4.7 vs 5.7 and other options.
#11
Go with the HEMI HANDS DOWN!!!
Because of the cylinder deactivation in the HEMI, the gas mileage is essentially the same as the 4.7, but you get SO much more power and torque. It's not the 30 extra hp that makes the big difference, but the extra 70 ftlbs of torque that you will feel every time you drive the car. It is also more flexible if you ever decide to tow something. The towing capacity on the HEMI is much higher than the 4.7
Serioulsy, no reason to own this SUV without a HEMI.
Because of the cylinder deactivation in the HEMI, the gas mileage is essentially the same as the 4.7, but you get SO much more power and torque. It's not the 30 extra hp that makes the big difference, but the extra 70 ftlbs of torque that you will feel every time you drive the car. It is also more flexible if you ever decide to tow something. The towing capacity on the HEMI is much higher than the 4.7
Serioulsy, no reason to own this SUV without a HEMI.
#12
When we where looking for a Durango/Aspen, we test drove both. Though the 4.7 seemed to have sufficent power, the Hemi was noticably better. After talking with folks on the forums to see what the Hemi was getting for gas mileage in the real world, it was a no brainer to het the Hemi. We tow some too, so that is a plus, but even if we didn't, I would have gone with the Hemi anyway.
FWIW, on the flat extended highway trips of 65 mph and under, I am averaging 23-24 mpg. On the interstate at speeds of 75-80, that drops a little to about 21-22. On hilly drives, mountains, and slowdown/speedup highway conditions, we are getting 19-20. And lastly in the city, we are getting roughly 15-17, though we got as bad a 13 once when we where really enjoying the Hemi.
I would wager that the 4.7's numbers are equal or worse then these, so in my opinion, the Hemi is the way to go.
FWIW, on the flat extended highway trips of 65 mph and under, I am averaging 23-24 mpg. On the interstate at speeds of 75-80, that drops a little to about 21-22. On hilly drives, mountains, and slowdown/speedup highway conditions, we are getting 19-20. And lastly in the city, we are getting roughly 15-17, though we got as bad a 13 once when we where really enjoying the Hemi.
I would wager that the 4.7's numbers are equal or worse then these, so in my opinion, the Hemi is the way to go.
#14
Ya, I was pleasantly suprised. We had hoped the MDS would yield some decent mileage, but what we are currently seeing is better then we thought. I bought it in Utah and had to drive it back to Colorado, and was suprised to see a steady 23mpg out on the flat roads and long sections of I-70. Then to see 18-19mpg while driving in the steep winding mountains just really made me smile. When I drive my Ram in the mountains, i'm lucky to get 10.
I will preface my mpg #'s with the fact that those are the readings coming from the overhead display. I haven't calculated anything by hand yet to see what the overall average is for a single tank. I'm sure that will be a little closer to true reality. Still for the amount of power you get with the 5.7, and the size of the vehicle in questions, i'm happy with the mileage i'm getting. I've not seen many vehicles out there that would do any better honestly, unless they are an SUV built on a car frame or are a mini-van, and then you lose lots of capability in other areas.
I will preface my mpg #'s with the fact that those are the readings coming from the overhead display. I haven't calculated anything by hand yet to see what the overall average is for a single tank. I'm sure that will be a little closer to true reality. Still for the amount of power you get with the 5.7, and the size of the vehicle in questions, i'm happy with the mileage i'm getting. I've not seen many vehicles out there that would do any better honestly, unless they are an SUV built on a car frame or are a mini-van, and then you lose lots of capability in other areas.
#15
I'm thinking that 24 reading was an "instant" setting on the display -- while going downhill. I don't think I could ever drive 65 (unless the limit was 55). I guess your readings are possible. I did make 19.3 on my first trip (only about 1000 miles on the clock). That was with several steep grades in the Ozarks, and several rolling hills.
Last edited by kkreit01; 03-26-2010 at 09:31 AM.
#18
Price, UT: Elevation = 5566 feet
Grand Junction, CO: Elevation = 4597 feet
You were going downhill all the way I bet you didn't make the same going back? Seriously, it sounds silly, but it might make a difference. While in college, we used to always get better mileage driving to college, vs coming home (600 mi., 1-way).
It might not make a difference on a Hemi -- since we can't feel the hills/ or changes in elevation
Grand Junction, CO: Elevation = 4597 feet
You were going downhill all the way I bet you didn't make the same going back? Seriously, it sounds silly, but it might make a difference. While in college, we used to always get better mileage driving to college, vs coming home (600 mi., 1-way).
It might not make a difference on a Hemi -- since we can't feel the hills/ or changes in elevation
#19
Ya I guess, but 1000 feet decline in elevation over 160 miles is not that significant in my book (most of which was right outside of Price anyway). I change more then that much elevation just on my drive to work everyday. Oh well. We have another road trip coming up soon that will test a differnet stretch of Colorado -225 miles one way, mostly flat highway. I can compare both directions on this trip too. I'll let you know how it does.
#20
That's only a 0.1% slope over the entire trip, but chances are the road flattens and you have periods of steeper slope (2% or so) that could actually make a difference. There are other variables there as well - tire pressure, wind speed and direction, etc. It may have all been working in your favor that day.
Either that, or you are the "Hemi Whisperer", because that mileage is outstanding.
Either that, or you are the "Hemi Whisperer", because that mileage is outstanding.