You are operating on outdated information. We are already in phase one for Medium and Heavy duty vehicles.

No, real world not anecdotal. We have tested mpg with the same truck configurations (6.2l vs 6.2l and 6.2l vs 6.8l), on the same roads, same trips, same driving conditions etc. The difference is tiny as I have said before. And we are not the only ones that have come to that conclusion.

Its obvious you have not worked on too many vehicles, especially Ford vehicles over the years. If you had you would see some of the mistakes (often really dumb ones) that have been made by Ford engineers.

 

I have 3.73's in my '11 as well as my '03. My '95 has 4.10's, far superior. Any difference in mpg's could never be worth the real world use ability difference of the lower gear ratio, if there is in fact any difference to be found at all mileage wise.

Problem is I'm a tight wad so I never buy a new off the lot truck and I always say that when I have an issue that's when I'll gear it up proper. That's what happened with my '95, but none of the newer stuff yet.

 

Actually. I worked directly with Ford Light Truck Engineering for about twenty five years, starting in the mid 80s.

I also worked with the EPA, DOE, and EMA in the 2007-2009 timeframe
when the medium and Heavy-Duty rules were being developed. I left the industry seven years ago and didn't realize things moved forward. There wasn't much progress yet when I retired.

A casual search suggests that the fuel economy rules are gams of CO2 per ton mile, which explains the dramatic increase in rated gvwr and gcwr over the past few years.

It's relatively easy to increase capacity as opposed to improving aerodynamics or powertrain efficiency.

It's also easy to call out "dumb" ideas when one is an observer, with no involvement or responsibility,rather than a participant.