4.9L commercial?
Posting Guru
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 2
From: North Reading Mass
Yes I do remember those commercials and the high gas mileage ratings. The EPA tests were actually performed for emissions and done on a dyno. A city cycle and highway cycle were part of the test and mileage figures were published for comparison with other similar vehicles. I don't think air or rolling resistance were factored in. IIRC the highway cycle was set at 49 mph.
Still one of the best looking trucks ever made !
regards
rikard
Still one of the best looking trucks ever made !
regards
rikard
Elder User
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 552
Likes: 0
ive gotten a best of 23 mpg in mine, and i had many things holding me back.
First and foremost, im carb'd and without overdrive. secondly, the overall condition of my truck wasnt at its best.
i cruised 70-75 the whole way, which is 2500-2700 rpm for me. im sure if i was closer to 2000 with fuel injection and newer odds and ends (like repacked wheel bearings, etc) i could have gotten high 20s.
First and foremost, im carb'd and without overdrive. secondly, the overall condition of my truck wasnt at its best.
i cruised 70-75 the whole way, which is 2500-2700 rpm for me. im sure if i was closer to 2000 with fuel injection and newer odds and ends (like repacked wheel bearings, etc) i could have gotten high 20s.
Postmaster
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,241
Likes: 3
From: Broken Arrow, OK
I also remember seeing that commercial on TV. If you read the fine print you will see that it says "Actual Hwy mileage and California rating are lower".
Back in the days when those truck were being built I would say that 30mpg was possible, but not in a truck you'd want to drive. The didn't load them up with frivolous crap like they started doing on the later body styles. It would have to have the tallest possible rear gear, no power anything, no AC, no P/S, no electical accesories and driving at 55 mph with a tailwind. In other words, the engine wouldn't turn anything but the wheels and alternator. If it didn't come with a radio it wouldn't have an antenna, and a passenger side mirror might have been an option then as well. All the little things add up. All that stuff also adds up to a few hundred pounds that it doesn't have to lug around.
Back in the days when those truck were being built I would say that 30mpg was possible, but not in a truck you'd want to drive. The didn't load them up with frivolous crap like they started doing on the later body styles. It would have to have the tallest possible rear gear, no power anything, no AC, no P/S, no electical accesories and driving at 55 mph with a tailwind. In other words, the engine wouldn't turn anything but the wheels and alternator. If it didn't come with a radio it wouldn't have an antenna, and a passenger side mirror might have been an option then as well. All the little things add up. All that stuff also adds up to a few hundred pounds that it doesn't have to lug around.
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,987
Likes: 104
From: Boise, Idaho
Originally Posted by Silver Streak
I also remember seeing that commercial on TV. If you read the fine print you will see that it says "Actual Hwy mileage and California rating are lower".
Back in the days when those truck were being built I would say that 30mpg was possible, but not in a truck you'd want to drive. The didn't load them up with frivolous crap like they started doing on the later body styles. It would have to have the tallest possible rear gear, no power anything, no AC, no P/S, no electical accesories and driving at 55 mph with a tailwind. In other words, the engine wouldn't turn anything but the wheels and alternator. If it didn't come with a radio it wouldn't have an antenna, and a passenger side mirror might have been an option then as well. All the little things add up. All that stuff also adds up to a few hundred pounds that it doesn't have to lug around.
Back in the days when those truck were being built I would say that 30mpg was possible, but not in a truck you'd want to drive. The didn't load them up with frivolous crap like they started doing on the later body styles. It would have to have the tallest possible rear gear, no power anything, no AC, no P/S, no electical accesories and driving at 55 mph with a tailwind. In other words, the engine wouldn't turn anything but the wheels and alternator. If it didn't come with a radio it wouldn't have an antenna, and a passenger side mirror might have been an option then as well. All the little things add up. All that stuff also adds up to a few hundred pounds that it doesn't have to lug around.
Mountain Pass
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
From: Arkansas
Correct me if wrong. I remember talking to a guy who had a Ford from those years with the inline 6 and OD manual transmission. He said the 4th gear OD was so high is was useless for him. So maybe in flat country it might get mid 20s mpg? In the ad it mentions a transmission option.
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,987
Likes: 104
From: Boise, Idaho
That's what mine's like. I6, 3.00 rear end, 4 speed manual with OD. Fourth gear is really really high and I can only really use it if I'm going over 50mph and am not climbing any hills. However, in the flats, I can coast at 75mph at 1700 RPMs and it does get in the low 20s if I keep it around 65 (probably will do even better when I put a new exhaust without a clogged cat on it.)
Post Fiend
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 8,521
Likes: 16
From: Lost
Originally Posted by mxer201
Correct me if wrong. I remember talking to a guy who had a Ford from those years with the inline 6 and OD manual transmission. He said the 4th gear OD was so high is was useless for him. So maybe in flat country it might get mid 20s mpg? In the ad it mentions a transmission option.
This combo works rather well, when used with a 3.25 or lower (higher number) rear gear ratio.
The engine/trans/rear gear combo was used as a MPG leader, but wasn't that useful for people who actually work their trucks. Same holds true for the later EFI 4.9L/5 speed, backed by the 2.73 rear gear. Killer MPG on the highway empty, but not much power for working.
Cross-Country
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
From: Venice, Florida
I remember those ads. My dad was a die hard Ford man and had many half & 3/4 ton pickups for his company. All were 6 cylinders and I never remember him having a problem with any of them mechanically. Too bad I can't say the same thing about rust. 
Doug
Doug
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
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
Lead Driver
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,962
Likes: 594
From: Greater Austin, Texas
I can't view that here at work. Is that the one where the truck jumps off a ramp and does a roll into a big net in a ditch and on the underside of the truck is the MPG in big letters? I didn't remember that one being 30 but hell it was about 25 years ago.
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,987
Likes: 104
From: Boise, Idaho
Jass88, the commercial shows two pickup trucks of different colors (one blue, one tan) driving side by side driving straight at the camera, over one it says "Highest MPG", the other one, "Most Powerful Six". Then they swerve into each other and become the same classic Ford red truck. After that the truck just drives to the top of a hill and it has some gas mileage information superimposed over it about it getting 30mpg and 20mpg ave. highway. Fade out to a "Built Ford Tough" logo and end of commercial.
