Notices
JK Talk General discussion forum regarding thoughts, opinions and rumors about the Jeep JK Wrangler or related subjects that don't quite fit in the Modified, Stock or Electronics forums.

So What's Up with the Crappy MPG?

Thread Tools
 
Old Aug 25, 2006 | 09:01 AM
  #1  
wayoflife's Avatar
Thread Starter
JK-Forum Founder
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 36,534
Likes: 16
From: Laguna Niguel, CA
Default So What's Up with the Crappy MPG?

Seriously now, have any of you seen what the MPG on the new JK-Unlimited is? Well, at least according to some of the initial sticker shots (16 city/19 hwy) that are circulating around show, it ain't any different than what the TJ gets now. I mean, I thought the whole idea of ditching the 4.0L-I6 in favor of the new 3.8L-V6 was done to make the new Wranglers more fuel efficient :rolleyes2:

Last edited by wayoflife; Aug 25, 2006 at 09:12 AM.
Reply
Old Aug 25, 2006 | 09:14 AM
  #2  
wayoflife's Avatar
Thread Starter
JK-Forum Founder
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 36,534
Likes: 16
From: Laguna Niguel, CA
Default

Well, after taking a closer look at KBB, they're numbers show 19 city/27 hwy with the Rubicon showing a little less at 18 city/25 hwy. However, I think I'm more inclined to believe what I see on the sticker over what KBB shows.
Reply
Old May 16, 2007 | 07:20 PM
  #3  
JonGiovani's Avatar
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
From: Omaha, NE.
Default

Originally Posted by wayoflife
Well, after taking a closer look at KBB, they're numbers show 19 city/27 hwy with the Rubicon showing a little less at 18 city/25 hwy. However, I think I'm more inclined to believe what I see on the sticker over what KBB shows.
After a month and about 1000 miles, my best tank was 21 mpg and I am averaging about 16.5 with about 75% of my driving in town.
Reply
Old May 16, 2007 | 07:51 PM
  #4  
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Default

I heard the 4.0 went away cause of stricter safety rules..."it's smaller and sits further back from the front end". At least thats what my salesman pitched to me...

I remember my 1991 Wrangler 4.0L kicked ass with 2.5 leaf lift/3" bod lift and 35's, everything else stock...I could haul some serious asss....This new 3.8 can't haul anything but my big arse around at 13 MPG!

Still love it tho
Reply
Old May 16, 2007 | 08:55 PM
  #5  
Foo's Avatar
Foo
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
From: Phoenix, AZ
Default

Now when my TJ was new the MPG really sucked! After about 8,000 or so the MPG picked up. I think it has to do with breaking in the engine.
Reply
Old May 16, 2007 | 09:53 PM
  #6  
2K1TJ's Avatar
JK Super Freak
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,775
Likes: 1
From: Ga
Default

Um, you did realize this thread is almost 9 months old, right
Reply
Old May 16, 2007 | 10:15 PM
  #7  
AZCA jeeper's Avatar
JK Super Freak
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 1
From: Phoenix, AZ
Default

Originally Posted by 2K1TJ
Um, you did realize this thread is almost 9 months old, right
Yeah, look at WOL's posting date. LOL
Reply
Old May 16, 2007 | 10:35 PM
  #8  
Foo's Avatar
Foo
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
From: Phoenix, AZ
Default

LOL, no but who cares. I wonder if the original poster's MPG has improved?
Reply
Old May 16, 2007 | 11:01 PM
  #9  
AZCA jeeper's Avatar
JK Super Freak
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 1
From: Phoenix, AZ
Default

Originally Posted by Foo
LOL, no but who cares. I wonder if the original poster's MPG has improved?
The Big Kahuna?(that's the administrator) I'm sure it's stayed about the samew with the new tires and gears.
Reply
Old May 17, 2007 | 06:47 AM
  #10  
only_in_my_jeep's Avatar
JK Super Freak
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
From: Ridgeville, SC
Default

I traded in a van that got 9mpg with my average driving to my jeep getting 19. I save enough in gas to make the payments so I am happy as can be.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:16 PM.