Time for a New Truck--MPG is a Priority

[Todd n Natalie]

Very well stated Bill!! Also a bed cap or dropping the tailgate kills fuel economy as well. I scratch my head in bewilderment with these loaded down rooftop rigs with huge awnings, steel bumpers, winches and all that spare fuel. I bet they are dropping 7-8 mpg on some of them.

Probably but, I drop 7-8 mpg towing.

Mind you I'm not towing 100% of the time where I see people in Taco's driving around with rotpax' on their bedrack and RTT's everyday year round.

Maybe they're just being prepared in case they break down.... In a city of a million people....... and don't have cell reception?

 

[phsycle]

Maybe they're just being prepared in case they break down.... In a city of a million people....... and don't have cell reception?

?? and can’t find a hotel room

 

[rruff]

Have not driven the 5.0 extensively here but 2.7/3.5 both feel better when climbing and passing. MPG depends on how often you mash. At WOT, I don’t know if there would be significant difference either engine. Didn’t tfl or some channel do a tow test at elevation with the 3.5 and 5.0? I seem to remember mpg were similar.

The 3.5 was 3.5 mpg, the 5.0 was 4.0 mpg... and that was with both running the same speed up the mountain, so same power output. That's a significant difference IMO.

The reason for my question was that I'd assumed the the smaller turbo engines achieve better mpg by being more efficient when boost is not used. In normal relaxed driving this would be the case most of the time. But if you are in a situation where a lot of boost is used, the larger displacement V8 is actually a more fuel efficient at producing the same amount of power.

 

[phsycle]

The 3.5 was 3.5 mpg, the 5.0 was 4.0 mpg... and that was with both running the same speed up the mountain, so same power output. That's a significant difference IMO.

The reason for my question was that I'd assumed the the smaller turbo engines achieve better mpg by being more efficient when boost is not used. In normal relaxed driving this would be the case most of the time. But if you are in a situation where a lot of boost is used, the larger displacement V8 is actually a more fuel efficient at producing the same amount of power.

Well, let’s also take into account margin of error. Just the difference in speedo could make that difference. (Or make it even more of a disparity). Taken with a grain of salt, really no difference to me. Not much scientific method those guys use anyway. Just for entertainment. ?

 

[Todd n Natalie]

?? and can’t find a hotel room
View attachment 708064

Exactly.

Maybe they'll wait for Amazon to deliver what ever part they need for the repair road side. Can't leave a truck like that on the side of the road! Too risky!

 

[rruff]

Well, let’s also take into account margin of error. Just the difference in speedo could make that difference. (Or make it even more of a disparity). Taken with a grain of salt, really no difference to me.

It's a 14% difference and they are both F150s, so I don't see how the speedo would account for that. Plenty of anecdotal evidence too (owner reports) that the turbos are not good for mpg while towing. Granted, towing up a mountain is an extreme case and on flatter roads and at lower altitudes the difference would be smaller.

 

[calicamper]

Well, let’s also take into account margin of error. Just the difference in speedo could make that difference. (Or make it even more of a disparity). Taken with a grain of salt, really no difference to me. Not much scientific method those guys use anyway. Just for entertainment. ?

Not to mention turbo feeds mor air at altitude which then means more fuel can be fed. Which means less altitude sickness for turbo stuff vs non turbo. Its a little bit of apple vs Orange. But regarding mileage all the 10spd stuff is going to be more efficient over a mixed use typical owner use pattern vs the 5-6-7-8-9 spd stuff. Smaller displacement stuff no doubt will return better mileage under unladen use which makes up a huge % of most 1/2 ton trucks today with car like ride, safety and comfort. When trucks were bare bones work vehicles most guys had cars they used when not doing work truck work.

 

[phsycle]

It's a 14% difference and they are both F150s, so I don't see how the speedo would account for that. Plenty of anecdotal evidence too (owner reports) that the turbos are not good for mpg while towing. Granted, towing up a mountain is an extreme case and on flatter roads and at lower altitudes the difference would be smaller.

Speedo’s are supposed to be within 10%, so it could make up for the majority of that. Who knows. Not a controlled environment and lots of variables. This is backyard science.

But for me, even if the 3.5 uses little more fuel, it’s so effortless going up steep grades and passing on a narrow 2-lane highways, it is absolutely worth the mpg penalty to me. With no significant load, which is most of the time for me, 3.5 definitely has the advantage.

 

[skrypj]

The 3.5 was 3.5 mpg, the 5.0 was 4.0 mpg... and that was with both running the same speed up the mountain, so same power output. That's a significant difference IMO.

The reason for my question was that I'd assumed the the smaller turbo engines achieve better mpg by being more efficient when boost is not used. In normal relaxed driving this would be the case most of the time. But if you are in a situation where a lot of boost is used, the larger displacement V8 is actually a more fuel efficient at producing the same amount of power.

The 3.5L Ecoboost goes rich to protect stuff when under high load. I've actually started using the AFR on my 3.5L to tell me when to downshift towing so that I keep it as high as possible. The stock transmission tuning will hold gears, since the torque is there, and the AFR will drop.

But, that said, the MPG loop that the Tundra and F150 just did was ridiculously good. Both are TT V6's. Both achieved around 12mpg while a Ram 1500 hemi and Grand Wagoneer both were in the 9's on the same loop with the same trailer a couple weeks ago. I am not sure any V8 has hit 12. Maybe the GM 6.2L did at one point with a different trailer years ago.


You have to take the IKE mpg reading with a grain of salt as it is reported readings from the truck. They might be wildly off.

Also, towing is such a hard thing to get a read on. I have been towing my travel trailer around Utah for 4 years now and my truck as returned anywhere from 11 mpg to 6.7 mpg towing the same trailer. I always set my cruise to 70 mph on the open freeway. If there is a head wind the MPG's absolutely plummet.

 

[Grassland]

Does the GM offer the 6.2 and ten speed in a crew cab Long box?

What kind of fuel economy are those getting?

 

[skrypj]

Does the GM offer the 6.2 and ten speed in a crew cab Long box?

What kind of fuel economy are those getting?

Yes and they do ok, but not as well as the 5.3, 5.0 or 3.5.

They are meant to run premium fuel. They have a higher compression ratio than the 5.3L. So they get crappier mileage on more expensive fuel.

 

[Grassland]

Yes and they do ok, but not as well as the 5.3, 5.0 or 3.5.

They are meant to run premium fuel. They have a higher compression ratio than the 5.3L. So they get crappier mileage on more expensive fuel.

I've heard they are decent for what they are, but didn't know what that was compared to other engines.
Like, if the 5.3 was getting 18 MPG and the 6.2 was getting 16.5 sorta thing.
My friend had a 6.2 Tahoe, and now a 3.5 F150. He had/has terrible fuel economy in both because he stomps on it all the time lol.

 

[skrypj]

I've heard they are decent for what they are, but didn't know what that was compared to other engines.
Like, if the 5.3 was getting 18 MPG and the 6.2 was getting 16.5 sorta thing.
My friend had a 6.2 Tahoe, and now a 3.5 F150. He had/has terrible fuel economy in both because he stomps on it all the time lol.

Fuelly.com is the only source I know of for real world mpg. It shows the 6.2 being maybe 1/2 an mpg worse than the others.

Dont get me wrong, if I was buying a V8 truck I would skip right over the 5.3 and go for the 6.2. But at this point my favorite GM motor is the 3.0 Duramax. And I’d rather have an Ecoboost or the iForce Tundra over any 1/2 ton V8.

 

[Grassland]

I just built a double cab custom trail boss with 6.2 and ten speed the way i'd like it and it's $50,650.

Ford is really getting out to lunch with their pricing, when GM and Toyota have the same or cheaper pricing than the equivalently specced vehicle.

 

[Regcabguy]

Probably but, I drop 7-8 mpg towing.

Mind you I'm not towing 100% of the time where I see people in Taco's driving around with rotpax' on their bedrack and RTT's everyday year round.

Maybe they're just being prepared in case they break down.... In a city of a million people....... and don't have cell reception?

View attachment 708063

They're all over San Diego. Most look like like they were just detailed. We have to drive 80 miles to Anza Borrego to use them or go to Baja.