Talked with a fellow over the weekend who just loved his Safari with a 2" lift and some bigger tires. Said it was the most fun vehicle he's had, but he was disappointed with the fuel efficiency of the thing. He said even on the highway the best he would get was 15mpg.
I thought these things were good for as much as 25mpg highway?
Won't make a good camper if I can't afford to fill the tank.
A guy I know was telling me (also just this weekend) about trying to get better mileage out of his. He has improved it from 18ish to 21ish (mixed, mostly highway) with driving technique. His has the awd.
My company Astro Cargo which was typically empty got about 18.
In what you wrote you mentioned lift and bigger tires. If that also includes 4wd then 15 sounds about right.
All the aerodynamics of a storage shed.
At www.fueleconomy.gov the EPA gives the following ratings:
'02 2wd Passenger: 14/16/18
'02 4wd Passenger: 13/15/17
I can't imagine that the mileage is all that good. The 4.3 isn't known for thriftiness, and as John says, the aero is quite poor. The thing was designed in the 80s, after all. My wife's Taurus X with much better aero, a 6-speed trans, no AWD, no lift, and a considerably more modern, efficient engine gets 24 on the freeway, but only if you keep it under 70 or so. No way an Astrofari gets close to that, especially a lifted AWD one.
I can eke out 21 mpg on the highway by paying attention to traffic and easing in and out of the throttle on my 2001 Astro 2wd. My son drives it daily and he routinely gets an average of 16.
i used to average 21 with my 1998 cargo van on stock size tires.
JohnRW1621 wrote: At www.fueleconomy.gov the EPA gives the following ratings: '02 2wd Passenger: 14/16/18 '02 4wd Passenger: 13/15/17
Those ratings were probably done with real gasoline, which the average motorists could still buy back then.
I had a colleague with one in Charleston SC. He used to say 14ish...
I had a two wheel drive Safari, would get 18 to 21 mpg with it..
You'll need to log in to post.
