I have a 6.7 ccsb lariat with 20" wheels 3.55 gears and I reset my lifetime average at 10k to see if I noticed any mpg difference and 6k miles later my truck is showing 20.9 mpg average .. the speed limits in my area are 55 which is ideal for good fuel mileage but I've been overly impressed with the fuel mileage

 

Like all things in this world, the grass is always greener on the other side. You just have to ask yourself, is it worth going to the other side to then just find something else on the other side of that? Or, are you OK with being content with what you have?

My last truck was my first Diesel, up from at least a dozen gas trucks (both Ford and Dodge) in my lifetime, and as others have said, it's tough going back to Gas after a Diesel, so try not to get used to the loaner, lol...

 

If tomorrow is 'as planned and predicted', I will be saying goodbye to the loaner on Wednesday. This is about to get more interesting, or just fade away...

 

I've really enjoyed reading all of this. I've had a rough year. Back in July, I had a dealer mishap that resulted in total transmission failure on my 2014 leased F150. I planned on actually buying it out at the end- nicest truck I have ever owned. Race red, FX4, appearance package, EB, etc. loved it. Three weeks into the ordeal without them touching it, I got dumber (out of anger) and swapped the lease on a new Tundra Crewmax. First Toyota. Drove it 4 months and sold it back to the dealer to get out of the payment. It averaged 12.6 mpg. It was not anywhere near the truck the F150 was.
I decided to take a break from 2 car payments to decide what I wanted next. Besides- needed to focus on some other garage projects (Jeep, 2 fox bodies) plus the wife's 2015 Expedition payment was enough.
So- I shopped for a decent "work truck". Ended up buying a 2nd Dodge 2500 24v Cummins. It will give me something to sell and put towards a down payment. It's a nice truck- perfect body (redone), solid drivetrain, big exhaust, tuner, etc. it'll do for now but the family doesn't like riding in it. Loud, quadcab has zero legroom, etc.
as I sit and read these forums, I'm drawn to the Superduty. I've had 3 - 99 V10, 01 5.4, and an 03 7.3. Should have kept that one.
That 7.3 hooked me. I live in WV and a diesel just hits the hills and goes. All of my gas trucks need a downshift. They all drank gas. The only exception has been the ecoboost. It pulls like a diesel.
Anyway- I've decided I'm targeting a SuperDuty. I don't need it per-say. But if I'm going to spend $50-$60k, I'm going big.
I don't "need" a diesel. But I like power and I like effortless drama driving.
But the 6.2 is an option. 4.30's are a must for me. The Tundra had them and they complemented the powerband.
I've got some test driving to do....
Sorry for the long winded post. Believe it or not, this thread has helped me a bunch.

 

This has been a fun thread. Thanks to JeepPuller for starting it. Now how will he be in his truck?????

 

Wait...you dumped your Toyota after only 4 months because of 12 MPG, and you're now considering a 6.2L Super Duty? What will make you happier with this than the Tundra?

 

Poor description on my part-
I only stated mpg for information. I got out of the Tundra because I simply didn't like it. I couldn't see paying on it for two years with no chance of buying it out at the end like the F150. My Cummins only gets 14.5 mpg on the same drive for that matter. I want to take my time without "having to" trade based on necessity. I've considered another F150 (practical). But considering I always level and put bigger tires on my trucks, I will likely just go Super Duty. For the amount of money a Lariat F150 is vs. a Super Duty, I can't see where I'd just go F150. The 6.2 Lariat F250 seems to be about the same as a similar F150. I still have some researching and test driving to do. The 6.2 is reliable and much cheaper. So it is an option if it suits me power wise.

 

So I had a 45 mile round trip drive this morning that covered back country roads, double yellow line roads and a two lane highway. Speed limits ranged from 25 - 65.

I drove exactly the speed limit and did not take off fast from any stops.

At the end of the drive the truck reads 17.1 mpg. The first half of the trip had me at 21.1 mpg, but returning was up hill mostly.

I do not live in mountainous terrain, but hilly for sure.

Seems the best I will get is between 17-18 even with hyper-miling.

 

I've had several trips like that, but about twice the distance in my 6.2L. I averaged high 15 to low 16 mpg. Considering it is a gasser, I'm pretty happy with the mileage.

 

Did the same trip the next day. This time I just drove as I normally do. I ended up with 17.2 mpg. Not sure if this means anything at all. None of this is hand calculated, and certainly not scientific, but it does have me wondering about any chance to break 18mpg on a consistent basis. I suspect my longer trips present the best opportunity for increased mpg.

It it appears I will have this truck a while longer too.

Nothing but crickets from the dealer since he told me the parts did not come in as expected.

We are heading to our cabin in PA this weekend. I'll have some turnpike time and hit a few small hills. I'm curious to see what my mpg is for this trip. I plan to track up and back separately.

 

I think you'll get better mileage with the longer trips, but am curious to see what the actual mileage is.

I don't think hand calculating mileage is any more accurate than the computer. Unless you want to spend millions of dollars on highly specialized measuring equipment, you're not going achieve more accuracy than a vehicle’s trip computer.

With modern motors, they need to know exactly how much fuel is being used by every stroke of every cylinder. Vehicles today do a lot of precision measuring of the fuel injectors and exhaust treatment system that the computer then converts that data into fuel economy.

That kind of precision easily trumps hand calculating methods, where temperature (gas expanding/contracting, vapors being absorbed by charcoal filters, plastic gas tanks expanding/contracting, sloping gas station parking lots and variations in the way gas pumps sense when a tank is full all can impact the outcome of fuel-economy measurements.

 

Thanks for putting my thoughts into words. Yep, lots of variables in hand calculations.

 

Well, that is all true with one major caveat: manufacturers don't have to feed the exact same info the engine is using to control air/fuel mix into the dashboard display. They can round up, embellish, or use some other "stabilized" formula. I'm not saying they do, but some vehicles have more accurate trip computers than others. This is not new technology...has been around since the 80's at least...but only the manufacturer knows the truth.

 

^^^^ right on!!!! Also,regardles of whether we hand calculate or go by the trip computer......the fuel consumptioon rate is what it is; either way we do it will not change the rate! And we really only have two choices.....fill 'er up or park it!!🤠🤠

 

They can, but for the most part, the engineers are engineers. They try to do the math as accurately as possible. If it were up to the marketing folks, your miles per gallon would be hitting upwards of 30 mpg no matter what!

At least the mpg indicated should be rather consistent from fill-up to fill-up. Far more so than hand calculations.

Regardless, as has been stated, I'm putting the fuel in and driving anyway. Currently, my mpg has exceeded what I estimated when crunching the numbers between a diesel and gasser. It just goes to show you, a little bit of work up front will help you purchase the right truck for your situation. And while the gasser fits me better than I had hoped, I would much rather have a diesel and not need the extra power than a gasser and discover it can't haul my trailer.