Hello, looking to trade up to a new ford, wanted to know what you guys were ACTUALLY getting on your diesels. cit/hwy.

Thanks!
-Chris

 

2015 Super Duty 6.7.
I have used it only very gently so far. Approximately 50/50 city vs highway driving.
At 6500 miles I have averaged 17.2 mpg, hand calculated, since new.

 

18-19 on the highway
15-16 city
13-14 towing


About 11,000 miles so far. Stock tires, 3.31 gears. Driver display fuel economy is about a half MPG high most of the time, but still pretty accurate.

 

With max tow unit with 4:30 rear
16.5 freeway
10.5 towing 14K

 

<p>the F350 averages 17 MPG, theF550's average 9 mpg.</p><p>the 350 usually is run empty, the 550's usually run around 30,000 lbs.</p>

 

2016 F-350 6.7L 3.31 gears 1400 miles and I get 21.5 highway but runs right around 17 for combined hwy and city.

 

2006 Ford F-350, SD, CC, 4x4 XLT, 5 spd auto., LT285/75R/17E Toyo Open Country A/TII tires. 4.10 gears, 8 ft bed, 6" ProComp lift kit, 8" lift in p/u bed due to 12 rear leaf spring pack, and a 2003 Lance 1161 TC in p/u bed. 10.2 miles without and with TC on board.
Ben

 

Damn, my old beater '83 6.9, with no overdrive, and an inefficient C6 auto trans, with farm truck gears, gets 16mpg while blowing white smoke indicating it's running rich and needs injectors or IP. Should get 20+ if it was in better tune. God knows how many hundred thousand miles are on that thing.

So in 30 years we've added a few HP, a thousand miles of wires and sensors, overdrive 5-6 speed transmissions, electric accessories, etc, and we can't even get 1 MPG more....

 

You left out the part where they cost as much as a house.

 

That's not true, I've seen lots of houses for HALF the cost of a new diesel truck.

 

<p>the reason these new trucks do not get good mileage is <strong>EPA</strong>.</p><p>get rid of all the EPA pollution crap and watch the fuel mileage skyrocket.</p><p>i know of 2 deleted 6.7 4X4 trucks that are getting over 20 MPG city driving and over 25 highway MPG</p>

 

This ^^^^

Most specifically the NOx requirements. I've yet to find any decent data saying that reducing NOx emissions is important. Yet they are KILLING both our MPG and reliability, I'm almost to the point of calling it a conspiracy.

NOx is very unstable, in the atmosphere it does not last long at all. It either breaks down or becomes NO2 and harmless.

NOx is produced during high temperature high pressure combustion. Do you know how you get an engine to be efficient, with high temperature high pressure combustion. Then there's how they reduce NOx, the EGR. We can look back 50 years now and realize just how many reliability and longevity issues have been caused by or contributed to by the EGR.

If we really wanted to reduce NOx production the EGR is one of the worse ways to do it. There is a technology that's been around for longer then the EGR that increases HP, increases MPG, reduces NOx, and is cheap. Water injection, plain simple water injection. Aids in expansion increasing HP and MPG and cools combustion reducing NOx.

Yet the EGR was one of if not the first required emissions devices.

 

Conspiracy? Hell, this is right out in the open, and notorious.

Pollution is a political term, not a scientific one. Yeah, I like clean air and water as much as the next guy. Don't put words where they don't belong though. But it's a matter of degree. If I change the oil in my truck and dump it down the storm drain, that's a problem. But if I live in Texas and dump it next to an oil well, it won't hurt a thing. Each however is equally heinous in terms of "pollution".

 

What does logic have to do with it? The need for cars to use so much plastic in place of steel to save weight and squeeze out an extra mpg to meet federal regs has killed untold thousands on the alter of environmental justice!

My '03 F250 7.3L is getting 18-19 mpg's on the traffic-free roads of Maine. Can't wait to see it drop when I need 4WD when the snow arrives.

 

my all metal 65 with a 289 4 barrel and "green dot" gets 25 mpg.