top down vs. a/c MPG
07-06-2012, 09:43 AM
#11
JK Super Freak
Originally Posted by ZMagic97
I've never believed in the A/C effecting the fuel efficiency unless it's in an old car or one with an engine that is WAY too small for the vehicle. When I was in high school and gas was close to $5/gallon I saw people driving with the A/C off and windows down when it was 115 out. Of course they said it was "to get better gas mileage." I don't think they realized that it didn't help, and if they really wanted to get technical, wouldn't rolling the windows down create more drag therefore lowering efficiency?
Not trying to take anything away from the OP, the test is still interesting of course. But like CoreyZ said, who buys a Jeep for fuel efficiency? I can understand trying to drive as efficiently as possible, but since my JK maybe get 14-15MPG on the freeway (17 in really flat areas while doing 68) I just deal with it when I drive it, and I have a small truck for when I don't need the Jeep.
Heck, I just took the JK to Vegas and back 2 days ago and averages 15.3 there are back doiung 65-72MPH average. It's not great, but for a lifted brick I'm not upset. I'm, sure I know I could have done 80MPH, but then I'd be getting aroind 13ish MPG. I had the hard top on, A/C blasting, and took my time in the right lane with the seat tilted back and the cruise control on.
Not trying to take anything away from the OP, the test is still interesting of course. But like CoreyZ said, who buys a Jeep for fuel efficiency? I can understand trying to drive as efficiently as possible, but since my JK maybe get 14-15MPG on the freeway (17 in really flat areas while doing 68) I just deal with it when I drive it, and I have a small truck for when I don't need the Jeep.
Heck, I just took the JK to Vegas and back 2 days ago and averages 15.3 there are back doiung 65-72MPH average. It's not great, but for a lifted brick I'm not upset. I'm, sure I know I could have done 80MPH, but then I'd be getting aroind 13ish MPG. I had the hard top on, A/C blasting, and took my time in the right lane with the seat tilted back and the cruise control on.
07-07-2012, 06:15 AM
#13
JK Super Freak
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Goodyear, Arizona
Posts: 1,567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
07-07-2012, 06:38 AM
#15
Top off is a killer of fuel mileage. (roof racks too)
And as for the weight.. This isn't scientific but I bet you'd need to shave 1500 pounds, or more, off your jeep to see a 3mpg gain at highway speeds.
And as for the weight.. This isn't scientific but I bet you'd need to shave 1500 pounds, or more, off your jeep to see a 3mpg gain at highway speeds.
07-07-2012, 06:41 AM
#16
JK Freak
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by EzK
Top off is a killer of fuel mileage. (roof racks too)
And as for the weight.. This isn't scientific but I bet you'd need to shave 1500 pounds, or more, off your jeep to see a 3mpg gain at highway speeds.
And as for the weight.. This isn't scientific but I bet you'd need to shave 1500 pounds, or more, off your jeep to see a 3mpg gain at highway speeds.
07-07-2012, 08:58 AM
#17
JK Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Moundsville, WV
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I drive with the top off/ sun rider open and ac on all the time. I do it more so in slower traffic and when I am just getting in.
As far as mpg it stay pretty close to 18.8 mpg regardless of setup in my '10 2 door Rubicon.
As far as mpg it stay pretty close to 18.8 mpg regardless of setup in my '10 2 door Rubicon.
07-07-2012, 10:24 AM
#18
JK Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Goodyear, AZ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not to derail the thread too much but I recently swapped out my stock air filter with a K&N filter. As of today I only have 2012 miles on the Jeep (ironically its a 2012)... and the previous tanks of gas (before the filter change) was around 17mpg... after the change latest fill-up calculated out to be 18.5mpg.
So it appears that having the top off degrades the mileage to some degree... may want to look at a K&N filter (or equivalent) that will offset the difference a little.
I agree though too... I never bought my JK for the mileage but for its ability... but I will say it gets better gas mileage than my Nissan Titan did so I win either way! GRIN
So it appears that having the top off degrades the mileage to some degree... may want to look at a K&N filter (or equivalent) that will offset the difference a little.
I agree though too... I never bought my JK for the mileage but for its ability... but I will say it gets better gas mileage than my Nissan Titan did so I win either way! GRIN
07-07-2012, 01:40 PM
#19
Another point I have seldom wondered was the mpg difference between the soft-top top down and the top removed. I doubt it would be a noticebable difference, but the soft top does create a bit of a spoiler when folded down.
Of course the biggest impact is driver behavior and geography. I lost 3mpg moving from the coast to the mountains.
Of course the biggest impact is driver behavior and geography. I lost 3mpg moving from the coast to the mountains.
07-07-2012, 01:51 PM
#20
JK Newbie
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Veneta, OR
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just another data point / anecdote- I spent most of the week with the whole top and all 4 doors off. l put just the front panels on and drove about 80 miles today in mixed city / hwy and watched the mpg readout climb from 18.1 to 18.6. I know the numbers are not necessarily accurate, but they've been consistently half an mpg low for the whole 4 years, 70k miles since new.