Last post on Mar 21, 2012 at 8:42 AM
You are in the Dodge Dakota-2010 and older
What is this discussion about?
Dodge Dakota, Fuel Efficiency (MPG), Truck
#22 of 164 02 Poor Mileage aaronwi
Apr 20, 2005 (7:12 pm)
geez, my my 2003 Ram 1500 Quad Cab with a Hemi does better than your mileage. My worse tank ever was 11.4 and my best was 17.3. My overall average for 21,000 miles + is 14.2.
My previous truck was a 2000 Dakota Quad cab with the 4.7/5-speed manual in 2 wheel drive (as is my current Ram). I had the overhead display that gave you instantaneous MPG. I found that if I paid attention to the display I could modify my driving style to maximize my fuel economy. The 4.7 seemed to get better mileage with moderate acceleration. I wasn't the first away from the stoplight but neither was I the last. The sweet spot for my truck was just under 65 mph. My best tanks of gas approached 22 mpg on roads with 55mph speed limits. I would cruise at just under 60. Driving 70 to 75 would drop mileage into the 17mpg range. 80-85 would get down to 13-14 range. A full throttle launch from a stop light would show 1-2 mpg until speed picked up and then it would get up to 4-5 until you backed off the throttle. I really think driving style has a much greater impact on economy than if you were to get into a v6/v8 comparison. Dodge no longer gives you the instant mpg on the overhead display, only the average so I can't really drive my Hemi for economy but using what I learned with my 2000 Dakota I believe has given me somewhat better economy with my Ram than a lot of others report getting. Unfortunately the siren song of the Hemi's exhaust note calls to me more often than the 4.7 in my Dakota did. Rick
#23 of 164 RE:02 Poor Mileage aaronwi
Apr 26, 2005 (6:01 am)
That mileage seems very low. My 02 QC, 4x4, 4.7, auto, 3.92s averages 13.3 to 14.7 in mixed driving (60% highway 70 MPH, 40% rural/suburban). The mileage is very temperature dependant. Lower temps, lower mileage. I've only had 1 tank in pure city driving and got 12.5 MPG. On the highway, it generally gets 16.5 to 19.0 at 70 MPH. The average is around 17.5 MPG. Again, temperature, wind conditions, and terrain all come into play. I did have one time where I got 14 MPG on the highway, but I was fighting a very strong headwind in a hilly area. I consider myself to be an average driver. I'm not the first one away from the stoplight, but I'm not the last either.
#24 of 164 03 Dak. Fuel mileage
May 02, 2005 (10:02 pm)
I have a 2 W/D 02 Durango that gets 19 to 20 M.P.G. all year long my 03 Dak. 4X4 at best so far is 15.5 (both with 4.7L). I just bought the Dak. and I am taking it to the dealer to get it looked at. Has anybody had any luck with better fuel mileage by adding a K&N air filter or any other alterations? I never had two Veh. so similar with the exception of 4X4 to compare mileage.
#25 of 164 Re: 03 Dak. Fuel mileage [blasie]
May 03, 2005 (12:42 pm)
Do not add that K&N, those oilable type of filters are a wasteof $$ and have even been reported to cause problems when the oil migrates (gets sucked) into the intake sytem. (A lot of $$ and headaches for no meaningful difference in performance)
You did not mention the gear ratio that your dakota has. Perhaps it is different from your Durango. Also, does your Dak have that "full time" 4X4?
#26 of 164 Re: 03 Dak. Fuel mileage [blasie]
May 03, 2005 (2:53 pm)
When I first got my 02 QC (4.7L, auto, 4x4, 3.92s), the mileage was fairly poor. On the highway with the cruise set to 70, I would only get 15-16 MPG. I switched to Redline synthetic gear lubes in the front and rear differentials and the mileage increased 1-3 MPG. Right now, my highway mileage is between 16 and 19, with an average around 17.4. The mileage from the 4.7L in the Dakota is sensitive to temperature, terrain, wind, and driving style. I have more mileage variation in my Dakota that any other vehicle I've owned.
Also, I've noticed that my average MPG continues to improve with age (now at 55K miles). It's not a huge increase (about 0.3 MPG in the last three years), but at least it is going in the right direction. I don't expect this to last much longer, though.
As was mentioned in another post, don't bother with the drop-in K&N type filter.
#27 of 164 Re: 03 Dak. Fuel mileage [bpeebles]
May 03, 2005 (4:26 pm)
I have used the K&N air filters in my 1999 Club Cab V-6 in my 2001 and 2004 Q Cabs with the 4.7L V8 and now am installing one in my 2005 4.7L Dakota Q Cab, I have never had any problems with these Air Filters, on the long run you will save money by being able to wash/oil the filter and re-use them.
#28 of 164 Re: 03 Dak. Fuel mileage [blasie]
May 03, 2005 (6:49 pm)
My '03 Dakota Club Cab Sport 2WD, 4.7 with 545RFE, 3.55 LSD, has delivered a average of 16.56 at a total of 42099 miles. My summer time average for the last two years has been 17.36 MPG. I consistently hit 21 MPG on interstate trips to my property, including carrying between 650-900 pounds of load (ATV and other gear). I've hit over 22 on several occasions. Week-to-week summer time averages are typically 18 or better. The wintertime drops considerably. This year's wintertime average was 14.51. This was worse than the year before at 14.68.
Echoing the comments from Bpeebles and Sunburn, I have found that the 4.7 is sensitive to how it's being driven, temperature, and driving conditions. Mine took a little longer to break in, I think. I've been using Mobil 1 0W-30 motor oil, the only synthetic lubricant in my truck (except the factory fill ATF+4 is semi-synthetic). I'm usually light on the gas pedal, but I do a lot of in-town or country road driving. Not too much freeway or interstate.
From my discussions with other Dak owners I think you'll find that your going to realize about a 1-2 MPG penalty with 4x4. But a lot depends on your driving habits, too. I think the 4x4 Dakota is heavier by about 900 pounds over the two-wheel drive version. Do you know how much your Durango weighs?
#29 of 164 Re: 03 Dak. Fuel mileage [hasel]
May 04, 2005 (5:42 pm)
You are fooling yourself if you think you are saving money "in the long run". My definition of "long run" means at least 150,000 miles. The facts dont add up to saving any money when all is considerd. (like the engine wearing out faster)
But also the math comes out showing that the oiled-guaze filter does not cost less than quality paper filters changed at 50K miles over the life of the vehicle. (It takes a LOT of $6 paper filters before they cost more than the oiled-guaze ($50), oil, cleaning-compound, and time it takes to muck around with them)
$50(K/N ) / $6 (paper) = OVER 8 PAPER FILTERS!
8 filters X 50,000miles = 400,000miles
(I just looked up the prices on the web for the airfilters so I know my numbers above are correct average prices.)
Also, there is no need to change air-filter more often than about 50K miles unless you drive in VERY dusty conditions. This has been proven in tests. If you are a skeptic, you can even add a "filter minder" to your intake so you KNOW when to change the airfilter. ("filterminder" actually measures the filter for plugging and tells you when it needs to be changed.)
Obviously, the oiled-guaze filter filters worse (thus allows more damaging particals to enter the engine and the oil) Also, on many vehicle applications, the oiled-guaze filter does not seal well around the edges after being removed several times for cleaning and re-oiling....this allows UNFILTERD AIR to enter the engine and contaminate the oil.
BOTTOM LINE: Guaze belongs in the medical field....NOT soaked with oil and soaking up my hard-earned cash.
#30 of 164 Re: 03 Dak. Fuel mileage [bpeebles]
May 06, 2005 (10:15 am)
Since posting the original message I have heard more bad things about washable high flow filters than good. they might work OK on my dirt bike but not on my daily driver, I plan to get 300,000 miles out of this one like I did the last one. I looked to see what the Durango had for gears but I forgot, the Dak. has 3:55 gears, 255/70 R16 tires and the trailer towing Pkg (if that make a difference). Both vehicles turn 1950 R.P.M.'s 70 M.P.H. I also did a little research and asked some questions in the past couple of days that may end up solving my problem and hopefully some other peoples problems with their fuel mileage. That info is posted on this site, but not on this particular page. As for the full time 4X4 I don't believe it does. I will post the problems found if any when I get my truck back. Thanks for the advice.
#31 of 164 Re: 03 Dak. Fuel mileage [sunburn]
May 06, 2005 (10:29 am)
I was thinking of switching to Amsoil synthetic, now I think I will with 1 - 3 M.P.G. improvement. I have only had this Dak. almost 30 days and the mileage does vary quite a bit even compared to my wifes Durango. The thing that really gets me about my mileage is that I also have a 1986 3/4 ton Dodge with a 318 (carb.) 4:11 geared and no over drive and it gets 12 M.P.G. if I drive it conservatively and don't show off my exhaust!!