Ford vs The Competition Technical discussion and comparison ONLY. Trolls will not be tolerated.

f150 vs gm

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #1  
Old 12-22-2011, 04:30 PM
mictro's Avatar
mictro
mictro is offline
New User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
f150 vs gm

I have read alot of past posts but wanted to toss this out there again regarding fuel economy of a 2009 or 10 f150 ext cab 5.4 4x4 vs equiv in a gm with active fuel managment. Dont have the cash for newer eco or 5.0l
trucks and not going the lifted route with larger tires as well . Looking for hard honest real world stock fuel economy figures from those who have these trucks. Sorry for bringing it up again. Merry Christmas to all.
 
  #2  
Old 12-22-2011, 04:44 PM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins
tseekins is offline
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine, Virginia
Posts: 38,156
Received 1,221 Likes on 803 Posts
There are too many things to consider before starting a war over MPG's.

1. Cab configuration
2. Gear ratio
3. driving habits

This will likely get kicked to "ford Vs the competition".
 
  #3  
Old 12-22-2011, 09:19 PM
efx4's Avatar
efx4
efx4 is offline
Laughing Gas
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,058
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
2010 Super Crew 6.5' bed FX4 and 3.73 rear. Right now avg. 13.7 mpg mostly stop and go driving. During the warmer months avg. is around mid 14's. The lieometer (mpg read out) on the highway below 2000 rpm's is around 18, and between 8-9 towing my 6000 lbs. plus camper.
 
  #4  
Old 12-22-2011, 10:15 PM
NoMo's Avatar
NoMo
NoMo is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: OK
Posts: 4,742
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
I have a 2007 GMC extended cab 4x5 with 5.3L and 4-speed auto. My driving isn't typical as I do a bit more idling than most folks so my mileage figures aren't as good as they 'could' be. Not sure that the 6-speed tranny in the newer models helps as much with city driving, but they're coupled with lower (numerical) gears so they can do better on the highway. Still, cylinder deactivation isn't as great as the advertising makes it sound. Many of us have found that we can get a little better mileage if we leave the transmission in "two-haul" mode as that tends to keep the engine in 4-cyl mode longer.

As noted above, make sure you're comparing similar trucks when buying... especially in terms of gear ratio.
 
  #5  
Old 12-22-2011, 11:21 PM
BlueOvalFitter's Avatar
BlueOvalFitter
BlueOvalFitter is offline
Cargo Master
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Cajun Country
Posts: 2,013
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
Thumbs up

If I were to buy a new truck tomorrow it would be a GMC. I have driven Ford trucks since I was in high school (class of 82). I just want a change and think the current GMCs look and drive better then the current Ford trucks,IMHO. I have had so many hot rods in my past,98% Chevy (built or rebuilt about 35 SBC engines),but have always driven Ford trucks.
 
  #6  
Old 12-23-2011, 06:54 AM
parkgt's Avatar
parkgt
parkgt is offline
5th Wheeling
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by BlueOvalFitter
If I were to buy a new truck tomorrow it would be a GMC. I have driven Ford trucks since I was in high school (class of 82). I just want a change and think the current GMCs look and drive better then the current Ford trucks,IMHO. I have had so many hot rods in my past,98% Chevy (built or rebuilt about 35 SBC engines),but have always driven Ford trucks.

I did just the opposite I came out of a GMC, had both a 2000 and then a 2003 5.3 SLT Quadrasteer. Both very dependable, mpg in 16.4 range.

When I decided to buy new the interior of the Ford and the 5.0L won me over. A new GMC just would not have seemed like a new truck with the same basic interior and 5.3 engine.

Only 1700 miles on my 2011 Plat, but no regrets yet.
 
  #7  
Old 12-23-2011, 08:07 AM
Going_Going_Gone's Avatar
Going_Going_Gone
Going_Going_Gone is offline
Tuned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 495
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
For what it's worth, our 2010 Supercrew 4X4 with 5.4 and 3.55 axles has averaged 15.7 mpg (hand calculated) over 30K miles with minimal stop-and-go driving...exactly one mpg better than my son gets in his 2006 Supercrew 4X4 with 3.73 axles, bigger off-road tires, and much heavier foot. I hoped to get better, but realistically I'm getting about the same as my other son gets in his 2011 Ecoboost with identical build configuration and axle ratios.
 
  #8  
Old 12-23-2011, 10:22 AM
shotgunz's Avatar
shotgunz
shotgunz is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 2,016
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Boat Puller (Ford F-150) | Fuelly

S. Crew, 5.4L, 4x4, 157" WB, 3.73LS
 
  #9  
Old 12-23-2011, 01:23 PM
broncobran68's Avatar
broncobran68
broncobran68 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by shotgunz
Boat Puller (Ford F-150) | Fuelly

S. Crew, 5.4L, 4x4, 157" WB, 3.73LS
I take it you never use your boat? Just kidding but that's really good mileage. I get between 5 and 9 mpg pulling my boat which gets the overall average down to around 12mpg in a hurry.

I wouldn't worry about the fuel economy between the two brands it'll be close enough not to be the deciding factor.
 
  #10  
Old 12-23-2011, 02:50 PM
mictro's Avatar
mictro
mictro is offline
New User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks to all that replied. Just trying to gather alittle more info before i switch. Im not 100 percent brand loyal, but ive had great service and luck with every ford we have owned. (dont want to jinx myself) I can deal with mpgs that are close and it appears that they should be, but didnt want to give up 2 plus mpg though. Does the 2009 up 5.4 have a six speed auto trans? That seems like it should help a bit in mixed driveing.
 
  #11  
Old 12-23-2011, 04:23 PM
shotgunz's Avatar
shotgunz
shotgunz is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 2,016
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
You can only get the 6-speed auto with the 5.4L.
 
  #12  
Old 12-25-2011, 11:31 PM
dkf's Avatar
dkf
dkf is offline
Hotshot
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pa
Posts: 10,101
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes on 17 Posts
Cylinder deactiviation (active fuel management) is more of a farse used to sell vehicles than anything. The added complexity far outweighs the negligeable gains in fuel economy IMO. On either truck the 6 speed trans will help with mpg.
 
  #13  
Old 12-26-2011, 11:37 AM
mictro's Avatar
mictro
mictro is offline
New User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Right, it is extreme to shut down half of the engine in order to make up for the lack of efficiency of an engine. I am leaning towards an 09 or 10 4.6l 6spd. Will only be towing utility trailer periodicly and not putting on oversize tires. Those that have these satisfied with the combination?
 
  #14  
Old 12-27-2011, 03:50 AM
shotgunz's Avatar
shotgunz
shotgunz is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 2,016
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
If you're concered about mileage and won't be towing or hauling any heavy loads, get the 3.31 rear end.
 
  #15  
Old 12-27-2011, 05:19 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins
tseekins is offline
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine, Virginia
Posts: 38,156
Received 1,221 Likes on 803 Posts
Originally Posted by shotgunz
If you're concered about mileage and won't be towing or hauling any heavy loads, get the 3.31 rear end.

Or if it's a 4x2, the 3.15 is available and widely used.
 


Quick Reply: f150 vs gm



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:12 AM.