7 Cars And Trucks That Have Some Of The Worst MPG Ratings Ever

While some countries are out there selling gas for less than $2 a gallon, in the U.S., we're seeing prices sitting near the $5 mark, so it's worth highlighting the models that burn through fuel at record rates.

Now, of course, some historic vehicles with aircraft-powered racing machines and other such rare antique engines will be laughably inefficient, but the focus here is actually on more modern machinery. The sort of cars you might actually stand a chance of seeing one day, like the Dodge Ram SRT-10, and its modern successor, the Ram 1500 TRX. To inject a little excitement, we've also thrown in some significant and woefully inefficient supercars, like Lamborghini's angular Countach and the sixteen-cylinder Bugatti Veyron.

It's worth noting that all of these cars and trucks do have their uses. We aren't claiming they are useless and should be avoided just because of their poor fuel economy. Still, anyone scared of current fuel prices should steer well clear. Listed in order of their efficiency, with the most "impressive" featured first, here are our seven cars and trucks with some of the worst mpg ratings.

The 2021 Hellcat-powered Ram 1500 TRX has some serious off-road pedigree. A 702-horsepower supercharged V8 enables this TRX to dart from 0 to 60 mph in just 3.7 seconds, while Bilstein remote-reservoir dampers, an electronic-locking rear diff, and 35-inch all-terrain tires ensure it's capable when the going gets tough.

Blistered wide arches see the TRX sitting a full 8 inches wider than standard 1500 models. While the wide arches themselves don't significantly increase weight, the wider mechanical components underneath help increase its base curb weight to a hefty 6,396 pounds. Piece all that info together — supercharged V8, massive tires, and a robust curb weight — and it should come as no surprise that the TRX finds itself on our list of vehicles with the worst fuel economy. 

The EPA provides a combined rating of just 12 mpg, consisting of a 10 mpg rating around town and 14 mpg on the highway. However, in independent testing, the TRX has actually performed even less admirably than this, with as little as 9 mpg reported. Not the wisest choice for those who fear rising fuel prices.

The Ferrari Enzo is about as far removed from a TRX as one could possibly get, sporting minuscule ground clearance, low-profile performance tires, and a naturally aspirated 6.0-liter V12. Yet, unsurprisingly, the two vehicles share something in common: woeful fuel economy.

Of course, a multi-million-dollar supercar is never going to be a Prius rival, but it's worth taking a look at just how inefficient the Enzo's 6.0-liter V12 is. Its EPA-provided rating is 12 mpg on the highway, and just 7 mpg around town, for a combined score of just 8 mpg. Independent testing sees the Enzo achieve 11 mpg, so actually better than the EPA suggests. Clearly, though, in addition to needing around $8 million in the bank to buy one in the first place, wannabe Enzo owners will also need to assign a decent portion of their net worth to actually keeping the thing fueled up. Those on a budget could always opt for a Fiero-based Enzo 'replica' instead, but the embarrassment of being seen in such a monstrosity likely outweighs any financial benefits there are to be had.

Another pickup truck, and another equally unsurprising entry. The 2005 Dodge Ram SRT-10 combined a full-size truck, hardly the most economical of vehicles, with a Dodge Viper engine. All the ingredients are here for financially ruinous mpg. 

It's a spritely machine, as one might imagine for any vehicle with a 500-horsepower, 525 pound-feet, 8.3-liter V10. This engine helps produce 5.3-second 0 to 60 mph and sub-14-second quarter-mile times. 

However, when you're lugging around 5,100 pounds (or 5,450 pounds of weight in the Quad-Cab's case) using an engine meant for a lightweight sports car, and aerodynamics hardly matching its Viper counterpart, poor fuel economy is a natural result. While the Viper with which the truck shares an engine is capable of netting up to 19 mpg on a highway run, the Ram instead returns just 14 on the highway, or 9 around town, for a combined score of only 10 mpg.

Interestingly, data from Hagerty's valuation tool demonstrates that the 2005 Ram SRT-10's fuel economy is not enough to turn buyers off from this two-decade-old truck. Despite rising gas prices, values are climbing, with concours models now commanding in excess of $70,000 — almost 15% more than what was required to claim such an example just three years prior.

Moving away from supercars and powerful trucks for a second, we find ourselves staring at a 1970s land-yacht, and quite possibly the finest of them all. The Lincoln Continental was a full-size luxury car that exuded opulence, with all the features and trimmings a high-flying individual from the decade could ever want.

Under its hood sat a 460-cubic-inch Ford V8 engine, which kicked out 212 horsepower; not a lot in comparison to some of the other thirsty models on our list. Still, the Continental was never positioned as a performance model, and the early '70s were when the newly formed EPA began introducing emission-boosting, performance-sapping policies, so the car's power output isn't a primary consideration.

What might prove harder to overlook, though, is the '73 Continental's reported 10 mpg. Of course, this 50-something-year-old sedan predates official EPA ratings, but it's not hard to believe the ratings quoted, as a reasonable average. One particular safety feature introduced in the 1970s didn't help matters, either, that being the newly mandated 5-mph bumpers. These added a chunk of weight to the never-sleight Continental's curb weight, and as a result, the '73 model tipped the scales at around 5,200 pounds.

There really are no surprise entries to be found here. After all, it's not hard to guess which cars and trucks might give poor fuel economy ratings, and little explaining is required to justify why a 1,001-horsepower, quad-turbocharged, 8.0-liter W16-powered Bugatti Veyron capable of 253 mph finds its way onto our list.

This was a real turning point in the world of ultra-high performance cars, as Bugatti finally toppled the McLaren F1 from its top spot as the fastest production car of all time. Bugatti threw everything at the Veyron, from a monstrous engine to remarkably expensive tires and clever aerodynamics. Still, these aerodynamics didn't make much of a difference regarding mileage. 

The EPA reports that Bugatti's Veyron can achieve up to 14 mpg on the highway, whereas 8 mpg is as good as it gets around town, making for a combined rating of just 10 mpg. Perhaps the most interesting stat, though, is how quickly the Veyron will empty its 26-gallon fuel tank — in just 12 minutes it will all be gone. That's $136 worth of gas sunk in less than a quarter of an hour.

Lamborghini's Countach enjoyed a long career as the firm's flagship supercar, boasting a production period spanning from 1974 through 1990. The very first model, the LP400, packed a 3.9-liter V12 engine, which sent 370 hp to the rear wheels. By the time the 5000QV hit the streets in the late 1980s, that engine had swollen to a 5.2-liter V12, which enjoyed a 50-hp premium over the earlier cars.

This later Countach also weighed roughly 850 pounds more than the LP400, with the bulk of that weight derived from mechanical, body kit, and safety regulation equipment additions. With this extra weight, the 5000QV yields a measly 6 mpg around town, and a hardly improved 10 mpg when cruising the highway.

While some may believe the earlier LP400 cars are the best example of the marque, others might argue the later, more powerful and V-winged models are the ones to have. Regardless of which side of the argument you're on, this isn't the supercar to go nostalgia-chasing in if current gas prices make your stomach turn.

This gargantuan SUV from the 1980s steals the crown as our thirstiest entry, returning somewhere between 5 and 7 mpg according to various reports. Figures like that have us believing that Lamborghini deliberately went out of its way to produce the least economical car possible, and judging by the LM002's mechanical make-up, it wouldn't be that far-fetched.

The car weighed an almighty 6,780 pounds, and used the same basic 5.2-liter V12 as the aforementioned Countach 5000QV. If the mill returned sub-10-mpg in the Countach, then just imagine how thirsty it would be in the tank-like LM002. Interestingly, the LM002 is frequently cited as more powerful than the Countach, and that's likely because emission regulations were less stringent for vehicles in the LM002's class, so buyers can expect to find around 444 horses at the SUV's disposal, as opposed to its supercar sibling's 420.

Recently, prices for the very best examples have been soaring north of $400,000, despite the fact that it weighs as much as a small house, looks like one, and drinks fuel faster than the owner can refill it. Clearly, those with the cash are happy to pay for the novelty of driving a 5-mpg super-SUV, which is just as amazing as it is terrible.