| LOST JEEPS http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/ |
|
| My Odometer is WAY Off http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=11605 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | CRuD Bucket [ Mon Aug 21, 2006 11:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | My Odometer is WAY Off |
No wonder I'm only getting 23mpg. I took a trip this weekend that has been 150 miles on the nose for 2 years (in my TDI). I only logged 138 in the Jeep. I also have another “point” from my house that’s a hair over 3 miles (my turnaround point on my 6 mile run). It’s 3.05+- as far as I can tell. The Jeep logs a mere 2.8. Would the tranny update fix this? Tires are OEM. 
|
|
| Author: | vtdog [ Mon Aug 21, 2006 11:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Don't know about the update fixing the problem. I had my odometer re-set for new size tires (245/70) by the dealer. It requires a computer update and they charged me approx $ 15. I checked after the update with my hand held gps and it was within 1% on both speed and distance at different speeds. |
|
| Author: | RFCRD [ Mon Aug 21, 2006 11:47 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My Odometer is WAY Off |
CRuD Bucket wrote: No wonder I'm only getting 23mpg. I took a trip this weekend that has been 150 miles on the nose for 2 years (in my TDI). I only logged 138 in the Jeep. I also have another “point” from my house that’s a hair over 3 miles (my turnaround point on my 6 mile run). It’s 3.05+- as far as I can tell. The Jeep logs a mere 2.8. Would the tranny update fix this? Tires are OEM.
You aren't the only one. My 100 mile commute is only @ 97 miles in the Jeep. Have a feeling the speedo is calibrated for the slightly smaller 235/70/16 tires that were stock on earlier KJ's. So if distance is time, and time is money, the Jeep is saving me money on this. Right??? 
|
|
| Author: | CRuD Bucket [ Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yeah, as far as my economy goes it's like throwing away a gallon or more of fuel every tankfull. Hmmmmmmmmmm... |
|
| Author: | MightyCRD [ Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
My speedometer reads about 3 mph fast on mine (changed the tires to a 235/70/16, had the dealer recalibrate to this size, still reads fast) but my odometer reads slow ... ??? If nothing else, I look at it as an extended warranty .... |
|
| Author: | RFCRD [ Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
CRuD Bucket wrote: Yeah, as far as my economy goes it's like throwing away a gallon or more of fuel every tankfull. Hmmmmmmmmmm...
Filled my Impala last night at the local Speedway for $2.55/gal. Diesel pump on the same island was $3.09/gal. There is no economy in that, cheaper to drive my full size Chevy pick-up than the Jeep right now. 
|
|
| Author: | KJbob [ Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm not sure about the accuracy of my speedometer, but my EVIC is way off in calculating mpg's. It consistently reports 2-3mpg higher than when I calculate mpg manually. Could the EVIC be calculating mpg's correctly, but the miles recorded on both the speedometer and EVIC be too low? |
|
| Author: | Jim Friese [ Mon Aug 21, 2006 1:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | After Market System Scanners. |
KJbob, Check the recal board at Jeep, There is a software upgrade to the transmission control module the corrects a incorrect mph reading of the after market scanners. Jim Friese |
|
| Author: | Jim Friese [ Mon Aug 21, 2006 1:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | After Market System Scanners. |
KJbob, Check the recal board at Jeep, There is a software upgrade to the transmission control module the corrects a incorrect mph reading of the after market scanners. Jim Friese 
|
|
| Author: | BLake [ Mon Aug 21, 2006 2:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
CRuD, I noticed the same thing just last week. I reset the "odometer" on my GPS at the same time as my trip odo. I was off a full mile after 30 miles of driving. I did not check the real odometer to see if it was closer. I need to take a long trip to see how far off it really is. I thought I was crazy but it seems I'm not alone. Time to get the last two recalls done to see it it fixes the problem. |
|
| Author: | CRuD Bucket [ Mon Aug 21, 2006 2:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Judging by my 2.8 miles vs. 3.05, I'm off a quarter mile in 3 miles or 1 mile in 12! I don't have a GPS but may be able to borrow one. I will post the results if/when I can. |
|
| Author: | kb61751 [ Mon Aug 21, 2006 2:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Mine is off as well, completely stock. |
|
| Author: | Bgame [ Mon Aug 21, 2006 3:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
My 06 is off about 10 miles every 200 miles. Showing less miles than I am really going. |
|
| Author: | dritchie [ Mon Aug 21, 2006 6:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Bgame wrote: My 06 is off about 10 miles every 200 miles. Showing less miles than I am really go Yep, Mine is 5% off too, on the low side. However, MPH is about 2.5 faster than the GPS
Dave |
|
| Author: | litton [ Tue Aug 22, 2006 11:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Interesting.....I will fire up the GPS on the way back to Tucson from SD and check both the odometer and EVIC trip. There should not be a differance between them as they read from the same place but one can never tell. If our recorded distance is lower then acual, then we are all getting better fuel economy then we think....right?? |
|
| Author: | Bgame [ Tue Aug 22, 2006 11:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
litton wrote: Interesting.....I will fire up the GPS on the way back to Tucson from SD and check both the odometer and EVIC trip. There should not be a differance between them as they read from the same place but one can never tell.
If our recorded distance is lower then acual, then we are all getting better fuel economy then we think....right?? Wrong if the recorded distance is lower then you are not getting as many miles to the gal. |
|
| Author: | Bgame [ Tue Aug 22, 2006 11:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
litton wrote: Interesting.....I will fire up the GPS on the way back to Tucson from SD and check both the odometer and EVIC trip. There should not be a differance between them as they read from the same place but one can never tell.
If our recorded distance is lower then acual, then we are all getting better fuel economy then we think....right?? Wrong if the recorded distance is lower then you are not getting as many miles to the gal. Sorry hit the button twice 
|
|
| Author: | seanpr123 [ Tue Aug 22, 2006 12:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Bgame wrote: Wrong if the recorded distance is lower then you are not getting as many miles to the gal.
Why? I hate to be so naive but I would rather divide 220/10 then 200/10. So If the recorded distance is lower then actual the recorded would be 200 and actual would be 220... |
|
| Author: | Bgame [ Tue Aug 22, 2006 12:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
seanpr123 wrote: Bgame wrote: Wrong if the recorded distance is lower then you are not getting as many miles to the gal. Why? I hate to be so naive but I would rather divide 220/10 then 200/10. So If the recorded distance is lower then actual the recorded would be 200 and actual would be 220... No, the way I see it. my mileage is showing 200 when I have really gone 210. My meter is off 10 miles for every 200 miles. So yes I would rather be dividing 210/10 than 200/10. With the last 8 trucks I have owned, from my house to my shop it is 20 mile round trip. Now on the CRD it is showing 19 miles. So I'm showing 190 miles and really going 200 miles |
|
| Author: | seanpr123 [ Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
edit: delete |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|