Fuel Economy For 2-Door, 2.3, Auto Sasquatch

[webspoke]

2dr badlands 2.3 7mt. I was averaging 17-18, then added SAS wheels and tires, and it dropped into the low 17's. Got mid 17's all highway last weekend for 200+ miles , running 75 on cruise. Noticeable increase in boost and throttle to move the 35's in 6th gear and maintain speed. 1-5 you don't feel it as much. Its the tire weight, width (aero impact) and gearing with the 4.7's.

On the positive side, power is good, and it can pull hills in 6th gear 70-75 easily with boost. No downshifitng required.

Sponsored

 

[WuNgUn]

Yes, my window sticker indicates 18 MPG, not 21. I noticed the models without Sasquatch, even the four door models,. say 21 MPG for the 2.3 Auto.

Was your Bronco built? What is your estimated delivery date?

Hope you enjoy it, I know you will!

Apparently I'm built, but not according to trackers. ETA date got pushed to Monday (figured as much)
Did they make a mistake with my window sticker? I definitely have Squatch

 

[WuNgUn]

2dr badlands 2.3 7mt. I was averaging 17-18, then added SAS wheels and tires, and it dropped into the low 17's. Got mid 17's all highway last weekend for 200+ miles , running 75 on cruise. Noticeable increase in boost and throttle to move the 35's in 6th gear and maintain speed. 1-5 you don't feel it as much. Its the tire weight, width (aero impact) and gearing with the 4.7's.

On the positive side, power is good, and it can pull hills in 6th gear 70-75 easily with boost. No downshifitng required.

The manual is definitely worse on mileage than the auto as far as I know.

 

[79BKO]

I'm at around 1800 miles and my average is 18.9.

 

[Mr. Nice]

Just speculating here: the weight of the Sasquatch shouldn't be significant, but the width of the tire (more resistance), the gearing, and the taller stance (worse aerodynamics) will all hit your MPG.

Height and weight are really the only concerns for a Bronco's tire efficiency -not width.

Rolling resistance - basics
People usually don't understand rolling resistance well, but everyone seems to have an idea of what it means. It has to do with your wheels when you're driving. Generally, you want the least rolling resistance possible and you can reduce it if you buy low rolling resistance tires. Some of you might even know that rolling resistance is a type of friction-force that slows you down.

All of that is correct, but we are here to help you go deeper. Did you know that rolling resistance doesn't depend on your tire size, but it does depend on the weight of your car/bike/train? The best way to explain it is to learn the physics behind it.

 

[RJ Bronco]

I received my Window Sticker on Monday, and I am curious why Ford rates a 2.3 liter I4, 2-door, Automatic Trans with the Sasquatch Package, at just 18MPG.

Is there really a 3 point drop for the Sasquatch/35" tires. This doesn't sound accurate.

I am interested in the actual mileage people are getting who have a 2-door, 2.3, Auto, Sasquatch. Thanks!

Gearing makes a big difference.

 

[Doc Rocket]

I have a 4cyl base, Sasquatch, 2 door, auto, and I am getting about 16 to 17 mpg over the first 1100 miles. This is the mileage at the pump, not the dash (which is about 1.5 mpg higher).

 

[Hossfire]

I recall base comes stock with 30" tires? In that case Sas is 5" extra diameter. With additional weight of the tire/wheel to get turning. Maybe 2" or more height to catch more wind? Up geared diffs. I can see that stuff taking an mpg toll.

I think the weight of the vehicle is a fairly small component.

Height and weight are really the only concerns for a Bronco's tire efficiency -not width.

Rolling resistance - basics
People usually don't understand rolling resistance well, but everyone seems to have an idea of what it means. It has to do with your wheels when you're driving. Generally, you want the least rolling resistance possible and you can reduce it if you buy low rolling resistance tires. Some of you might even know that rolling resistance is a type of friction-force that slows you down.

All of that is correct, but we are here to help you go deeper. Did you know that rolling resistance doesn't depend on your tire size, but it does depend on the weight of your car/bike/train? The best way to explain it is to learn the physics behind it.

if you eliminate all other factors, a wider tire creates more resistance. The weight difference of the tires is pretty small (around 100 lbs on a 5,000 lb vehicle).

Here's a visual. The 12.4" Sasquatch tire vs. the 10" base.

 

[Squatch Bronc]

I think the weight of the vehicle is a fairly small component.
if you eliminate all other factors, a wider tire creates more resistance. The weight difference of the tires is pretty small (around 100 lbs on a 5,000 lb vehicle).

Here's a visual. The 12.4" Sasquatch tire vs. the 10" base.

I think the drop in fuel mileage is due to the change in gear ratio for the Sasquatch.

 

[Hossfire]

I think the drop in fuel mileage is due to the change in gear ratio for the Sasquatch.

Yep. It's a mix of factors.

 

[nameuser]

2 Door, Sasquatch , auto, FE, with the 2.7
First two tanks around town 18 MPG

 

[Mr. Nice]

I think the weight of the vehicle is a fairly small component.
if you eliminate all other factors, a wider tire creates more resistance. The weight difference of the tires is pretty small (around 100 lbs on a 5,000 lb vehicle).

Here's a visual. The 12.4" Sasquatch tire vs. the 10" base.

This was my point.

Static tire weight is virtually meaningless. Rotational weight is the big factor.
AND- Did you know that rolling resistance doesn't depend on your tire size, but it does depend on the weight of your car/bike/train? The best way to explain it is to learn the physics behind it.

Tires with a smaller diameter have a higher rolling resistance with the same inflation pressure, because tire deformation is proportionally greater. ... Wider tires roll better than narrower tires.
Larger tires will often have a lower Rolling Resistance Coefficient than smaller tires...

 

[Fowler]

That 477 rear end sucks gas.

 

[WuNgUn]

That 477 rear end sucks gas.

I don't think so.... Not with 35's.
Like I mentioned, my window sticker for a 2 door, Squatched 2.3L with auto is 21MPG, not 17 and not 18.
Why it's different than the OP's window sticker mileage I have no idea.

 

[Fowler]

I don't think so.... Not with 35's.
Like I mentioned, my window sticker for a 2 door, Squatched 2.3L with auto is 21MPG, not 17 and not 18.
Why it's different than the OP's window sticker mileage I have no idea.

Automatic better mpg in general use.

Sponsored