16.5 mpgs
Thread Starter
|
Tuned
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 316
Likes: 7
16.5 mpgs
Need some advice. My 2011 xlt ecoboost 3.55 gear 2x4 was getting about 18.5 highway (70 mph). Leveling the front end 2.5" had no effect that I could tell on the mpg economy.
The problem came when I put on the pro comp. 285s. I took it to the dealership and the computer was updated for the bigger tires so it should be accurate. But I'm averaging 16.5 at the same speeds/same commute now.
Overall the mpg is not where I want it to be.
I have not towed with the truck and shouldn't have to anytime soon. No travel trailer or anything like that.
I love the look and set-up of the truck right now. So what are my options for getting close to 20mpg?
My only thought, without changing the tires, is to change the gears.
Would 3.15 be an OK option for my highway commuter needs?
Or 3.31....
Thanks for the feedback all.
The problem came when I put on the pro comp. 285s. I took it to the dealership and the computer was updated for the bigger tires so it should be accurate. But I'm averaging 16.5 at the same speeds/same commute now.
Overall the mpg is not where I want it to be.
I have not towed with the truck and shouldn't have to anytime soon. No travel trailer or anything like that.
I love the look and set-up of the truck right now. So what are my options for getting close to 20mpg?
My only thought, without changing the tires, is to change the gears.
Would 3.15 be an OK option for my highway commuter needs?
Or 3.31....
Thanks for the feedback all.
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 12
From: Sioux Falls SD
Tires make big difference on mpg. When I went from the stock all season tires on my 99 to all terains of the same size I lost 2mpg also. All due to higher rolling resistance, every time i took my foot off the gas it was like putting the brakes. With tires you either get mpg or traction, the more traction the less mpg and that is with staying with same size. If you up size now you change weight and overall gear ratio too.
Thread Starter
|
Tuned
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 316
Likes: 7
Thanks! Yea I went from the stock 265s to 285 all terrains so they're a bit bigger.
My main question at this point is about the gearing. I realize if I go 3.15 it's going to down shift when going up a hill, and with bigger tires that changed the gear ratio.
If anyone has a link to a good thread post about gearing please paste it here.
My main question at this point is about the gearing. I realize if I go 3.15 it's going to down shift when going up a hill, and with bigger tires that changed the gear ratio.
If anyone has a link to a good thread post about gearing please paste it here.
Super Moderator
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 40,019
Likes: 1,518
From: Maine, Virginia
Thanks! Yea I went from the stock 265s to 285 all terrains so they're a bit bigger.
My main question at this point is about the gearing. I realize if I go 3.15 it's going to down shift when going up a hill, and with bigger tires that changed the gear ratio.
If anyone has a link to a good thread post about gearing please paste it here.
My main question at this point is about the gearing. I realize if I go 3.15 it's going to down shift when going up a hill, and with bigger tires that changed the gear ratio.
If anyone has a link to a good thread post about gearing please paste it here.
It will take tens of thousands of miles driven at 2 mpg's less to pay for a gear swap. I'd leave it be and don't sweat it.
I was going to increase my size from my stock 235's to 265's like on my Expy but I may have to rethink that idea.
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 12
From: Sioux Falls SD
We just have to remember that every thing is a compromise. Ford chose the stock tire to deliver the lowest cost, best mpg and then traction, wear and looks.
I agree, a gear change will never pay for itself and the Ecoboost has plenty of power for any of the gear ratios. I also don't think a regear will improve the MPG by more than a trace amount due to the increase in rolling resistance and weight gain of the bigger tire.
I agree, a gear change will never pay for itself and the Ecoboost has plenty of power for any of the gear ratios. I also don't think a regear will improve the MPG by more than a trace amount due to the increase in rolling resistance and weight gain of the bigger tire.
Thread Starter
|
Tuned
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 316
Likes: 7
Thanks that's helpful. Which truck of yours has 235's?
Logistics Pro
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,512
Likes: 18
From: Detroit
Larger, heavier tires with a deeper, more aggressive tread use more gas. IMO, it is not worth 2 mpg for a better looking tire. If you are using the size and tread for regular off roading, the sacrifice is more likely worth the price in gas.
But 2 mpg will really cost hundreds of dollars worth of gas over their lifetime, so do consider that.
George
But 2 mpg will really cost hundreds of dollars worth of gas over their lifetime, so do consider that.
George
Trending Topics
Super Moderator
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 40,019
Likes: 1,518
From: Maine, Virginia
My 2011 has 235 75R 17 and my Expy has 265 70R 17. The tires on my F150 are bologna skins but looking back at the 80-96 trucks with 15" wheels makes me realize that these really aren't so bad.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Most Surprising 2026 Ford Truck Features!
Joe Kucinski
Senior User
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Since you increased the diameter of the tire, you effectively decreased the numerical value of the gear. If you dropped down to a 3.15, you would most likely loose more mpg. The height is not realy the big problem at work here, it is the rotational weight of the tires. The vehicle requires a certain amount of Torque to move, or maintain speed. By adding rotational weight, you are now requiring more torque to maintain the given speed. Combine this with the loss in mechanical advantage (effective reduction in gear ratio), the increase in rolling resistance and you have the mpg losses that you are experiencing.
In your situation, you would need to change to a lower gear (higher numerical number) in order to reduce the load on the engine. This load is part of the fuel consuption difference.
In your situation, you would need to change to a lower gear (higher numerical number) in order to reduce the load on the engine. This load is part of the fuel consuption difference.
Super Moderator
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 40,019
Likes: 1,518
From: Maine, Virginia
I tend to agree under certain applications. But, let us remember the old 80-86 F-150's that were using the 300 I-6 and 3.08 gear sets. These trucks weren't fast nor economical but they did get the job done.
FTE Legend
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 31,930
Likes: 1,499
From: Ottawa, Ontario
I don't know about the economical remark that powertrain often produced 18-20mpg... but of course that was usually in reg cab 2wd truck that only weighed about 4200lbs.. not a 6000lb super crew 4x4.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post