Just one correction...RAM is at 930lb-ft. Not giving them any more credit than they deserve, lol.

As to your other assertions, they aren't quite one-for-one.

A 2017 truck weighs more than a 1989 truck, and a dually back then was running smaller tires than a dually today does. Larger tires effectively reduce the axle ratio. In other words, a 4.10 in 1989 with small tires would be a better pulling truck than a 2017 truck with a 4.10 and larger tires today, if the engines were equal. Trailers have gotten larger, too.

I agree that most owners could make due with less torque and horsepower...probably only a very select few need to move 30k lbs with their pickup.

 

Thanks for the correction... it was erroneously somewhere in my mind that Ford had tied Ram this year, but not exceeded.

I agree that tire were a factor... my 96 Ram had relatively puny LT215/85R16Es. And trucks did gain weight in the early 2000s, but have been fairly consistent since. And while the old mechanical-injection 12-valve Cummins was wonderfully efficient, even I was surprised to get 24.3 mpg over 265 miles in that 96. To get that kind of mileage in a full-size pickup today, I'd have to get a Ram 1500 diesel or the upcoming F-150 diesel. (One of the fleet management sites noted the 150 diesel will start production at the Dearborn plant only on Feb 26 2018, so it's not far away.)

If my next truck is an F-350, there is no reason for me to have anything stronger than 3.55s, even as a dually. I can't justify the extra tow ratings from 4.10s as a fair trade for better mileage.

 

So when Ford releases the new 7.0 gas engine and obsoletes the 6.2 perhaps you'll understand.

 

I try to drive 65 everywhere I go even in the 75 mph zones. I don’t like killing my mileage but flying. That said, my Rpms are still around 2k. That should be the sweet spot for mileage. I don’t see how my 4.30 can be hurting my mileage so much with I’m turning less than 2k on the highway.

Brett

 

I love the simple old mechanical diesels, too. Unfortunate they cannot meet emissions.

My 2017 F-250 Crew 4x4 diesel will get 24mpg on 55mph highway. For the weight, height, and power on tap...I'm pretty impressed. I can routinely get 24mpg on a 100-mile round trip I make weekly, and this is in hilly Vermont. But the roads are all 50-55mph, slowing to 35 through a couple of small towns along the way. Ideal conditions, I guess. On the interstate, it will be more like 18mpg at 70mph, which is still pretty decent.

My 2017 dually was a 3.55. I specifically ordered it that way. Still rated to pull 27,300lbs. But the 4.10 guys claim they get similar mileage. My gut says the 3.55 does a little better, or else why would Ford offer it?

 

I will never use the full capacity, few will. But that is not the point. You don't have to use the full capacity to get the full use of it.

If I am not using the full Fu Manchu ability of my rig, but say just 50%, this will result in increased performance, mpg and longevity of the truck.

One time at a change of command we got a new Col, I was a young Lt and at the end of his talk to us troops he as for a show of hands as to how many were going to give him 101% going forward? Of course we all raised our hands. He laughed and said: 'not working for me you aren't". Then he went on to tell us, give me 90% 100% of the time and there will be times I will ask you for and extra effort and I want you to be able to give it, that is what that 10% is for. That is MY investment in you.

He was one of the best commanders I had in my military career, we worked smart, not long and the times we needed more we had more to give.

No engine or person can work at max cap 100% of the time without early failure.

I have posted on this a couple of times and over a year into owning my truck I can affirm this is a FACT JACK. My truck gets better mpg at 75, than at 65 mph. Be it on cruise control or just foot pressure on the go pedal.

I will offer a guess that I am slightly higher in the rpm band and in a sweeter spot on the torque curve.

My increase in mpg is about +2 mpg. I do a Lot of out of town business trips around 400 mi or so round trip. When I am not pulling 75 is better than 65, it also applies when I am pulling my 5th wheel, but I do not drive when pulling 75 unless I am really running late, but the times I have 75 have yielded an increase in mpg.

 

Ironically, those were the kinds of roads I was running on that 265 mile drive that got me 24 and change in that 96 Cummins. All state highways - 2x2 and 2-lane. Cruise set at 57, occasional drops to 35 for small towns.

Actually good to hear you can get 24 from your 250, as that's what Motor Trend/Truck Trend said they got during last year's Truck of the Year testing. Seemed a bit ideal, but it works for me when "real people" can do it as well.

The reason the 4.30 hurts your mileage is because you're not traveling as far as if you had 3.73. If 2000 rpm is the efficiency sweet spot and gives you 65 mph with 4.30s, it would be 75 mph with 3.73s - 15% more miles per time traveled, 15% more miles per gallon used. Yes, there are some slight losses with pushing air 10 mph harder and rolling resistance, but in theory, you would go from 15 to 17 mpg.

 

Th RAM inline six sounds like an AMC inline six from the 70s especially with big exhaust, it sounds like crap....gotta love our V8 rumble.....and it's with STOCK exhaust!

 

It takes around 30% more power to travel at 75 MPH vs. 65 MPH holding all other variables constant. v^3 adds up quick.

(Got these numbers from some googling)
55 ft^2 frontal area
.45 Cd
0.015 Crr
9000lb truck with 150lb driver
25% drive train loss

93HP to go 65
131HP to go 75

I'll crawl back into my pedantic hole now.

 

Understand? Engines just don't become obsolete when a new displacement is introduced. This isn't an I-phone we're talking about. The 5.4 was still in production, even 8 years after the 6.2 was introduced.

If Ford made a PR tomorrow saying the 2018 SD was getting the 7.0, I wouldn't have an ounce of regret or doubt in my decision. The 6.2 pulls just fine, and has proven itself very reliable, along with the 6R140 mated to it.

 

I agree, and even if a 7.0L is released, it might only be available in chassis cab trucks.

In a way, the 5.4L is still being produced in the form of the 6.8L V10. But 18 years of production for one motor is pretty solid.