You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!
I find it humorous that much newer trucks with smaller engines, more emissions crap, computer control and more gears cannot significantly outperform (or outperform at all) my 31 year old truck in the efficiency arena.
The "emission crap" doesn't exactly help efficiency, to say the least. If they were optimized for efficiency, they could probably get lot better mpg. Also, todays cars and trucks have a lots of not really necessary equipment like power windows, power and heated seats, etc.
It's not a pickup truck, but my '95 Bronco with 351W can get 17+ mpg on a highway.
I think you'll find that it's more a function of the amount of work the truck can do, and how fast it can get the job done (POWER). To perform a certain job at a specific rate requires X amount of power. Requires the same amount of power regardless of the truck on the other end of the hitch. And to produce that amount of power simply requres that amount of fuel. IOW, it's a limitation of physics and not some evil oil company/automaker conspiracy.
I think you'll find that it's more a function of the amount of work the truck can do, and how fast it can get the job done (POWER). To perform a certain job at a specific rate requires X amount of power. Requires the same amount of power regardless of the truck on the other end of the hitch. And to produce that amount of power simply requres that amount of fuel. IOW, it's a limitation of physics and not some evil oil company/automaker conspiracy.
Power is not a function of how much fuel you cram into an engine per se. A more effecient engine will make the same power with less fuel. And a truck with lower gears and less power may well be able to out work a more powerful truck with higher gears. Sorta depends on the work involved too. If that work is blowing down the interstate at 90 mph hauling cattle or horses, then you're gonna need horsepower, no doubt. For pulling stumps, I'd take the family's 40hp farmall tractor...
In any case, when it comes to towing or 4 wheeling, I'd rather have less power and the gear reduction I need, than have gobs of power, but less gear reduction. (or less gear choices) I think that the less powerful the engine is, the more gears they should put in the transmission.
__________________
2007 Ford F150 XL 2WD
4.2L V6, 5spd, 3.55:1
Average MPG: 20.6
aiming for 25 mpg
Not sure why you brought up the conspiracy idea since oil companies/automakers just follow (they have to) the rules set forth by the fed. Having said that, the tightening of emission and crash safety rules (weight) had a negative impact on mpg. The late 80's Honda Civic CRX HF had an EPA rating of 50/56 (!!) mpg, for example.
On a personal note, my '71 Maverick with a 200 CID I6 and 3 speed stick could get 26 - 27 mpg on a highway (ethanol free gasoline and 55 mph speed limit at that time) when a '77 Pinto with a significantly smaller I4 and 4 speed could only get 24 - 25 mpg, at best. (E10, 70 mph speed limit)
The problem is WEIGHT. The equation f=ma means that it takes more force (horsepower) to accelerate more mass (weight). All the powertrain efficiency gained in the last decade or so has been wasted on bloat. The average 2007 F-series, Ram, Sierra, Silverado, etc. is about 1000lb heavier unladen (EMPTY) than average 1997 models. It looks even worse if you go back to the mid-20th century. Early 1960's F-250's tipped the scales about the same as that 1997 F-150.
Dont blame it on emissions controls now. Lean-burning EFI, high energy direct ignition with optomized timing curves, overhead cams, multi-valve heads, higher compression ratios, overdrive gears all increase efficiency. It was the 1970's stuff that was bad, pre-computer, vacuum hose hell, when they really didnt know what they were doing.
Lean-burning EFI, high energy direct ignition with optomized timing curves, overhead cams, multi-valve heads, higher compression ratios, overdrive gears all increase efficiency.
On a more detailed note, because of NOx issues, the peak temperature need to be controlled, and I believe, the mixture isn't as lean as it could be for peak efficiency.
Modern EFI systems are calibrated to run lean-of-peak most of the time. This reduces temperatures, and NOx, by itself. Reduction cats take care of the rest. EGR is not needed on all engines because of this.
my first vehicle was a 1994 f150 and it gets about 18mpg on the highway and about 14 or 15 in town. thats driving it really nice. just cruisin not runnin stop light to stop light. i have the k&N fuel injection performance kit and a throttle body spacer on it thought along with 161,000 thousand miles lol
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.
