Baseline MPG. Charger RT.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: steve20
you have a very large advantage in CID and are putting out, off the top of my head, what, 130 hp more than him---? what would you expect?

disclaimer: I like neither Fords nor ChryCo prods, but am very interested in your experiment. Please continue to keep us updated


Try 40. A 3v mustang has 300hp. My 06 charger has 340. And I've got a serious weight disadvantage.
I'll keep this thread updated with my fuel consumption. Thanks for the interest. I'm glad our trying this out isn't wasted time and some people are finding it informative
 
Last edited:
I'm one tank away from baseline mpg's on both the Civic and Frontier. I'll just start a new thread when the data is in. Now I am really interested in seeing my Frontier results since EPA is 15/20 [17 combined] and that is right where I am now...in the low 17's.

Clevy, not sure, but I think the '06 Charger R/T's EPA is 15/23 mpg [18 combined]. So you're well ahead of that.

You have me more interested than before in getting a Charger. [I told you I was looking at getting an '11+ 5.0 mustang next].
 
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: steve20
you have a very large advantage in CID and are putting out, off the top of my head, what, 130 hp more than him---? what would you expect?

disclaimer: I like neither Fords nor ChryCo prods, but am very interested in your experiment. Please continue to keep us updated


Try 40. A 3v mustang has 300hp. My 06 charger has 340. And I've got a serious weight disadvantage.
I'll keep this thread updated with my fuel consumption. Thanks for the interest. I'm glad our trying this out isn't wasted time and some people are finding it informative


Yeah, the 3V cars aren't all that fast. How much of a torque advantage do you have? Do you know off the top of your head?

I however ran into an AMG last year that was more than a challenge on the Trans-Canada. Those things move out!
 
Note that Clevy does not have all the tweaks that the new 5.7's have. Variable cam timing is in there now as well as vastly different programming for MDS. A sizeable HP increase as well to 370 hp and 395 tq.

Once they get the 8 speed ZF slushbox in there that thing will be quicker AND more economical
 
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Note that Clevy does not have all the tweaks that the new 5.7's have. Variable cam timing is in there now as well as vastly different programming for MDS. A sizeable HP increase as well to 370 hp and 395 tq.

Once they get the 8 speed ZF slushbox in there that thing will be quicker AND more economical


I might have to buy another one although I think I see a challenger in my future. The old lady said no more mustangs,mopar isn't a mustang.
Hehehe
 
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: Trajan
So far, I have no indication that MoS2 does anything for mpg. Didn't really expect any....


Pollute someone else's thread. Your opinion is worthless so don't bother wasting your time or mine.



Awww..... Someone got their feelings hurt.

I would suggest you get your own private board then. The only thing worthless is the fact that you don't like the fact that I said what I did.

Not a waste of my time. Nor yours since you took the time to make a worthless opinion.

One of the purposes of this board is to exchange information. Learn to deal with the fact that not all observations will be to your liking.
 
Last edited:
when you all have time, go back in time to 1966 and check out the horsepower of the everyday muscle cars and the mileage they got. If you own a modern day muscle car and get 19 mpg, you are doing good. IMHO,,muscle cars are made to run and have fun, to hzll with the mileage, life is short, twist the grip and let it rip.....
 
Originally Posted By: CourierDriver
when you all have time, go back in time to 1966 and check out the horsepower of the everyday muscle cars and the mileage they got. If you own a modern day muscle car and get 19 mpg, you are doing good. IMHO,,muscle cars are made to run and have fun, to hzll with the mileage, life is short, twist the grip and let it rip.....


You're right Courier, but an extra mpg or two never hurt anybody.
 
Originally Posted By: Clevy

Another tank by the wayside. 420 miles and I think I was sucking fumes driving into the gas station. 18.2 gallons filled which translates to 23,1 mpg


You do know that thing only holds 19? Man, you WERE on fumes.

But that is ridiculously fine mileage for a V8 with real power, and using it, too...
 
Originally Posted By: CourierDriver
when you all have time, go back in time to 1966 and check out the horsepower of the everyday muscle cars and the mileage they got. If you own a modern day muscle car and get 19 mpg, you are doing good.


Indeed. And you can beat rated mpg for *free*
 
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: Clevy

Another tank by the wayside. 420 miles and I think I was sucking fumes driving into the gas station. 18.2 gallons filled which translates to 23,1 mpg


You do know that thing only holds 19? Man, you WERE on fumes.

But that is ridiculously fine mileage for a V8 with real power, and using it, too...


I don't know how I'm going to get back into a mustang after getting spoiled in this thing.
I just cancelled the insurance on my fox body,I really want driving it much except to completely beat up which was fun but I lost interest. Put her in the garage for the winter.
With 3.90s my 2000 got 26 mpg on the highway with a light foot. I saw 30mpg on my charger on the run to to the city and the run home.
I burned that tank off in what seemed like forever. I'm seeing 20+mpg in the city now.
I have maybe 1000 miles left before the 3000 is up and the oil is still clean on the blotter test.
I've always been a mustang guy but I'm really starting to appreciate the hemi. My last one was great but it never got this kind of mileage.
New challenger or mustang. Gonna be a very tough decision.
 
Originally Posted By: CourierDriver
when you all have time, go back in time to 1966 and check out the horsepower of the everyday muscle cars and the mileage they got. If you own a modern day muscle car and get 19 mpg, you are doing good. IMHO,,muscle cars are made to run and have fun, to hzll with the mileage, life is short, twist the grip and let it rip.....


I have a 2011 Corvette that runs 0-60 in 4 seconds and 0-100 in 8.9 seconds, and can corner at 1G. On a slightly tailwind assisted 180 mile trip last year, where I filled up one block from entering the freeway and filled up two blocks off the freeway, I got 34.2 MPG. It was a cool, non-AC day with moderate traffic and I averaged just under 70 MPH for the entire trip. On any fairly level freeway trip averaging around 70 MPH, it'll top 30 MPG. These really are the best days of performance cars.
 
Had a G/100 of 4.76 before adding MoS2.

541 miles into it, the G/100 is 4.76.

The EPA G/100 rating is 5.6.
 
Callenger or Mustang....no choice at all... gotta go with the Challenger. You've already done the Mustang thing (so have I) and you need something totally different to try on.
 
I have seat time in both cars and i don't really understand why folks compare them at all.

Challenger is BIG, much more roomy, and has a solid feel to it that is characteristic of the LX/LC cars. They also have tons of content you cannot see. They are much heavier than the Stang and will never run with it on a HP to HP basis.

Want noisy, stimulating fun? Go Stang. Want quiet solidity with a smoother ride and comfort? Go Challenger.
 
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
I have seat time in both cars and i don't really understand why folks compare them at all.

Challenger is BIG, much more roomy, and has a solid feel to it that is characteristic of the LX/LC cars. They also have tons of content you cannot see. They are much heavier than the Stang and will never run with it on a HP to HP basis.

Want noisy, stimulating fun? Go Stang. Want quiet solidity with a smoother ride and comfort? Go Challenger.


Well said. I'm a Ford guy through and through but I fell in love with the Challenger R/T when I drove it. As you put it, very smooth solid car. If I were in the market now for a new muscle car, it would be a tough choice.
 
Originally Posted By: panthermike
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
I have seat time in both cars and i don't really understand why folks compare them at all.

Challenger is BIG, much more roomy, and has a solid feel to it that is characteristic of the LX/LC cars. They also have tons of content you cannot see. They are much heavier than the Stang and will never run with it on a HP to HP basis.

Want noisy, stimulating fun? Go Stang. Want quiet solidity with a smoother ride and comfort? Go Challenger.



Well said. I'm a Ford guy through and through but I fell in love with the Challenger R/T when I drove it. As you put it, very smooth solid car. If I were in the market now for a new muscle car, it would be a tough choice.


Nuttin' wrong with Fords, they are at a high point right now. A modern Stang is a great bargain for the performance.

But the LX/LC cars from Chrysler are like nothing ever built in this country in years. Mine is 8 years old and solid as a rock, doors still shut like a bank vault. The hydroformed chassis is extremely stiff and solid, they really did set up a cool compromise between ride and handling.

Believe it or not, many road racers who spend a lot of time at the track praise them for their predictable handling even under the worst possible conditions...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

F
  • Locked
My personal experience with MotorKote
2 3
Replies
40
Views
5K
cptbarkey
T
Factory Fill 15W-40, 27 hours, 2021 Kubota M7060 Tractor, V3307-CR-TE4 Engine, 27 hours
Replies
8
Views
783
fantastic
wwillson
  • Sticky
Pennzoil Q&A - Engine Operation and Motor Oil Performance - Answers
Replies
15
Views
5K
alaskanseminole
wwillson
Pennzoil Q&A - Ask Mike Burroughs anything questions more for Pennzoil - Answers
2
Replies
29
Views
6K
parmm
wwillson
Pennzoil - Low-speed pre-ignition (LSPI) Q&A - Answers
Replies
6
Views
5K
garageman402
Back
Top Bottom