Let's stay on topic guys..........I believe it was gas mileage. Don't want to move your threads to the Testosterone Section. Do we even have one of those? ...Maybe a good idea to get one started!

 

You may not believe this, but in my whole carrier as a mechanic I have never had to diagnose a vehicle for getting poor fuel economy. If I was the one who owned or drove the vehicles then this issue may have come up sooner for me.
In the past , the vehicles I have personally owned always got fairly decent gas milage. And if they didn't it was for obvious reasons and was known from the start that the fuel milage was gonna be crap. And this stuff about new vehicles getting poor gas milage untill they're well brokne in is news to me.
I may have been a diesel mechanic for 20 years, but that doesn't mean I know everything
The one thing you will never, till the day I die, hear me say is that "I know it all".
Buying this vehicle has so far been quite the learning experience.
I too came across something that after reading it made me wonder if the fuel milage might get better in time. I guess that's just one of those things that I'll have to wait and see to believe. But still, untill someone can show me the hard proof that there's nothing that's malfunctioning and the milage that I'm getting now is the best it's gonna be without doing any modifications, then I'm just gonna keep on thinking that there's something wrong. If I don't get satisfaction and I end up having to find out for myself...then so be it. But while it's under warrenty, I have to let someone else try to figure it out first.
Which gives me a very uneasy feeling.

CHOPPER

 

If I had your skill set as a deisel tech I'd be well on my way to doing a Cummins 4BT swap, hard to give up the Warranty but IMO it would be the perfect TJ powerplant....Hmmm...

 

Believe me I was thinking about that even before I got my Jeep.(sticking a diesel in it that is
If I had the money and time right now I would go with a Cummins QSB3.3 instead.
But money, or really the lack there of, is slightly in control of my world at the moment. Plus, I bought a brand new vehicle so I wouldn't have to worry about screwing around with repairs for a while. This is my daily driver and I have no plans on turning it into a project vehicle....yet. For now I'm just gonna do a few things here and there to give it some of my own style.

MONEY, MONEY, MONEY......Got any of that evil stuff you can't use???? I'll gladly take it of your hands.

Any play dough that I'm saving up right now is gonna go into my motorcycles.
Summer is coming on fast and I have a ton O'stuff to take care of on them.
So you see ... my bikes are my project vehicle's now (instead of my old used to be daily driver which wasn't worth throwing any more money into), and my house is a never ending project in and of itself, but that's a whole other thread

This thread is asking the question "What kind of fuel milage are you getting in your stock TJ (Unlimited Rubicon)?...(If there are any more still out there )

 

Well...I brought my Rubi to the dealer so that they could work on the fuel milage problem, the clutch master cylinder rod recall and also the cruse control self accelerating problem (which I forgot to mention in my earlier posts).

Since I had told them that the engine warning light came on once but never came on again, and also the cruse control would sometiimes not stop accelerating when I released the accelerate button, they connected their computer to the vehicle and found that there were no stored fault codes. So they flashed the computer to be on the safe side. (Which Is what I hoped they would do). They also said that they couldn't find any problems with the fuel system, and proceded to tell me that the vehicle wouldn't be fully broken in untill it hits the 6000 mile mark, and the fuel milage might get better by then. He also said that there are additives in the gas, which make vehicles get crappy milage.

Anyhoo...After picking up my vehicle I noticed that the engine didn't seem to bog down quite as much as it used to when I stepped on the throttle on the highway, in the higher gears. I filled the tank the first chance I got, and then after I had driven it (the same way I normally would without doing anything special), and had used enough fuel to warrent topping off the tank, I took down the numbers and figured it out, and found that this time my vehicle got 15.9 MPG. (this is with a equal combination of city and highway driving)

Now I feel beter. At least now my ride seems to be getting the milage that it's rated to get. I'll be checking it out a few more times though, just to be sure.
And on another good note...I had brought my vehicle in at 10:am, and I got the call that it was ready, and I could pick it up, at 2:pm....Not bad.

PS:
My vehicle didn't need the recall because it was built 4 days after the end recall date.

 

Good to hear - we all know that the EPA ratings are bulls... but you're at least supposed to be in the ballpark. Glad that it's improving for you - I've yet to see 15mpg with my JK, but I'm also just over 500 miles on the engine...

 

The EPA rateings I have found to be fairly accurate as I have had 4 brand new vehicles in the last year and a half. My 05 Grand cherokee with full time all wheel drive and the 4.7 got above what it was rated at, my 06 dodge ram quad cab 4x4 with the 4.7 gets over 20 on the highway and its rated at 19 highway! My 07 focus was rated at 37 highway and it got 32 but thats cuz I drove it 80 mph to dc and back but had I did the speed imit it would have been in that area. Now my 07 JK got 19 to 21 on the highway right off the showroom floor until the lift and 35's that brought it down to about 15 on the highway! Next up are some intake exhaust mods to try to get some back and possible chip.

Now my next question, why is the 4.7 not offered in the JK as it seems to be a good motor and gets 20+ in my big ass quad cab 4x4 full size pick up and has alot more power than the 3.8 as well!!

 

Early explanations of this were that DC was required to meet certain 2007 front end crush zone crash ratings. In order for this to happen they had to use the 3.8 which gave them the space to do this without lengthening the front of the jeep. Tooling was worn out on the beloved I6 they had used in the past. It was also a longer engine not giving them the room to meet the standards. They decided, for economical reasons, to use an already proven engine that they had in their line-up.

Not sure how factual the explanations are but that was written many times over in the early hours of the JK. We will see if these reasons hold true in the future as engine options change down the road.