You try so hard to sound intelligent. Simple physics keyboard warrior. Greater mass will require more energy to move and keep it moving. Airplane, boat, your truck,my truck,op's truck, a donkey....physics still apply.

 

I'm sorry I exaggerated...but it's easy to see that fully fueled and with an occupant and other miscellaneous items it's easy to be in the ball park of 6k.

 

Are we going to really argue about the laws of physics over a F150... I'll stop here. I'm out.

 

Did you miss the study on page two that showed some cars get better mileage at higher speed, or are you just intentionally ignoring it, hoping nobody else will see it? It's not going to work; everyone else can still read it.


Yes, it takes more power to overcome more wind resistance. But you are ignoring the fact that engine efficiency can improve enough (under some circumstances at certain engine speeds) to overcome a little additional drag. We get it, you are convinced that you can't possibly be wrong, even though it's clear that you don't know much about this subject.

 

I guess Ford must have done some fibbing on the weights, because these all show them between 4-5k. 2015 Ford F-150 Curb Weights Revealed - Gas 2


But whatever, a few hundred pounds are irrelevant to the discussion.

 

As was already explained, the laws of physics apply in the engine too, but it's clear that you don't even have a basic understanding of it, as shown by your hilarious "apples to oranges" comparison of a truck engine to a jet engine.


I'm not trying to "sound" like anything. I was trying to educate you, but it's clear that you don't want to learn. Is ignorance as blissful as they say it is?

 

[QUOTE=Wiggums;16766929]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_e...in_automobiles
[I]
Fuel economy at steady speeds with selected vehicles was studied in 2010. The most recent study indicates greater fuel efficiency at higher speeds than earlier studies; for example, some vehicles achieve better fuel economy at 100 km/h (62 mph) rather than at 70 km/h (43 mph), although not their best economy, such as the 1994 Oldsmobile Cutlass, which has its best economy at 90 km/h (56 mph) (8.1 L/100 km (29 mpg-US)), and gets 2 mpg better economy at 105 km/h (65 mph) than at 72 km/h (45 mph) (9.4 L/100 km (25 mpg-US) vs 22 mpg-US

Note the terms "achieve better fuel economy " , "although not their best economy ". I'm out....again .

 

I love posts about mileage. However, I put no weight in anecdotal information pertaining to a vehicle's on-board mileage indicator. They are almost all flawed and tend to show much higher mileage than the actual measured mileage. While I do believe that some rare vehicles can achieve higher mileage by slightly increasing their speed, by and large the vast majority of vehicles do not respond this way. If you are pushing more air in front of the truck, it is the same as carrying more weight. The engine is going to need to work harder, I.E. Burn more fuel per mile. So, as a general rule, if you want to achieve you best mileage possible, drive at a speed just above the shift point of high gear. Of course, nobody wants to drive this way because everybody passing you on the freeway will point and giggle. Is your vehicle one of the few that will achieve higher mileage at faster speeds? Try it out and see, but don't believe that on -board computer. JMHO Jag

 

[QUOTE=CuNmUdF250;16771414]
You made an ignorant statement that "Defying physics if you're getting better mpg by driving faster", then when shown evidence that your statement is not always true (under certain circumstances), you still cling to your ignorant beliefs. And instead of trying to learn how engine efficiency varies with RPM, you threw out insults. Crack some books on engines and fuel systems, or don't argue about subjects on which you don't even have a basic understanding.

 

You're fairly abusive for a newby Delta_Echo. Might want to back off on your tone a little bit, or maybe switch to decaf?

 

It's difficult to remain polite when someone else acts rude and condescending. Join date should be irrelevant, and having a lot of posts doesn't give anyone credibility.

 

Typical Internet tool. Comes hard with bull***** and then turns to insults when he's exposed for being a pompous blowhard. I've blown apart every thing professor Delta dip***** has come with. I'm out...again.

 

Your logic on fuel burn and efficiency is so wrong I don't know where to begin...so I won't bother.

 

Well there's threads on here full of f150 owners unhappy with their fuel mileage especially the ecoboost. Perhaps you could do it for them. Explain to them how they can drive faster and use less fuel...let's acknowledge that their is a certain speed (which varies from each vehicle) that a vehicle will maintain momentum and use least amount of fuel translating to its highest mpg numbers. Please share.

 

Also I can't take credit for the laws of physics. It's not my logic.