I use my Pathfinder for towing our travel trailer, almost always at 60 mph. Using CC, the instantaneous mpg readout on the scanguage bounces around between 12 and 17, with the overall average maybe 14 or 15.
A couple times I increased the speed to 63 and now the SG bounces between 14 and 20 and seems to center around 17. At 62 and 64, the mpg seems to fall off again. It appears to be repeatable but I haven't tried it long term yet. Does it make sense that increasing the speed to a certain point could increase the efficiency like that?
Sweet spot for efficiency?
Moderator: volvite
It's certainly possible. Lugging the engine can burn more fuel. I haven't connected my Scanguage to the Pathy yet, but on my Tundra the fuel burn (actual gallons/hour) was better to downshift while pulling some steep hills as opposed to lugging up them in OD. The mpg meter in the Pathy isn't the most precise so you might consider a Scanguage if you're that interested in fuel savings. I added 1mpg by adjusting driving style on my Tundra plus it also lets you read engine codes and a large number of other stats.
I find that when towing our boat (4000-4500lbs depending) I get the best MPG below about 65 or between 73-75. If I try to keep it right around 65-70, the torque converter unlocks on the hills and I go into super-gas-burn-mode. With the cruise set, I do about 11-12 mpg at 65-70MPH and about 14 at other speeds. I pretty much tow at 75 (speedo indicated, 73-74GPS) on the highway these days (in 4th gear).
Skinny, I am using the scangauge to get the instantaneous mpg readings but I never used the burn rate. Is the gal/hr really accurate enough to be useful?skinny2 wrote: ...on my Tundra the fuel burn (actual gallons/hour) was better to downshift while pulling some steep hills as opposed to lugging up them in OD.
It's using fuel burn to calculate mpg or gal/hr so it should be quite accurate. Watch gal/hr when you're idling and you'll realize how bad city driving can be!marvmmarv wrote:Skinny, I am using the scangauge to get the instantaneous mpg readings but I never used the burn rate. Is the gal/hr really accurate enough to be useful?skinny2 wrote: ...on my Tundra the fuel burn (actual gallons/hour) was better to downshift while pulling some steep hills as opposed to lugging up them in OD.
Does the Scanguage pickup the transmission temp on the Pathy? It wouldn't do it with the Tundra.
skinny2 wrote:marvmmarv wrote:Not on the Path either (yet). I asked the main guy at SG about that. He said the data is present in the bitstream but it has to be decoded. They are working the vehicles having a high user base first. Ford and GM (and VW ?) are available and he claims others will be added as time permits.skinny2 wrote: Does the Scanguage pickup the transmission temp on the Pathy? It wouldn't do it with the Tundra.
For grins, I poked all the existing codes into my SG, hoping some other vehicles's code would work for the Path. No luck!
Find Your Forum!