Dodge Caliber Forums banner

1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have a 2007 SXT Caliber with the 2.0 and was wanting to get better Fuel Economy. I usually get 28MPG on the highway and am wanting to know what everyone has found to work to improve MPG. My first plan of action is to Purchase a dop-in K&N Filter. Any other ideas? Plugs? CAI? Chips? Oil? Anything
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,883 Posts
I have a 2007 SXT Caliber with the 2.0 and was wanting to get better Fuel Economy. I usually get 28MPG on the highway and am wanting to know what everyone has found to work to improve MPG. My first plan of action is to Purchase a dop-in K&N Filter. Any other ideas? Plugs? CAI? Chips? Oil? Anything
I've always had good luck going the synthetic route with ALL fluids, engine tranny, differential. Chrysler is good at using synthetics, although not top-of-the-line, in the tranny and differentials.

The K&N might help a little, plugs=no, CAI-no, there are not any chips for the car that I'm aware of. Lighter wheels and tires will help the MPG, but you have to drop at least a couple pounds before you'll see a noticable difference.

I used to get 36-38 MPG with my 1996 neon 2.0...kinda gotta wonder about that engine in the heavier Caliber. I am consistently getting 30+ MPG with the CSRT-4 on the highway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
The trick to good MPG with the CVT is to get the torque converter to lock up at a low speed. Go easy on the gas until it locks. You will see a drop in RPM. Then you can get on the gas more to accelerate. With the varialble valve timing, keeping the revs down while driving really helps. It simulates a more efficient, torquey cam and will use a lot less gas. The CVT has a really wide gear ratio, so you can let the engine loaf along at low RPM's even at 80 MPH. With 2.4 liter engine and all wheel drive I get 27 blasting back and forth to work. If I drive slower I can get 30.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,964 Posts
I've always had good luck going the synthetic route with ALL fluids, engine tranny, differential. Chrysler is good at using synthetics, although not top-of-the-line, in the tranny and differentials.

The K&N might help a little, plugs=no, CAI-no, there are not any chips for the car that I'm aware of. Lighter wheels and tires will help the MPG, but you have to drop at least a couple pounds before you'll see a noticable difference.

I used to get 36-38 MPG with my 1996 neon 2.0...kinda gotta wonder about that engine in the heavier Caliber. I am consistently getting 30+ MPG with the CSRT-4 on the highway.
The drop in filter is not going to make a huge impact, if any. It will save you $$ in the long run as you only need that one filter. The key is the keep it clean. I use to inspect, and/or clean my filter every week or two.

Tires as mentioned can help. Moving weight is bad weight. The more you can loose there, the better you are. (i.e I dropped ~500g per tire on my mtn bike, which was really noticed.) Also, make sure the air preasure is correct and balanced between tires. Using the limits listed on the tires (not the sticker inside the driver door), set your air preasure to ~5PSI less then the max when your tires are hot (go for a hwy drive on a warm day, then check the air preasure).

Use AC on the hwy, and open windows at slow speeds (these cars are not designed to have open windows at any speed).

For plugs, check them once and a while. If they look dirty (not tan brown), consider replacing them. I don't know about the Calibers, but the Neons liked NGKs which worked out the ~$8 for plugs, and less then 10 minutes work.

For mods, a light weight pully could help. Less spinning weight requires less power to get it moving and maintain speed.

:eek:fftopic: My 95 2-door, 5speed Neon, during January/Febuary of 07 was braking over 50MPG. If I remember correctly, the trips from Sudbury to SSM that I actually calculated the millage was (numbers rounded) 48,51 and 53MPG. Was sad to auction it off that fall with over 460,000km on her.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,479 Posts
28mpg? I took a road trip last weekend which was all highway, average speed was about 80mph, with a few times here and there going over "xxx" and i got about 36mpg

I have done nothing to the car really.. Cut off the suitcase of a muffler, and thats about it.

I also have the 1.8L and a 5-speed though


Filled up the car before i left, and this is after i got home

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
29,881 Posts
i got about 42 MPG going up north doing 110km/h for 4 hours up and then back again with the a/c on.

mind you thats not my normal speed :worried: so my mpg does suffer a bit
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,479 Posts
i got about 42 MPG going up north doing 110km/h for 4 hours up and then back again with the a/c on.

mind you thats not my normal speed :worried: so my mpg does suffer a bit
110kph is only 70mph :rofl:

normal highway driving for me is around 85mph, or 136kph for you canadians :rofl:





yea, the best i have seen my car do is about 41, but that was driving slowwww on the highway. Like, 65-70mph, changing gears somewhat early instead of redline, etc etc.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,964 Posts
110kph is only 70mph :rofl:

normal highway driving for me is around 85mph, or 136kph for you canadians :rofl:
Ontario hwys suck. If it is a devided hwy, you have a 100kmph speed limit. If it is not devided, your looking at 90kmph for major hwy, 80kmph on non-major hwys or side roads (unless otherwise set by the local city/town).

It hurt to come back from FL when we drove down. I had the cruise set to nothing below 80MPH the entire time we where down there. Come to Canada, and the drive felt so slow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,479 Posts
Ontario hwys suck. If it is a devided hwy, you have a 100kmph speed limit. If it is not devided, your looking at 90kmph for major hwy, 80kmph on non-major hwys or side roads (unless otherwise set by the local city/town).

It hurt to come back from FL when we drove down. I had the cruise set to nothing below 80MPH the entire time we where down there. Come to Canada, and the drive felt so slow.
that sucks. I know out in the middle of nowhere here you can get up to 100mph and cruise no problem. Of course, i have a very good radar detector :rofl:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
29,881 Posts
110kph is only 70mph :rofl:

normal highway driving for me is around 85mph, or 136kph for you canadians :rofl:





yea, the best i have seen my car do is about 41, but that was driving slowwww on the highway. Like, 65-70mph, changing gears somewhat early instead of redline, etc etc.
yeah i won't do more than 145 on a highway because of the "racing" law where they take your car. not worth it to me.

Ontario hwys suck. If it is a devided hwy, you have a 100kmph speed limit. If it is not devided, your looking at 90kmph for major hwy, 80kmph on non-major hwys or side roads (unless otherwise set by the local city/town).

It hurt to come back from FL when we drove down. I had the cruise set to nothing below 80MPH the entire time we where down there. Come to Canada, and the drive felt so slow.
i hate highway 11 where it is gasoline alley and it drops from 100 to 90.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,964 Posts
Now that we have strayed totally off topic....

To the OP, how much stuff are you carrying in your car and do you have the CVT or 5-speed? (My apologies for not knowing what options are available on the non-SRT Calibers.)
Also, how heavy is your right foot?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,964 Posts
yeah i won't do more than 145 on a highway because of the "racing" law where they take your car. not worth it to me.



i hate highway 11 where it is gasoline alley and it drops from 100 to 90.
Nobel on hwy 69 is a lot worse. Its goes down from the 100kmph to 70(?) with the community safely zone. I have had many close calls there.

For those south of the border, Community safely zones means 3 times the fine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,479 Posts
Now that we have strayed totally off topic....

To the OP, how much stuff are you carrying in your car and do you have the CVT or 5-speed? (My apologies for not knowing what options are available on the non-SRT Calibers.)
Also, how heavy is your right foot?
I could see the cvt killing gas mileage for sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
I have an 07 SXT with the CVT and i get 18mpg in the city. I dont drive fast and i cannot get my milage to improve. Gonna try using full synthetic in the engine.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,964 Posts
I have an 07 SXT with the CVT and i get 18mpg in the city. I dont drive fast and i cannot get my milage to improve. Gonna try using full synthetic in the engine.
I noticed the fuel millage on the 2010 SXT rental I had was brutal compared to my 2008 SRT4.
I think one thing with the CVT is you have to adjust your driving for it. It doesn't handle speed change in the same manner as a normal auto or even a manual transmission.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
I noticed the fuel millage on the 2010 SXT rental I had was brutal compared to my 2008 SRT4.
I think one thing with the CVT is you have to adjust your driving for it. It doesn't handle speed change in the same manner as a normal auto or even a manual transmission.
Anyone know why they abandoned the conventional auto trans? these CVTs are garbage as far as im concerned.

Still, there has to be some reason why im getting 13L/100kms (18MPG). A 2.0L should have better millage than that! I noticed a while ago that the exhaust had a skunky or sour smell to it, i wonder if there is a problem there somewhere.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,964 Posts
Anyone know why they abandoned the conventional auto trans? these CVTs are garbage as far as im concerned.

Still, there has to be some reason why im getting 13L/100kms (18MPG). A 2.0L should have better millage than that! I noticed a while ago that the exhaust had a skunky or sour smell to it, i wonder if there is a problem there somewhere.
If I remember correctly, the CVT was rushed into production by Dodge because other manufactures had started production on theirs. Keep in mind, this is not new technology, it has simply been modernized with the use of computers and hydraulics instead of weights and springs.
In theory, if you can control your gear ratio as precise as you can with a computer controlled CVT type transmission, you could have optimal performance and fuel efficiency when married to an engine with computer controlled valve timing.
CVTs are also smaller, lighter and cheaper to manufacture.

Here is where I think they went wrong (totally my opinion, with no backup proof):
The most current CVT type transmission design available at the time of the Caliber's design stage would have been that of a snow mobile (I am totally ignoring the failed car from Europe built back in the 60's). These are light weight, high RPM, high revving engines designed for low millage and easy access to repair.
Cars are heavy, relatively low RPM, low revving engines, meant to do high millage (~10yrs/150,000km). This makes the basic design of the CVT type transmission a lot more difficult.
I also believe (as with most current day companies), they did not spend enough time designing and/or testing these units in the real world.
There is no reason I can think of that a car that can control the valve timing, intake manifold volume (btw, this is pretty cool), gear ratio and spark timing, TB position, and still not produce great gas millage at regular driving RPM.
Back a few years, a high performance car ran like crap at idle or low RPMs, but ran like a champ at the top end. Family cars did the opposite.
These cars with everything computer controlled and adjustable, should be able to run like a champ at all levels. I bet if sometime was spent on mapping these controls, these builds would be a whole lot better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
After all the problems I have had with my CVT I wish I went with the 1.8 5 speed. My first CVT failed at 54k and now i got 8 on my new one and it is starting to act funny. Today I was doing 55 at 4k rpm for a mile. Killing my MPG doing that crap.

Then sometimes it wants to drop the RPMs so i cant maintain my speed.

So I going to have to take it in again...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Your problem is the 2007 models have cvt1. Poor mapping and performance and reliability issues. In 2008 and beyond they updated to cvt2. This new cvt2 is programmed much better and you can't get it in the 07. I drive an 08 rt with the 2.4. I consistently get 19.9mpg doing city pizza delivery. The drop in k&n filter improved my mpg by 1to2 mpg and produces a noticeable improvement to acceleration. (less lag). I also use premium fuel. I couldn't be happier with my dodge's performance. *heads up* the steering rack/main gear is one unit and is built to last just 70000miles. Mine made it to 77000 and then I lost all power steering. Cost $700 to fix.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,479 Posts
Your problem is the 2007 models have cvt1. Poor mapping and performance and reliability issues. In 2008 and beyond they updated to cvt2. This new cvt2 is programmed much better and you can't get it in the 07. I drive an 08 rt with the 2.4. I consistently get 19.9mpg doing city pizza delivery. The drop in k&n filter improved my mpg by 1to2 mpg and produces a noticeable improvement to acceleration. (less lag). I also use premium fuel. I couldn't be happier with my dodge's performance. *heads up* the steering rack/main gear is one unit and is built to last just 70000miles. Mine made it to 77000 and then I lost all power steering. Cost $700 to fix.
there is absolutely no reason to use premium fuel in your car. You wont get ANY performance benefit, and wont get any gas mileage increase. Your throwing your money away, and with the way gas prices are now, the difference between premium and regular is sizeable.
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Top