have to carry fuel economy labels, beginning with the 2011 model year. Previously, large pickups and S.U.V.?s in this class (like the Hummer H2) were exempt; the new cutoff will be 10,000 pounds.

When the new stickers begin to appear, there is bound to be confusion. Labels carrying mileage figures based on the new calculations will be required on Sept. 1, 2007, making it plausible that the buyer of an ?08 Chevrolet Impala will see a lower m.p.g estimate on the window sticker than a neighbor who bought an ?07 model a week earlier ? even if the cars are mechanically identical.

Of course, the federal fuel economy ratings were not established for consumer education alone. The program began under the Energy Policy Conservation Act of 1975, after the Arab oil embargo, as part of an effort to improve fuel economy and reduce oil imports. The fuel economy data is compiled by the E.P.A.; in most cases, the tests are conducted by automakers and spot-checked by regulators.

To enforce a schedule of gradual improvements, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration was given the authority to establish standards for corporate average fuel economy, or CAFE. Under the law, each automaker must maintain minimum fleet averages for its cars and trucks to avoid penalties. But here?s the rub: Even though regulators have now agreed that the method in use for estimating fuel economy is unrealistic and needs to be revised, it will continue to be used for calculating compliance with CAFE mandates.

The decision to approach the fuel economy problem through the label and not the vehicle came from Congress, which tried to address consumer dissatisfaction by ordering the change as part of the Energy Policy Act it passed in the summer of 2005.

Gas mileage is a touchy subject not only among consumers, but also in Congress, where it took an explicit political compromise to pass the ratings change. Part of the deal was that the older, less realistic formula would still be used for CAFE compliance, which is 27.5 miles a gallon for cars, and a figure for light trucks (pickups, vans and S.U.V.?s) of 22.2 m.p.g. for 2007.

Beyond knowing that the older mileage calculations are unrealistic, government regulators also know the fuel economy of the vehicle fleet now on American roads (which of course includes older vehicles). Each month the Energy Department publishes its own estimate after adding up the gallons of gasoline sold and dividing by the number of miles driven. It says cars get 22.4 miles a gallon, and vans, pickups and S.U.V.?s get 16.2.

While there is a general consensus that fuel economy is crucial to America and that the current rating system is out of kilter, the agreement ends there. For example, in the summer of 2005, during the debate over whether to change the sticker or the vehicle, Senator James M. Talent, Republican of Missouri, described the threat this way: ?Unreasonably higher CAFE standards would be a dagger at the heart of our auto manufacturing sector.?

Mr. Talent, discussing a proposal to raise the fuel economy requirement to 34 miles a gallon, said in floor debate that a Ford F-150 pickup built in Missouri would cost $3,000 more as a result. That would encourage people to buy import-brand trucks, he said, because those manufacturers could offset gas-guzzling trucks with a large number of smaller, more efficient vehicles. In fact, sales of the largest American-built trucks have slipped because of higher gas prices.

On the other side of the debate was Representative Sherwood Boehlert, Republican of New York and chairman of the House Science Committee. After the E.P.A. acted this month, he argued, ?The sticker itself isn?t worth much if there isn?t a follow-through on the Department of Transportation?s part,? to change car?s actual mileage.

?Shame on N.H.T.S.A.,? he said, summarizing the recent history of inaction on fuel economy standards by the department in charge of the issue, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Mr. Boehlert predicted that the new Congress would toughen the standards.

The auto industry liked the change to the mileage calculation because it implies that drivers, not vehicles, are out of step with test procedures. A spokeswoman for the Alliance of Auto Manufacturers, Gloria Bergquist, said, ?How you drive really is the most important factor.?

Some incoming members of Congress plan to raise the issue of fuel economy in the next session, but it is not clear whether there is a consensus for tougher standards on cars. For light trucks, the Transportation Department has already ordered improvements in fuel economy, subject to economic feasibility and safety, but the change is modest, about 8 percent.

It did, however, change the system, setting a sliding scale based on each vehicle?s size. That had the effect of making fuel economy important to the manufacturers of each vehicle.

In contrast, the system in place for cars sets a corporate average, so that a company that specializes in small cars need not worry about improving its fuel economy, while a company that makes big cars may struggle to meet the standard. The Transportation Department has asked Congress to change the car rules to resemble the truck rules, so far without effect.

And while the new Congress will have a Democratic majority, the impact of that change on fuel economy rules is not clear; the issue has never broken down cleanly along party lines. Some Republicans have always looked with sympathy on the interests of the Detroit manufacturers and opposed fuel mandates; others have favored conservation.

Some Democrats were in the conservation category, too, but others took the position of the United Auto Workers, which has generally opposed stricter mandates.

The deeper problem, though, is that there is no free energy lunch, and cars with better fuel economy may seem less attractive in other ways. The mileage heroes may be smaller or slower; they may be priced higher because they are built with expensive, lightweight materials or use complex powertrains, as gas-electric hybrids do.

And the federal government?s recent track record on reducing oil dependence is dismal. In 1992, stung by the run-up in prices after Iraq invaded Kuwait, Congress passed an energy law that called for 10 percent of cars to run on something other than gasoline by the then far-off year of 2000. But the price of gasoline came back down, and the Energy Department found it could not swim against the economic tide. So transportation is still 97 percent dependent on oil.

There is another route, however. Many of the mandates on car emissions originated with California and spread to other states and the federal government. Now California and other states are seeking to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, which would have the result of requiring better mileage, since the amount of carbon dioxide emitted depends on the amount of hydrocarbons burned, either as gasoline or diesel fuel.

The case is now before the Supreme Court, and if it rules in the states? favor, states could effectively regulate fuel economy. Some would probably do so vigorously ? Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California has often said he aspires for his state to be the center of the ?carbon-free world.?


Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
Privacy Policy

Recent H3 mileage last 2 days was 16.4 mpg for me (1/3 suburban city and 2/3 fast freeway driving at 80-85 mph).

S.

[Interleukin]

Had my H3 since July, only have about 5,000 miles on it. I drive about 25+ miles interstate/city each day to and from work and surprisingly have seen my MPG drop from the first few fill-ups back in July/Aug.

Back then I was hitting 15.5 but now it is hanging between 12.8 and 13.2. This is hauling ass mpg though, I routinely drive it on the interstate at 75-80 mph. I expected an overall everyday mpg of 13-15 when I bought, so this is not surprising. However, I guess I have been a little surprised that it dropped upon "breaking in."

[f5fstop]

Colder weather will bring a drop in fuel mileage. So, hopefully, your mileage will go back up when the weather turns warmer. My city driving dropped from around 14.5 to around 13-13.5 last winter and this winter, but after last winter it went back up. Takes too long for the engine to warm up, thus the fuel stays a bit richer for a longer period of time.

I should also note that this summer when traveling to Utah, I noticed a one to two mile difference in fuel mileage from heading west to heading east. Heading west usually means heading into the wind, and that cut my mileage, while heading east increased my mileage.

[HumbleAg]

Originally Posted by f5fstop

Recent trip back from TN, I averaged 18.29916931 on one leg of the journey....

I think in a calculation this precise, you would need to factor in the evaporation coefficients for both the initial and subsequent fill ups, normalized for standard pressure and temperature. In addition, the varying load capacity due to Big Mac consumption and subsequent unloading would also cause variances.

Or you coud just say "screw it", I'm driving the cool truck that I want to drive and I don't really care about mileage.

[jman_in_minnesota]

I got 19.6 on a 200 mile or so trip a month ago, about 40 degree temps, not alot of hills, averaged around 70-75 with the cruise control

[RubHer Yellow Ducky]

Originally Posted by jman_in_minnesota

I got 19.6 on a 200 mile or so trip a month ago, about 40 degree temps, not alot of hills, averaged around 70-75 with the cruise control

So you would call this a highway trip with little on no city driving? Then it is not representative of of your normal AVERAGE MPG?

RYD

[The ArchiTexan]

Originally Posted by RubHer Yellow Ducky[B

Is there someone on the forum is is AVERAGING (city/highway)[/b]
20 + MPG ?

other then h3humvee and the gay guys that(?) is getting their under chassis protection on a trade out.

with an H-3 (not a 1, 2, 4, jeep or any other vehicle)

RYD

I get 22 mpg city.

[jman_in_minnesota]

that was the longest trip I had taken with the H3, I drive < 5 miles per day, if at all, during the week and I'm not tracking those statistics. The one trip was all I could contribute, sorry

[f5fstop]

Originally Posted by HumbleAg

I think in a calculation this precise, you would need to factor in the evaporation coefficients for both the initial and subsequent fill ups, normalized for standard pressure and temperature. In addition, the varying load capacity due to Big Mac consumption and subsequent unloading would also cause variances.

Or you coud just say "screw it", I'm driving the cool truck that I want to drive and I don't really care about mileage.

Not to be mean, but there should be no evaporation coefficient since it is a closed fuel system, what evaporates is burned when the carbon canister is purged by the canister purge solenoid. That is, as long as the fuel cap is still on.
As for varying load capacity...I don't eat when driving except at the end of the night, so my fuel mileage should get better with each rest stop.

[RubHer Yellow Ducky]

Originally Posted by The ArchiTexan

I get 22 mpg city.

LOL

Yes you will get 22 mpg when the

HITLER YOUTH GROUP (monitors)

restore my ending signature setup.

LETS SEE, THIS IS A FORUM ABOUT THE HUMMER H-3, NOT CHILDHOOD PRANKS...

RYD

Really not much H3 content here...

S.