My first MPG report with Superchip Flashpak...
02-06-2010, 12:17 PM
#1
JK Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: West "By God" Virginia
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My first MPG report with Superchip Flashpak...
Updated 2/26:
First of all, thanks to Dave at Northridge!! Had an issue with my online order, he gave me a call, got it figured out, in the mail, and I got it two days later!!
JK specs, 07 Rubicon, stock 4:10 rear, auto, 4.5" lift, 36" Irok Radials on 20" Rockstars (heavy combo). Only engine mod is a k&n filter...if you wanna call that a mod.
Before the flashpak:
Drove 180 miles, 80%city/20% highway, computer read 12.2mpg, actual calculation was 11.8 mpg. 180mi/15.2 gallons
After 87 tune only and tire calibration for 36.00" tire: computer read 14.8, actual was 13.3, 153miles/11.5 gallons. Still 80/20 town to highway
Conclusion, with just the 87 tune i increased 1.5 mpg from this week to last.
Next week, get my new exhaust put on, and will report back.
Update:
87 tune with mostly interstate trip, 15.2 mpg actual, computer read 15.8, 305mi/20gal, 230 miles of this test were on the interstate, 70-75mph (note: I live in WV and it's not exactly flat here)
87 tune and Flowmaster muffler 50 series SUV: 13.6 mpg actual, computer read 14.9, this was back to intown driving 80/20
Best I can tell the Flowmaster helped maybe a tad, but more so is just for sound.
93 Tune: 14.1mpg actual, computer read 15.5, this was also 80/20 city to interstate driving
Throttle response and overall power is slightly better with the 93 tune, however, the shift points are different than the 87 tune. It seems to shift too soon with the 93 tune, and ends up doing too much shifting, but the mpg results ended up being better.
Based on Today's gas prices locally, 2.55 for 87, 2.79 for 93, with running the 87 tune compared to no tune. At 12k miles per year, I can save $344 in gas in one year by running the 87 tune only. Thus, paying for the $308 Superchip from Northridge, and then some!!
First of all, thanks to Dave at Northridge!! Had an issue with my online order, he gave me a call, got it figured out, in the mail, and I got it two days later!!
JK specs, 07 Rubicon, stock 4:10 rear, auto, 4.5" lift, 36" Irok Radials on 20" Rockstars (heavy combo). Only engine mod is a k&n filter...if you wanna call that a mod.
Before the flashpak:
Drove 180 miles, 80%city/20% highway, computer read 12.2mpg, actual calculation was 11.8 mpg. 180mi/15.2 gallons
After 87 tune only and tire calibration for 36.00" tire: computer read 14.8, actual was 13.3, 153miles/11.5 gallons. Still 80/20 town to highway
Conclusion, with just the 87 tune i increased 1.5 mpg from this week to last.
Next week, get my new exhaust put on, and will report back.
Update:
87 tune with mostly interstate trip, 15.2 mpg actual, computer read 15.8, 305mi/20gal, 230 miles of this test were on the interstate, 70-75mph (note: I live in WV and it's not exactly flat here)
87 tune and Flowmaster muffler 50 series SUV: 13.6 mpg actual, computer read 14.9, this was back to intown driving 80/20
Best I can tell the Flowmaster helped maybe a tad, but more so is just for sound.
93 Tune: 14.1mpg actual, computer read 15.5, this was also 80/20 city to interstate driving
Throttle response and overall power is slightly better with the 93 tune, however, the shift points are different than the 87 tune. It seems to shift too soon with the 93 tune, and ends up doing too much shifting, but the mpg results ended up being better.
Based on Today's gas prices locally, 2.55 for 87, 2.79 for 93, with running the 87 tune compared to no tune. At 12k miles per year, I can save $344 in gas in one year by running the 87 tune only. Thus, paying for the $308 Superchip from Northridge, and then some!!
Last edited by cmb396; 02-26-2010 at 12:45 PM.
02-06-2010, 12:37 PM
#3
JK Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: ABQ, NM
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it common to notice a different between the calculation and Jeep computer. Mine was pretty close until I took it in for an oil change and they refreshed the computer for some TSB. Now it runs around 1.5 mpg difference. Interested to see how this turns out for you.
D
D
02-07-2010, 05:49 AM
#4
JK Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Montreal
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it common to notice a different between the calculation and Jeep computer. Mine was pretty close until I took it in for an oil change and they refreshed the computer for some TSB. Now it runs around 1.5 mpg difference. Interested to see how this turns out for you.
D
D
Because I noticed a substantial drop in MPG after my oil change also?
02-07-2010, 07:14 AM
#6
JK Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: West "By God" Virginia
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^I have 36" Irok Radials on 20x10 Rockstars, a failry heavy wheel/tire combo. Tires right now, with less than half tread left measure just a hair under 36" at 28psi.
Mine is an auto too, and my area is far from being flat, lotsa hills round these parts!!
On a side note, does anyone know how the computer calculates mileage on the JK? Is it a reading from the axle rotation, or is done by the tranny?
Mine is an auto too, and my area is far from being flat, lotsa hills round these parts!!
On a side note, does anyone know how the computer calculates mileage on the JK? Is it a reading from the axle rotation, or is done by the tranny?
Trending Topics
02-11-2010, 06:04 PM
#9
JK Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: ABQ, NM
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't really know
I don't really know what they were trying to fix, never told me, all they said was the flashed to computer with an update that was related to a TSB. Then I look at my spreadsheet I use to track MPG and notice this big difference between real and computer. I would go back and ask them, but they were downsized by FC (Fiat/Chrysler)