The Chrysler Minivan Fan Club Forums banner

2007 Town and country 3.8 gas mileage

12K views 14 replies 10 participants last post by  marine1 
#1 ·
I am looking at replacing my 02 Caravan with a 07 town and country. The T & C has a 3.8 in it. Any idea what kind of milage I can expect vs. a 3.3? Also are there any pros or cons to the 3.8? thanks for your help, this forum is awesome, it helped me fix my bad door hatch switch on my 02 just last week. Thanks Al.
 
#2 ·
Please update your "Location" and "Signature" with your van's year/make/model/engine/miles. This will help us help you when you discuss a problem here. Also pick up a Haynes Manual for your specific year/make/model/engine. It helps with many of the self-maintenance projects. :thumb:


Welcome aboard !! ! ! :beerchug: :biggrin: :hi2:
 
#6 ·
Hey AZ. Are you typing the "Please update..." ditty everytime you post? To avoid carple tunnel consider putting the statement in your signature. When I first started on forums I was typing my ditty about posting a fix (see my signature area) everytime I posted. Putting it in the signature block sure saved some wear and tear on the wrists.
 
#5 ·
I can directly compare our '07 T&C with the 3.8L with our prior '03 Grand Caravan with the 3.3L. Around town, the 3.3L got better mileage; measurably better. We're averaging about 17-19 MPG with our '07 in town, and the '03 would get an easy 19, and sometimes as high as 21 MPG. On the road, it's a bit of a wash, but I'd say the 3.8L has a SLIGHT advantage. As I recall, the 3.3L would pretty much top out at about 24-25 MPG, but we've returned as high as 26-27 MPG with the 3.8L...but more typically in the 25 MPG range.

The 3.8L has decidedly more power, though you may not really notice it at first (I never did). What I really appreciate is the taller final drive that the transaxle has with the 3.8L...lower RPM on the road. You'll also likely appreciate the transmission tuning that happened between '02 and '07. Your '07 will lock the torque converter in 3rd gear just cruising around, and your '02 likely never does that (our '03 didn't). Our '03 had to be in 4th gear to lock the torque converter...or I'd have to pull it down into manual 3. The '07's transmission tuning works much better I think.

In all, a worthwhile upgrade in my opinion.
 
#7 ·
I can directly compare our '07 T&C with the 3.8L with our prior '03 Grand Caravan with the 3.3L. Around town, the 3.3L got better mileage; measurably better. We're averaging about 17-19 MPG with our '07 in town, and the '03 would get an easy 19, and sometimes as high as 21 MPG. On the road, it's a bit of a wash, but I'd say the 3.8L has a SLIGHT advantage. As I recall, the 3.3L would pretty much top out at about 24-25 MPG, but we've returned as high as 26-27 MPG with the 3.8L...but more typically in the 25 MPG range.

...
My 3.8 '05 has pretty much the exact same mileage.
 
#11 ·
Fuel Mileage Question

I have posted reply information before, but here it is again. Our first Gen IV van was an '01 Dodge GC with a 3.3 liter engine; our present van is an '04 Chrysler with the 3.8 liter engine. Both vans were equipped with the towing package. On extended trips, not towing, and using the on-board computer to calculate fuel mileage, the 3.3 would return an average of 25 mpg, and the 3.8 will give 24 mpg average. I still like the 3.8 liter engine, as it has more torque and doesn't tend to shift gears as much.
 
#12 ·
I had a 1997 LXi with the 3.8 and drove it for 5 years and 130,000 miles, routinely getting 23.5 MPG on trips and 18 in town; occasional tanks would run up to 26. I've driven a 2002 Limited the past 2 years, putting 50,000 miles on it. It consistently gets 10% lower mileage than the 1997. Was there some change in the gear ratio, EPA controls, "black box" programming or something that would cause this? Maybe I just had a "good" '97 and a not-so-good '02.
 
#13 ·
Our 1998 3.8 got similar fuel economy to your 1997, and our 2003 3.8 gets virtually identical mileage to our 1998. In fact, on several occasions we took them both on trips (either loaded to the gills with kids and camping equipment, or devoid of removable seats and such to be used as mini-moving vans), and on every occasion, it was a flip of the coin as to which van needed gas first. When the OBCs were compared at the gas stations, the difference in the average MPG readouts never exceeded a half of a mile per gallon.

Thinking about this further, one thing you may want to consider is that fuel formulations have changed in recent years. Up here in New Hamster we went from 100% gasoline to E10 (10% ethanol, 90% gasoline) in 2006 or so, and that dropped the fuel economy on both vans by something a bit less than one MPG.

FWIW, the gear ratios between the Gen 3 and Gen 4 vans remained constant for each engine size. Said another way, the ratios for the 3.3 engines were the same for both generations and the ratios for the 3.8 engines were also the same for both generations, however, the ratios were different when 3.3 and 3.8 liter vans were compared (with the 3.8 liter vans receiving the taller set of gears).
 
#15 ·
I have a 2005 DGC with the 3.8 and averaged about 17 MPG, C/H. On my first long trip to California, I got 23.8 all highway. Last year to Colorado, I got 24.77, first tank, 28.41 on the second, 27.17 on the third, 24.65 and 23.92.

My brother has a 2006 Dodge caravan with a 3.3 and he said the most he has gotten was a little over 24. He said the power on my 3.8 is much better than his too.

Now I used the overhead computer to check mpg, but also had my brother do it on his calculator, when I gassed up, I couldn't believe it could get 27 and 28 mpg. So I called him on every fill up. But the two were very close.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top