When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
And, I didn't even rain on his two snake oil threads, even though I thought about it...
I got's 4 more tanks of gas to use up and get my average MPG numbers with loaded truck set up, then I will post my numbers and bring back that thread (if it doesn't get locked) and you can pick apart my conclusions then if you want...
I can’t believe he’s still going on about this… Maybe he’s mad because you are reporting better MPGs without his snake oil! I think he just likes to argue though… Oh well. I appreciate the valuable information shared by the OP.
I can’t believe he’s still going on about this… Maybe he’s mad because you are reporting better MPGs without his snake oil! I think he just likes to argue though… Oh well. I appreciate the valuable information shared by the OP.
Did you not read my very 1st post on here? I thought there was some valuable info there for improving your MPG on any truck with a 6 speed...
I got's 4 more tanks of gas to use up and get my average MPG numbers with loaded truck set up, then I will post my numbers and bring back that thread (if it doesn't get locked) and you can pick apart my conclusions then if you want...
There's so many variables that affect fuel economy to all the members here, your tests will still be statistically insignificant. Said another way, your test results won't be worth reading if one is to take it seriously.
Whether he gets 5 mpg or 50 mpg, how does that affect others? It's not a contest. Happy for him. Why do some people get bent out of shape over this? Sheesh.
So, a backup to my last fuel economy trip check.
Ran up the same route, same speeds, etc., but the less expensive fuel was a little further up the interstate.
This time the wind wasn't favorable, had a head wind 8-10 MPH traveling from my house up through east Texas and most of the way through Arkansas.
Anyway, the run was 662 miles on 31.6 gallons of fuel, and ONLY 20.95 MPG this trip...
Not too bad for bucking a little headwind!
And, pretty well backs up the previous run.
This **** on your parade thing is middle school at best. Do I question people? Yes. Do I question the science? Yes, that's why I teach it. Scientists are skeptical people. Do I question the reasons? Yes....BUT, I don't question the emotion. The gentleman was happy his truck does well. That is a feeling with all get when you or your machine goes up and above. My truck is amazing. Period. It does things my other truck couldn't, my brothers trucks or my buddies trucks.
There's so many variables that affect fuel economy to all the members here, your tests will still be statistically insignificant. Said another way, your test results won't be worth reading if one is to take it seriously.
Do you even understand the term "Real World Fuel Mileage" and what it means? It is different for each person and their situation, which means variable. It also means you can learn from it if you find yourself in a similar situation.
So, a backup to my last fuel economy trip check.
Ran up the same route, same speeds, etc., but the less expensive fuel was a little further up the interstate.
This time the wind wasn't favorable, had a head wind 8-10 MPH traveling from my house up through east Texas and most of the way through Arkansas.
Anyway, the run was 662 miles on 31.6 gallons of fuel, and ONLY 20.95 MPG this trip...
Not too bad for bucking a little headwind!
And, pretty well backs up the previous run.
Awesome, good for you. You obviously are doing something right.
From my latest work trip, stopped to top off fuel before going to job site.
Ran in the 75-80 MPH range for most of the miles, mostly interstate, some town slow downs before getting to the interstate, always on cruise.
No head wind, very light winds when it was blowing.
This is the also the first trip after installing the centramatics, maybe they helped???
This is finally in the range of my previous 2015 RAM 2500 Cummins.
617 miles, 28 gallons, 22 MPG.
I'd take 22 MPG every time!
I have never hand calculated this but the Avg MPG was up and down on this tank. The odometer is correct. To get over 1,000 miles I was pushing 21 mph for tank. That was my best and had the stock Michelin’s at the time.
Whether he gets 5 mpg or 50 mpg, how does that affect others? It's not a contest. Happy for him. Why do some people get bent out of shape over this? Sheesh.
I guess I need/should explain, my out of context words/opinion to the 22.3 MPG Ltngdrvr got, which IS good, great even... BUT,
What I meant and should have said in my very first post was... That I got 23.4 MPG average highway mileage, thirty years ago with the improvements I made with the overdrive splitter added onto my 5 speed, Thus me being unimpressed with todays trucks with the 10 speed that a billion+ $ were spent on development, and getting less MPG than I got 30 years ago...
The best MPG truck I ever owned was a 1992 3/4 ton 4X4, 6.5L turbo diesel, 5 speed manual GMC... With an overdrive splitter/transmission (I put on it), basically made it into a 9 speed manual transmission...
13.4 MPG average per tank, (per year) pulling my 26.6' Citation 5th wheel...
23.4MPG empty highway average per tank (per year)...
I guess I need/should explain, my out of context words/opinion to the 22.3 MPG Ltngdrvr got, which IS good, great even... BUT,
What I meant and should have said in my very first post was... That I got 23.4 MPG average highway mileage, thirty years ago with the improvements I made with the overdrive splitter added onto my 5 speed, Thus me being unimpressed with todays trucks with the 10 speed that a billion+ $ were spent on development, and getting less MPG than I got 30 years ago...
Wasn’t the L65 6.5 diesel rated for a whopping 190 hp and 380 lb/ft in 92 with very little or no emissions kneecapping, and really took its time getting up to 60mph? Auto week clocked it at 12.3 seconds to 60 with the 4 speed auto
Wasn’t the L65 6.5 diesel rated for 180hp and 380 lb/ft in 92 with very little or no emissions kneecapping, and really took its time getting up to 60mph?
Yea, but who cares, one does NOT need 475 HP & 1,050 Lbs of torque to move an empty truck down the road, thus this new ford truck is dealing with the same needed HP, both engines are putting out the same power to do the same thing... This new truck with the new trany and 30 years of improvements, should get better MPG than I got... IMO... I am not talking racing, but even towing my 26.6' 5th wheel it got 13.4 MPG, and that seems to me better than average, dealing with only 190 Hp. & 380 ft/torque and doing the same job.
and.. yes the ford would get up the hill faster racing, but not in normal operating conditions... IMO
Yea, but who cares, one does NOT need 475 HP & 1,050 Lbs of torque to move an empty truck down the road, thus this new ford truck is dealing with the same needed HP, both engines are putting out the same power to do the same thing... This new truck with the new trany and 30 years of improvements, should get better MPG than I got... IMO... I am not talking racing, but even towing my 26.6' 5th wheel it got 13.4 MPG, and that seems to me better than average, dealing with only 190 Hp. & 380 ft/torque and doing the same job.
and.. yes the ford would get up the hill faster racing, but not in normal operating conditions... IMO
how much does your 26.6’ trailer weigh? You are probably better off comparing with 1/2 ton diesels that now routinely get over 30mph highway and closing on 500lb/ft with just 3 liter displacement.
how much does your 26.6’ trailer weigh? You are probably better off comparing with 1/2 ton diesels that now routinely get over 30mph highway and closing on 500lb/ft with just 3 liter displacement.
You may be right about the towing part/capacities compared to a smaller diesel, or not, after all the less HP diesel would have to work harder using more fuel. But empty, an 8cylinder diesel compared to another 8 cylinder diesel, both, using what... about 60/70HP. to go down the highway, empty, at 65 MPH... the modern fancy one should be better, not less MPG, ( doesn't matter that one can make 475 Hp. or the other can only make 190 HP. because they both need to make the same HP. to do the same thing... when both at 65 MPH). IMO
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Slideshow: Called the Fortress, the 850-horsepower pickup combines Raptor underpinnings with military-inspired features, survival equipment, and a starting price of $285,000.
great even... 
