3V vs. 2V MPG?
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 358
Likes: 1
From: Tri-Cities, WA
3V vs. 2V MPG?
I've had two different trucks with the 2V V-10: a 1999 SCSB 4wd with 3.73's and 285-75-16 BFG All-Terrains, and a 2003 CCSB 4wd with 4.30's and 285-75-16 Toyo Mud-Terrains. Both trucks averaged 10-12 in mixed driving, and 8-10 towing my various trailers.
I'm now looking a 2008 CCSB 4wd with 4.10's on stock sized tires with the 20" wheel package (unsure what that size is??), and wondering if the newer V-10's are any more economical than the earlier generation? I realize it's not a Honda Civic and that is not my expectation whatsoever, I'm simply asking if the newer engine is just more powerful, or if it may also be more economical? Thanks for any real world input
I'm now looking a 2008 CCSB 4wd with 4.10's on stock sized tires with the 20" wheel package (unsure what that size is??), and wondering if the newer V-10's are any more economical than the earlier generation? I realize it's not a Honda Civic and that is not my expectation whatsoever, I'm simply asking if the newer engine is just more powerful, or if it may also be more economical? Thanks for any real world input
Junior User
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
From: Secor, Illinois
I just got a 08 crew cab 2wd with 4.10s all stock and 18" wheels.. Im getting 12.5-13 mixed driving with mine.. No towing and winter gas.. Hope I gain at least 1 this summer.. Power out the waazoo!! 
Junior User
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 79
Likes: 1
I have a 2008 CCLB 4x4 on stock 20's. It has 5-star tune, CAI and exhaust work. I get about 1 mpg less than my old 2001 V10 CCLB 4x4. The power is amazing and coupled with the Torqshift tows great. My 2001 would not hold overdrive with even the slightest headwind towing my 12K lb toyhauler while the 2008 tows the same trailer effortlessly in comparison. Well worth a slight loss of MPG.
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 358
Likes: 1
From: Tri-Cities, WA
Thanks for the input guys.
I pulled the trigger and picked it up Saturday morning. After filling the tank and resetting the display, it is currently reading 12.8mpg after about 180 miles of mostly freeway driving with the cruise set a 72mph. Not sure how accurate it is, but I'll know when I hand calculate at the next fill-up. I did notice that the speedometer reads ~2mph slow vs. my phone GPS, so I need to look into that issue as the tires are stock size according to the door label... Regardless, it runs fantastic and the ride of the '08 is light years better than my '03. Definitely happy so far
I pulled the trigger and picked it up Saturday morning. After filling the tank and resetting the display, it is currently reading 12.8mpg after about 180 miles of mostly freeway driving with the cruise set a 72mph. Not sure how accurate it is, but I'll know when I hand calculate at the next fill-up. I did notice that the speedometer reads ~2mph slow vs. my phone GPS, so I need to look into that issue as the tires are stock size according to the door label... Regardless, it runs fantastic and the ride of the '08 is light years better than my '03. Definitely happy so far
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 358
Likes: 1
From: Tri-Cities, WA
Just filled it up this afternoon, with the dash display reading 11.9mpg.
246.2 miles and it took 22.306 gallons, which maths out to 11.04mpg.
This was roughly 180 miles of 72mph freeway with the balance being typical commuting around town. I'm not upset with this at all, but I'm still hoping there are some gains to be had since I don't yet know the condition of the spark plugs or MAF sensor... Hope to have time this weekend to pull a plug or two and see what's what, and also clean the MAF.
246.2 miles and it took 22.306 gallons, which maths out to 11.04mpg.
This was roughly 180 miles of 72mph freeway with the balance being typical commuting around town. I'm not upset with this at all, but I'm still hoping there are some gains to be had since I don't yet know the condition of the spark plugs or MAF sensor... Hope to have time this weekend to pull a plug or two and see what's what, and also clean the MAF.
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,811
Likes: 15
From: Central Ohio
Everything I've come across on here shows the 2Vs tend to get very slightly better mileage. Not sure if it has to do with the motor or changes in the trucks themselves (weight, ride height, etc).
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 358
Likes: 1
From: Tri-Cities, WA
Second tank mathed out to 12.23mpg, again pretty heavily biased toward highway driving... Seems to be right in line with my older ones so far, even though this one has significantly taller tires 
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
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
Junior User
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
From: Secor, Illinois
One would think the 5 speed auto should get better mpgs, or even out with any engine differences..
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,394
Likes: 104
From: Southern KS
You're right about the trannys. I have always read and heard the 2V were slightly more fuel efficient. I do know that my current truck weighs a couple hundred pounds more too.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post