4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Topics and issues of interest to cavers which are not related to caving. No political or religious discussions, please.

Moderator: Moderators

What type of vehicle do you own?

Poll ended at Mar 31, 2008 3:00 pm

I own a 4WD vehicle.
16
40%
I own a fuel efficient vehicle.
5
13%
I wish I owned any vehicle!
1
3%
My 4WD is fuel efficient -- I have the best of both worlds!
7
18%
I own multiple vehicles.
11
28%
 
Total votes : 40

Re: 4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Postby Scott McCrea » Apr 7, 2008 1:14 pm

JackW wrote:Really? :big grin:

Looks nice. And back.
Scott McCrea
SWAYGO
User avatar
Scott McCrea
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 3198
Joined: Sep 5, 2005 3:07 pm
Location: Asheville, NC USA
NSS #: 40839RL
Primary Grotto Affiliation: Flittermouse Grotto
  

Re: 4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Postby NZcaver » Apr 7, 2008 3:40 pm

Oddball wrote:My stock 1995 stock 4wd Toyota Pickup has been to hell and back and has always gotten very good gas mileage.

From the trivia department - apparently the distance between Hell and Back is 1200 miles. :clap:

That's 18 hours of driving, several toll roads, and you pass through Oklahoma... you'd better have good gas mileage! :big grin:
User avatar
NZcaver
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 6342
Joined: Sep 7, 2005 2:05 am
Location: Anchorage, Alaska
Name: Jansen
NSS #: 50665RL
  

Re: 4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Postby cavemanjonny » Apr 7, 2008 3:53 pm

NZcaver wrote:and you pass through Oklahoma


I always assumed the highway to Hell was more exciting than that. AC/DC, you've let me down....
User avatar
cavemanjonny
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Oct 10, 2005 10:45 am
NSS #: 56510
  

Re: 4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Postby lenslover2003 » Apr 16, 2008 9:53 pm

I thought I would throw in the perspective of a more Western caver. I cave in the Black Hills,and while not totally remote,we have lots of crappy roads in the National Forest. Lots of big gravel, sharp limestone,and the muddy spots in the lower sections of road.

I learned long ago to "Never send a boy,to do a man's job". If I go anywhere out into the forest,on anything worse than an all weather,maintained gravel road,I take my highly modified M-715 Jeep truck. 42" tires,a foot of clearance,and lots of engine. And a pop-up camper on the back,full of supplies. Does it suck gas? Yup. But you know what sucks worse than my 8 MPG? Having to walk out, in the middle of the night,after getting your daily driver stuck,in a place it was never meant to be. This is how I look at it: Pay the extra cash for the gas now,or pay a buttload later,for a tow and repair bill,on a lesser vehicle. Not to mention the mental and physical anguish,of having your trip go askew.

I don't want to sound like a macho-man with my truck,but if you break down in the winter,or waaay out there,it becomes an unforeseen camping trip,and not a survival epic.

My daily driver is Caravan,and I do use it for some caving. But.......I even have light truck tires,shoe-horned onto that! Just an extra safety margin,for everyday use.
Blessed are the cracked......for they shall let in the light.......
lenslover2003
Frequent Poster
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Nov 28, 2005 6:36 pm
Location: Rapid City, SD
  

Re: 4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Postby Anonymous_Coward » Apr 21, 2008 3:21 pm

From another "western" caver's perspective:

My wife and I use the same two-car strategy as TNcaver. One Honda Civic, 35 mpg. One Toyota Tacoma 4WD, 6 cylinder, 19 mpg.

We try to use the Civic for everything except off-road or gear hauling, although we are sometimes guilty of driving the truck just because it is the nicer, newer vehicle.

We got the 2006 Tacoma which is bigger, more of a full-size truck than the old ones. It is an animal and has so far refused to be stopped by anything in SD, WY, NM, or AZ. We hesitated getting such a gas-hog, but we nursed a previous 2WD truck through so many 4WD situations that we had to stop the madness. Besides, when we were shopping for a truck, we had just passed the 10-year mark of NSS membership. So, we were forced by the BOG to finally get a Tacoma, that's the law. :wink:

P.S. I've seen Carter's jeep, it's a monster.
Andy Armstrong
American Carbide Council
User avatar
Anonymous_Coward
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 893
Joined: Feb 3, 2006 1:40 pm
Location: Inside the Beehive
NSS #: 45993RL FE
Primary Grotto Affiliation: Paha Sapa Grotto
  

Re: 4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Postby ian mckenzie » Apr 22, 2008 1:28 pm

You buy a monster truck, you get less efficiency, no doubt. Sometimes they're harder to fit thru narrow spaces too.

I've a 6cyl (all they make) Ranger 4x4 longbox and I get about 24 mpg (but our gallons are 20% bigger here), but the wife has a Toyota Matrix that gets over 40 mpg. Previously I had an 85 Toyota 4wd 4 cyl truck that gave me about 30mpg - small yes, but nothing ever stopped it (not so sure about the Ranger) except that time I got stuck in Mexico...
User avatar
ian mckenzie
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 549
Joined: Sep 16, 2005 9:40 am
Location: Crowsnest Pass, Canada
Primary Grotto Affiliation: Alberta Speleological Society
  

Re: 4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Postby Scott McCrea » Apr 22, 2008 2:26 pm

I just drove about 600 miles this weekend with my '97 Toyota T100 extended cab V6 4x4 loaded down with all the stuff necessary to take the family to G'ma and G'pa's for the weekend. I decided when I left, I was going keep the speedo between 60-65mph. I averaged 19.2mpg. Driving normally, 70-75mph, I get about 17mpg.

That means, 600 miles at 60 mph takes 10 hrs. At 70, it takes ~8.5hrs.
At 60 mph, (assuming $3.35 for gas) I spent ~$105. At 70 mph, I would have spent ~$118.
So, for $6.50 more dollars I could have gotten there to G'ma's house 45 minutes sooner. Worth it? Depends on who you ask.
(I know the math is not perfect—actual average speeds would have been closer to 50, etc. But, you get the idea.)

For me, I realized that driving 60-65mph on the interstate is much less stressful and even relaxing compared to 75 mph. At 65, you almost never pass anyone.
Scott McCrea
SWAYGO
User avatar
Scott McCrea
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 3198
Joined: Sep 5, 2005 3:07 pm
Location: Asheville, NC USA
NSS #: 40839RL
Primary Grotto Affiliation: Flittermouse Grotto
  

Re: 4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Postby Caver1402 » Apr 22, 2008 2:36 pm

All these posts are really interesting to read! I really like my new Wrangler, but I still feel guilty about having gotten a vehicle with less efficient gas mileage. :yikes: I can always trade it in after awhile, so I will enjoy it for now and who knows, maybe I will decide I don't want to trade it in early. I suppose that decision partially depends on if gas prices creep up to $4.50 ... $5.00 ... because I will sacrifice my "car" over caving trips, any day. :cavingrocks:
Laura J. Lexander
NSS #52727 / Affiliated with the WCG, NNG, and IKC
CRF Eastern Operations Personnel Officer
http://lexanderfamily.com - Updated 07/28/09
User avatar
Caver1402
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Sep 9, 2005 1:04 pm
Location: Streamwood, IL
Name: Laura J. Lexander
NSS #: 52727
Primary Grotto Affiliation: Windy City Grotto
  

Re: 4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Postby tncaver » Apr 22, 2008 8:15 pm

ian mckenzie wrote:You buy a monster truck, you get less efficiency, no doubt. Sometimes they're harder to fit thru narrow spaces too.

I've a 6cyl (all they make) Ranger 4x4 longbox and I get about 24 mpg (but our gallons are 20% bigger here), but the wife has a Toyota Matrix that gets over 40 mpg. Previously I had an 85 Toyota 4wd 4 cyl truck that gave me about 30mpg - small yes, but nothing ever stopped it (not so sure about the Ranger) except that time I got stuck in Mexico...


Ian,
Sounds a bit like fuzzy math to me. Are you sure that isn't 24mpg and 40 mpg per liter? I've owned Toyotas since 1977
and I don't get nearly that kind of mileage.
I'm with you on the narrow spaces though. That's where Toyotas have a definite advantage over full size vehicles.
tncaver
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 2631
Joined: May 17, 2007 7:03 pm
  

Re: 4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Postby Teresa » Apr 22, 2008 11:13 pm

tncaver wrote:
ian mckenzie wrote:You buy a monster truck, you get less efficiency, no doubt. Sometimes they're harder to fit thru narrow spaces too.

I've a 6cyl (all they make) Ranger 4x4 longbox and I get about 24 mpg (but our gallons are 20% bigger here), but the wife has a Toyota Matrix that gets over 40 mpg. Previously I had an 85 Toyota 4wd 4 cyl truck that gave me about 30mpg - small yes, but nothing ever stopped it (not so sure about the Ranger) except that time I got stuck in Mexico...


Ian,
Sounds a bit like fuzzy math to me. Are you sure that isn't 24mpg and 40 mpg per liter? I've owned Toyotas since 1977
and I don't get nearly that kind of mileage.
I'm with you on the narrow spaces though. That's where Toyotas have a definite advantage over full size vehicles.


Might not be, depending on altitude. I used to have a 1990 Ranger 4x2, which got 35-38 mpg in the Rocky Mountains. The label on the truck said 27 mpg highway; we stopped and asked someone in Wyoming after coming up with some pretty astonishing numbers, and they said the altitude made for better gas mileage. Mine only got 28-30 in the flatlands.

I won't buy another truck until I can get one (which I can afford, which eliminates hybrids) with over 30 mpg (US). It was done with almost 20 year old technology; why the Detroit *won't* (I didn't say can't, I said *won't*) is beyond me. I don't buy the "heavy is safer" nonsense; That's only true if you don't know how to drive, and because the ICC ( or what little truck regulation remains) lets tandem and triple "trains" on the interstates, instead of on the rails where they belong.

If you need a Chevy Suburban to carry all your gear-- you have too much gear.
Teresa
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 1413
Joined: Dec 31, 2005 9:06 pm
  

Re: 4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Postby ian mckenzie » Apr 23, 2008 12:17 am

tncaver wrote:Sounds a bit like fuzzy math to me. Are you sure that isn't 24mpg and 40 mpg per liter?


"40 mpg per liter" sounds fuzzy to me! Fuel efficiency in metric is expressed as litres per 100 kilometres.

Our Matrix gets about 42mpg (Imperial gallon; about 35mpg US) which is about 6.7 litres per 100km. This site http://www.carpages.ca/go/roadtest/2007 ... _test.aspx says 6.4l/100km which is even better.
User avatar
ian mckenzie
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 549
Joined: Sep 16, 2005 9:40 am
Location: Crowsnest Pass, Canada
Primary Grotto Affiliation: Alberta Speleological Society
  

Re: 4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Postby ArCaver » Apr 23, 2008 6:15 am

ian mckenzie wrote:
tncaver wrote:Sounds a bit like fuzzy math to me. Are you sure that isn't 24mpg and 40 mpg per liter?


"40 mpg per liter" sounds fuzzy to me! Fuel efficiency in metric is expressed as litres per 100 kilometres.

Our Matrix gets about 42mpg (Imperial gallon; about 35mpg US) which is about 6.7 litres per 100km. This site http://www.carpages.ca/go/roadtest/2007 ... _test.aspx says 6.4l/100km which is even better.



Ian,
What are you paying for a gallon of gas in Canada right now?
User avatar
ArCaver
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 567
Joined: Jul 31, 2006 12:42 pm
  

Re: 4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Postby Scott McCrea » Apr 23, 2008 6:50 am

Teresa wrote:If you need a Chevy Suburban to carry all your gear-- you have too much gear.

Or you have kids. :laughing:
Scott McCrea
SWAYGO
User avatar
Scott McCrea
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 3198
Joined: Sep 5, 2005 3:07 pm
Location: Asheville, NC USA
NSS #: 40839RL
Primary Grotto Affiliation: Flittermouse Grotto
  

Re: 4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Postby tncaver » Apr 23, 2008 7:43 am

ian mckenzie wrote:Our Matrix gets about 42mpg (Imperial gallon; about 35mpg US)


Ian, now I understand why your gas mileage figures seem so high. Because you were referring to
Imperial Gallons. Is an Imperial Gallon larger than a U.S. gallon? That would explain why
you would get more miles per gallon. 35mpg (U.S.) is close to what my Camry gets(33mpg U.S.).
tncaver
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 2631
Joined: May 17, 2007 7:03 pm
  

Re: 4WD Vs Gas Efficiency?

Postby Caver1402 » Apr 23, 2008 7:56 am

Scott McCrea wrote:
Teresa wrote:If you need a Chevy Suburban to carry all your gear-- you have too much gear.

Or you have kids. :laughing:


Then you have too many kids?? :rofl:
Laura J. Lexander
NSS #52727 / Affiliated with the WCG, NNG, and IKC
CRF Eastern Operations Personnel Officer
http://lexanderfamily.com - Updated 07/28/09
User avatar
Caver1402
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Sep 9, 2005 1:04 pm
Location: Streamwood, IL
Name: Laura J. Lexander
NSS #: 52727
Primary Grotto Affiliation: Windy City Grotto
  

PreviousNext

Return to Open Talk Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot]