What are ya'll getting for mpg?

[90halfton]

You're talking about the equivalent of the DRAC, right? From what I can see in this thread, only 88-91 trucks have the electronics built into the cluster. 92-95 have the external DRAC, 96+ is all computer controlled.

http://www.gmt400.com/threads/gm-drac-vssb.31169/

Yes, and you are probably right about the years.

 

[shovelbill]

In an 88 to 94ish ( I guess ) the change of any type of drive line ratio change has to be addressed in the back of the gauge cluster. There are like, .02 amp fuses and from the factory depending on tire size, gears, whatever, they pop the fuses they don't want for the proper jumpers to still have proper continuity. There is a chart somewhere for which fuses you want for tire and gears. Simply have to pull cluster and cut out unwanted fuses and solder in jumpers where you want or solder in dipswitches for easy change later on. New vehicles you can just plug in a Doo dad and push a button.

cool to know, thanks.

i do like learning new stuff.....as i'm a frikkin dinosaur. the fuel injection and rear anti-lock brakes on my good 'ol 1990 K/5 was like Star Trek **** to me when i got her, LOL

 

[mattillac]

.....I found a truck that I would love to have for sale. It looks to be a 1999 Chevrolet k2500 ccsb truck. What are y'all getting with a k2500 ccsb 5.7 Vortec for mpg? I like going nearly 400 miles on a tank, but I really want and need this truck. Someone please tell me.

My 1999 ccsb with 5.7 engine ,4l80e trans ,3.73 gears and approx 31-1/2 tall tires probably gets right around 11-12 mpg on average. The trip meter usually shows between 240 to 260 miles when I need to fill up/gas gauge reading slightly below empty, from there the gas tank will normally take a little under 22 gallons to fill.

I have owned the truck since new and had installed after market cooling fans after about 10 years of ownership ,seems like that upgrade may have yielded me about one extra MPG over the stock configuration(probably 10-11 MPG).

Welcome aboard and Best of luck.

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[Spack9]

1996 5.7 get 13-14 city. Not sure what I get highway.

 

[Lone Wolf]

97 Extended cab short bed K1500 5.7L 350, stock height, stock 265/75/R16 tires running Wrangler Duratracs, about 350-400 pounds of winch and bumper on the front and about 150 pounds of tools in the cab. I get 15-16 city, 16-17 highway (going 80MPH).

 

[killerkart]

You must be registered for see images attach

1990 Silverado, 96 LT1-4, tremac six speed w/3.42 got 27+ mpg and now with 3.73's gets 25+.. Plus all depends not on how fast it's driven, but where it's driven, you see I built this for hi-speed as well as canyon cutting..

Today's tires are 235/70's and 275/60's on 7 and 8" rims

 

[Blue Turd]

I get 11-12mpg combo with my 1995 K1500, 5 speed trans, 305 V8, extended cab short bed. It has K02 tires in the stock size. Seem a little low to me but the motor does have 246k on it.

Doesn't matter much to me because my other better MPG cars can't tow anything or have a thousand pounds of crap loaded in the back.

 

[dcp1992]

'96 2wd 4 door Yukon, 350 Vortec, 4L60E, 3.73s, and 285/60R20 (33.5") and last time I checked I got 12.2 MPG. That was combo of HW, City, and idling roughly 15-20 minutes a couple days throughout the tank plus morning warm up time for roughly 5-10 minutes a morning.


But, I'll agree with what was aid earlier. We drive bricks, and I got two, my Yukon and my Jeep XJ.

But something I've learned is that anything you actually enjoy driving, won't get good MPG, so don't worry about it.

 

[tinfoil_hat]

For a while there I was doing a 370 mile commute over the Sierras and through the Coast Range. Lots of mountain climbing, lots of burning brakes, some freeway. I had it figured at almost exactly 15mpg. 265/65-18 and 3.73.

 

[Tmath]

Get 10.5 MPG but that is pretty much all city driving
3.73, stock 245/75/16 tires, 4x4 350 auto