Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
91 lifted F250 with a 5.0 V-8 a 6"-lift with 35" tires and 4.11 gearing it gets 10-13 MPG depending never better than 13mpg but then again most early EFI V-8 ford PU get about the same.
It's a close one between my '10 F-150, '08 Yukon Denali, and '10 Escalade. I don't know if I could even determine which is worse, all of them get around 15 mpg overall!
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,563 posts, read 81,131,933 times
Reputation: 57767
It was actually fairly recent, I just sold my '72 El Camino in 2007 and it got about 11mpg with the high performance 350 V8 4 barrel and TH350 Automatic. Sure do miss the power, though not the gas bill.
This car has been showing up alot in my answers lately, it also made the my oldest daily driver thread, 72 Gran Torino, I think it got around 12MPG if I kept my foot out of it.
'88 Volvo 760 GLE with the "frog" motor. Good torque out of that 2.8L V6 - it had no issues lighting up the rear tires - but the fuel economy sucked - 15 city, 20 hwy.
For perspectives, my 1994 Buick Roadmaster Estate that replaced it has a 5.7L V8 putting out a lot more horsepower and torque in a wagon that weighs over a half ton more, and yet, it gets better fuel economy at 16/24. Gearing makes a big difference.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.