Active Fuel Management control
August 27th, 2006, 3:25 AM
#11
CF Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Active Fuel Management control
That is a real good question! I will have to look on the window sticker when we get it back from the dealer on Monday. I assume the 3.73 are stock?
August 27th, 2006, 3:54 AM
#12
RE: Active Fuel Management control
ORIGINAL: MEVtopsail
Ok well i guess it is time for me to jump into this argument.....I am a salesmen at a dealership in NC, i bought a new 07 ltz and love the truck, and it is mostly all i sell. But i had a 02, and 05 both of them 4wd and i got 16.7 on the lie-o-meter, living at the same house, and driving the same roads and speeds to work.....I now have a fully broke in 07, and I get 15.3 on the meter. THE FUEL ECONOMY IS WORSE. All the literature the dealers get promise great things about dod/afm, but i will tell you now Mr. ZX1100F1, IT DOES NOT WORK AS IT IS MARKETED!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You can on average take 10% off the hwy mpg number and that will be most cars averages. NO ONE IS EVEN GETTIN THE ALLEDGED CITY MPG!!!! Granted people do not buy these for great gas milage, nor do i tell them they will get it...i tell them once you have broken in a 2wd you will average around 16.5, 4wd 15.5, and with the driving conditions on the coast of nc i have yet to be proven wrong. So to wrap this sillyness up the dod does not work as advertised, and if you want proof go on a test prive and watch the instant screen, on a truck with no miles it is even harder to get it to drop down to 4. Now if you are happy with the 5.3L dod, then my question to you is way are the AWD 6.2L 07 Escalades getting 17mpg after break in!!!
Ok well i guess it is time for me to jump into this argument.....I am a salesmen at a dealership in NC, i bought a new 07 ltz and love the truck, and it is mostly all i sell. But i had a 02, and 05 both of them 4wd and i got 16.7 on the lie-o-meter, living at the same house, and driving the same roads and speeds to work.....I now have a fully broke in 07, and I get 15.3 on the meter. THE FUEL ECONOMY IS WORSE. All the literature the dealers get promise great things about dod/afm, but i will tell you now Mr. ZX1100F1, IT DOES NOT WORK AS IT IS MARKETED!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You can on average take 10% off the hwy mpg number and that will be most cars averages. NO ONE IS EVEN GETTIN THE ALLEDGED CITY MPG!!!! Granted people do not buy these for great gas milage, nor do i tell them they will get it...i tell them once you have broken in a 2wd you will average around 16.5, 4wd 15.5, and with the driving conditions on the coast of nc i have yet to be proven wrong. So to wrap this sillyness up the dod does not work as advertised, and if you want proof go on a test prive and watch the instant screen, on a truck with no miles it is even harder to get it to drop down to 4. Now if you are happy with the 5.3L dod, then my question to you is way are the AWD 6.2L 07 Escalades getting 17mpg after break in!!!
We've had no problem getting 19+ mpg hwy with 22 various GMT900 suv's in real world cross country tests.
One problem is that most people are coming out of several year old Tahoe's (very well broke-in) and going into 07 units and expecting a miracle right out of the gate, you have got to give this machine a chance.
A secondary reality is that now with gas averaging around $3 a gallon nationwide consumers are much more conscious about economy then they were when they purchased their last vehicle.
"16.7 mpg" is nothing to sneeze at from a vehicle this size (300lbs heavier than last year) that hauls 9 passengers and can tow a 7,700lb trailer, not all that many years ago I owned a K-5 that sat only five people, couldn't a tow tent trailer or get out of its own way and never got better than about 10mpg, for this matter a very good friend of mine drives a Toyota ext cab 4X4 Tacoma with a 4 cylinder and auto trans, would you care to guess what kind of fuel economy he gets on the highway?
FYI, these vehicles will continue to get improved mpg as the miles roll on, if yo don't have 30k miles on your Tahoe then it is not "fully broke-in".
August 27th, 2006, 8:50 PM
#14
Administrator
RE: Active Fuel Management control
"For a descriptive and accurate account of what active fuel management is designed to do this is a good source of info: http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/...fm_120605.html "
Too bad the marketing people at Chevy didn't read this when setting up the website info and sales brochure.
Too bad the marketing people at Chevy didn't read this when setting up the website info and sales brochure.
April 25th, 2008, 11:07 AM
#15
Administrator
RE: Active Fuel Management control
I've kept a spread sheet of my milage and like ZX said considering the size and ability of the Tahoe the milage is pretty decent in my humble opinion.
She is my daily driver, back and forth to work is 18miles one way I have the 3.42 with the 5.3 liter the ? marks are where I lost my piece of paper where I wrote them down...
The Avg Eco is per the DIC I bought her in October of 07 and didnt count the first 2 tanks as you can see I have never gotten less then 16 mpg and have had better then 20 mpg (but not listed at the time of fill up and reset)
Date
Trip Miles
Avg. Eco
Fuel used
4-Nov-07
440.3
19.2
22.9
9-Nov-07
215.2
?
?
13-Nov-07
402.9
18.0
22.3
27-Nov-07
349.4
16.8
20.8
5-Dec-07
312.1
16.5
18.9
17-Dec-07
338.7
16.1
21.0
31-Dec-07
?
?
?
10-Jan-08
370.1
17.5
21.1
21-Jan-08
314.6
17.6
17.9
4-Feb-08
401.5
17.5
22.8
14-Feb-08
311.7
17.5
17.8
25-Feb-08
368.7
17.5
21.0
7-Mar-08
345.4
16.8
20.5
19-Mar-08
520.7
17.6
29.6
28-Mar-08
216
16.4
13.1
7-Apr-08
263.7
17.6
15.0
9-Apr-08
242.3
19.9
12.1
20-Apr-08
284.9
17.2
16.5
She is my daily driver, back and forth to work is 18miles one way I have the 3.42 with the 5.3 liter the ? marks are where I lost my piece of paper where I wrote them down...
The Avg Eco is per the DIC I bought her in October of 07 and didnt count the first 2 tanks as you can see I have never gotten less then 16 mpg and have had better then 20 mpg (but not listed at the time of fill up and reset)
Date
Trip Miles
Avg. Eco
Fuel used
4-Nov-07
440.3
19.2
22.9
9-Nov-07
215.2
?
?
13-Nov-07
402.9
18.0
22.3
27-Nov-07
349.4
16.8
20.8
5-Dec-07
312.1
16.5
18.9
17-Dec-07
338.7
16.1
21.0
31-Dec-07
?
?
?
10-Jan-08
370.1
17.5
21.1
21-Jan-08
314.6
17.6
17.9
4-Feb-08
401.5
17.5
22.8
14-Feb-08
311.7
17.5
17.8
25-Feb-08
368.7
17.5
21.0
7-Mar-08
345.4
16.8
20.5
19-Mar-08
520.7
17.6
29.6
28-Mar-08
216
16.4
13.1
7-Apr-08
263.7
17.6
15.0
9-Apr-08
242.3
19.9
12.1
20-Apr-08
284.9
17.2
16.5
April 25th, 2008, 12:10 PM
#16
CF Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Active Fuel Management control
My two cents. My previous daily driver was a 2001Mustang GT with the 4.6V8. It was rated 17 city, 24 highway. Even when driven agressively I got 20.5-21 MPG which is exactly 1/2 way between the two ratings.
So I buy the 2007 Tahoe and thewindow sticker says 16/21. What is halfway? 18.5MPG. So I'm expecting 18-18.5 if I drive the same routes and conditions as the Mustang.
What do I actually get? 14.5 winter and 15.5 summer. Even if I baby the Tahoe, I cannot get more than 15.8 or so on the same routes and conditions.
So.....I do not understand how two vehicles that went through the sameFederaltest routine could vary so much in actual MPG. Unless things like APM really help in the test but not so much in the real world? Which is why people are so negative about it.
I wasn't expecting to get 25MPG but this is the first and only vehicle I have ever owned which has can actually lay downa MPG average in every day drivingthat isLESS than it's CITY rating. And my commute is about 60-70% highway. If I'm in real city traffic I can get down to 12-13 pretty quick.
One of the people I work with has a Durango with the Hemi and MDS. Not sure how she does it but she is averaging 16.5-17, sometimes even 18MPG driving in similar conditions. The vehicles are of similar size and weigh about the same. I don't know much about MDS but it seems to have an advantage over APM. I wonder if the E85 compatibility holds back the 5.3? The Hemi/MDS is not setup for E85.
So I buy the 2007 Tahoe and thewindow sticker says 16/21. What is halfway? 18.5MPG. So I'm expecting 18-18.5 if I drive the same routes and conditions as the Mustang.
What do I actually get? 14.5 winter and 15.5 summer. Even if I baby the Tahoe, I cannot get more than 15.8 or so on the same routes and conditions.
So.....I do not understand how two vehicles that went through the sameFederaltest routine could vary so much in actual MPG. Unless things like APM really help in the test but not so much in the real world? Which is why people are so negative about it.
I wasn't expecting to get 25MPG but this is the first and only vehicle I have ever owned which has can actually lay downa MPG average in every day drivingthat isLESS than it's CITY rating. And my commute is about 60-70% highway. If I'm in real city traffic I can get down to 12-13 pretty quick.
One of the people I work with has a Durango with the Hemi and MDS. Not sure how she does it but she is averaging 16.5-17, sometimes even 18MPG driving in similar conditions. The vehicles are of similar size and weigh about the same. I don't know much about MDS but it seems to have an advantage over APM. I wonder if the E85 compatibility holds back the 5.3? The Hemi/MDS is not setup for E85.
April 25th, 2008, 12:17 PM
#17
CF Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Active Fuel Management control
I just read ZX's post about mileage on the vehicle. I am at 42,000 miles and run M1 5W30 oil. I did not see a noticeable MPG increase as my vehicle mileage increased.
Nowwhen I owned a 2003, 2500HD CC with Duramax, the MPG's kept going up from 5K miles up until about 15K. The DMAXengine did seem to require quite a bit of break in mileage.
We also currently own an 08 Impala with the 3.9V6 and the mileage on that hasn't changed much if any since day one. That car is currently at 14K miles and averages 20.5. When APM kicks in on the 3.9 your trip computer instantMPG's go from mid 20's to low 30's and APM will stay engaged up to about 70MPH on level ground.........
Nowwhen I owned a 2003, 2500HD CC with Duramax, the MPG's kept going up from 5K miles up until about 15K. The DMAXengine did seem to require quite a bit of break in mileage.
We also currently own an 08 Impala with the 3.9V6 and the mileage on that hasn't changed much if any since day one. That car is currently at 14K miles and averages 20.5. When APM kicks in on the 3.9 your trip computer instantMPG's go from mid 20's to low 30's and APM will stay engaged up to about 70MPH on level ground.........
April 25th, 2008, 12:19 PM
#18
Administrator
RE: Active Fuel Management control
One of the Uber mileage techniques I have been doing is keeping the tach under 2k when accelerating from a stop Read up on some of the “hypermiling” http://www.hypermiling.com/
I think someone pointed out also that the vehicle has a lot to do with it. A Vette is sleek and arodynamic the Tahoe... well its a brick with rounded edges....
I think someone pointed out also that the vehicle has a lot to do with it. A Vette is sleek and arodynamic the Tahoe... well its a brick with rounded edges....
April 25th, 2008, 8:26 PM
#19
Administrator
RE: Active Fuel Management control
Actually the NBS Tahoe has a pretty low Cd. Can't remember for sure but think it's around .38. It's lower than any full size SUV including the Cayenne. 
Also based upon two years now, the DIC is .5-1.0 mpg high. [
]
Also based upon two years now, the DIC is .5-1.0 mpg high. [
]
April 25th, 2008, 10:40 PM
#20
Administrator
RE: Active Fuel Management control
Yes when I did my manual calculations based on milage and fuel to fill up it was about .5 difference it suprised me that it was as accurate as that.