V-10
Thread Starter
|
Posting Guru
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,736
Likes: 1
From: Monroe, MI
V-10
I presently on an 05 350 6.0 L cc lb. I have been thinking of ordering an 08 or 09 350 CC LB with 4.10 rear. What seems to be mileage you guys are getting on hwy city not towing and at what speed. When towing everything I have read is saying 9-10 mpg. I will tow a 31 ft. TT. Thanks in advance to all answers. Jeff
Senior User
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 282
Likes: 1
From: Quad Cities, Iowa
V10 Fuel Milage
The newer 3 valve 6.8L V10 gets better milage than my two valve, however, this is my data:
Dead stock: 11 -12 mpg @ 75 mph empty
9 -10 mpg @ 65 mph towing 9000 pounds
4" lift 40" Tires 4:88 gears (net equivalent ratio 4:10):
10 mpg empty on highway
6-9 mpg loaded, towing mixed highway/town NOTE: High wind resistance and truck weighs 9000 pounds empty
Consider: depending on the miles you plan on driving, the V10 could have a significantly lower total cost of ownership even with low mpg
Dead stock: 11 -12 mpg @ 75 mph empty
9 -10 mpg @ 65 mph towing 9000 pounds
4" lift 40" Tires 4:88 gears (net equivalent ratio 4:10):
10 mpg empty on highway
6-9 mpg loaded, towing mixed highway/town NOTE: High wind resistance and truck weighs 9000 pounds empty
Consider: depending on the miles you plan on driving, the V10 could have a significantly lower total cost of ownership even with low mpg
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 121
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by dkf
You have that backwards. The 2V gets slightly better mpg than the 3V.
I can easily pull 12 mpg all around, if I'm not hard on it, and 14 mpg highway. and the truck is still under 2000 miles, not even broke in. My buddies 2v v10 even with 3.73s wasn't beating those numbers.
Posting Guru
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,060
Likes: 7
From: Burnsville, MN
I'm sure there can be individual exceptions, but the increased 40? hp of the 3 valvers simply takes more fuel, not to mention that when they were introduced in 2005 the chassis was made heavier, as were the brakes. It maybe be good PR to say the newer models are more "efficient", but I certainly don't see any improved mileage.
Senior User
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 446
Likes: 2
The only way my '08 could do 14 mpg is downhill with a tail wind for the whole tank. Mostly about 11 with best tanks in the mid 12s. This is figured with a calculator not what the lie-o-meter in the dash says.
Trending Topics
Senior User
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Mmaxed
The only way my '08 could do 14 mpg is downhill with a tail wind for the whole tank. Mostly about 11 with best tanks in the mid 12s. This is figured with a calculator not what the lie-o-meter in the dash says.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
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
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Most Surprising 2026 Ford Truck Features!
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Ford Trucks Coming to Mecum Indy 2026
Brett Foote
5 Best / 5 Worst Ford Truck Wheels of All Time
Joe Kucinski
Thread Starter
|
Posting Guru
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,736
Likes: 1
From: Monroe, MI
I test drove one today. I liked it, but it sure is a different feel than the 6.0. I think it would do the job of pulling my 31 ft. TT, but frankly the only thing holding me back is the lie o meter. It Scared The HELL out Of Me! I swear the gas gage moved as my foot touched the gas 
Senior User
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by wiingnut
I test drove one today. I liked it, but it sure is a different feel than the 6.0. I think it would do the job of pulling my 31 ft. TT, but frankly the only thing holding me back is the lie o meter. It Scared The HELL out Of Me! I swear the gas gage moved as my foot touched the gas
Hotshot
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 10,101
Likes: 40
From: Pa
Originally Posted by Remmy
Doesn't seem so by the numbers I've seen. I don't think that's Ford's claim either. All the 3v motors are supposed to be more efficient, I know the 3v 5.4 is as well.
I can easily pull 12 mpg all around, if I'm not hard on it, and 14 mpg highway. and the truck is still under 2000 miles, not even broke in. My buddies 2v v10 even with 3.73s wasn't beating those numbers.
I can easily pull 12 mpg all around, if I'm not hard on it, and 14 mpg highway. and the truck is still under 2000 miles, not even broke in. My buddies 2v v10 even with 3.73s wasn't beating those numbers.
The 3V isn't more efficient, it just has more power.
Your not going by imperial gallons are you.
.
Freshman User
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
My '05 3v 410 averages 12 locally and 14 at 70-75 m.p.h. hand calc.
I'm not claiming that 3v's inherently get better or worse mpg than 2v's, but the theory that more power = more fuel used in itself is flawed logic.
I'm not claiming that 3v's inherently get better or worse mpg than 2v's, but the theory that more power = more fuel used in itself is flawed logic.