Me too.....Just cheers me right up for the rest of the day!!

 

Tractice force is a FACT and it takes into account engine torque/hp, gearing and wheel rpm(the variables you mention). If I take that FACTUAL number and compare it in two hypothetical trucks that weigh the same (two crew cabs or two reg cabs, etc) then the one that has more tractive force is going to pull more weight. My calculations and situations are assuming that the truck is identical and the only difference is engine and gearing

Comparing my truck to Mike or Bill's v10, I don't need downhill, headwind, etc. I just need a good amount of weight and a steep hill. If the weight is heavy enough or the hill steep enough to keep them from accelerating to peak hp then I will outpull them. It's not that my engine is "extremely powerful", it's that I have good enough gearing to reach peak power under those conditions and they don't.

 

I am not a truck engineer, but my understanding is the lower the gearing the better the mpgs, to a point. There are other factors such as tranny gearing. This is because the lower the gearing, the lower it is in the rpm range, which in most circumstances means better fuel economy. Maybe an expert will correct me. (Or Josh maybe you can utilize math and a video to prove me wrong. Hehe)

 

11/15... Now that made me laugh. Honestly you think gassers get that bad mpg? now wonder why you hate V10's... you must think we get like 2/4 mpg

Here, it's a 2001 window stick for a 5.4L super crew, you can clearly see 15 and 19, no where near your supposed 11/15. Granted it has 3.55 gears, but I'm doubtful that the jump form 3.55 to 4.10 will result in a 25% loss in mpg.

Google Image Result for http://home.earthlink.net/~rghayes/sticker.jpg

If you don't believe me that my previous F150 got 15/18, that's fine. You don't even have to believe the weights I posted, I have no proof of them. The guy just wrote down what popped up on the screen and subtracted it from the loaded weight. I don't have slips or anything to prove it (although I can say the high payload package comes with heavier axles and multiple frame reinforcements -i.e. they boxed the frame in- and that is not light stuff.)

But you can't honestly believe that a 5.4L F150 is going to get the same mpg as a V10 super duty...

 

I had the F150, super cab, 4x4, long bed. It was a 2007 (i also had a similar truck as a 2005) F150 with the high payload package, which added quite a bit of weight over the normal F150's. Part of the high payload package was getting the 5.4 with 4.10 rear end. The only major difference in the drive train was that it had a crappy 4 speed tranny. (crappy because the gear ratio's sucked for towing)

I simply said that if I got 15/18 from it, there is no reason a regular cab, 4x2 super duty with a 5.4 (which would probably weigh about the same) with a better tranny couldn't get similar mpgs as my F150

 

If you look in the V10 forum's tech folder, there are three mileage polls. A lot more "scientific" data than I have seen elsewhere on this site. People specify when it's hand-calculated or the computer, and lots of other data in there.

Of course, you can just say "it's all lies" and ignore it, but there is a lot of information to be gleaned from those polls if you care to look at it.

 

I have a 2V V10 03 F450 6 speed I'd put against any stock naturally aspirated 5.4 in a tow off.

 

When you are talking about an automatic you lose several mpg's right off the bat even with the same gearing. With a 3.55 or 3.73 it is going to be doing a lot more downshifting than a 4.10 as well as having to be ran harder to maintain higher speeds. I have a Mustang that I have ran with a 2.73, 3.55, 3.73, 4.10 and 4.56. I got my fastest 1/4 mile times with the 4.56 but I got the best mpg's with the 4.10.

I wasn't talking to you when I said to come along for a ride with me. I was talking to the other guy that said my truck would be lucky to get 14 unloaded.

I never said mine would even get close to a v10 in that set up. You have more engine power, better tranny gearing and better rear end gearing than mine. I said I could out pull a 2v v10 with an automatic and 3.73 gear(pretty common trucks from those year models) from a dead stop up a steep hill with a heavy trailer. That is a valid test for me because the two roads leaving my house are 15% and 23%, close to 1,000' long and pull out from a dead stop. Ask Mike how that 7.3 fared making that pull ONE time and how he would like to take his truck up that kind of hill every single day. That's why my Bronco is on its 3rd e4od and why I will never own a truck with a 4r100 or e4od ever again.....

Edit-LSchicago, to compare your 450 to how a 250/350 with an auto and 3.73 gear would pull out, you would need to skip Low and 1st gear and pull out with yours in 2nd gear to get the same final drive ratio. I think it might have a little more trouble getting going on hills if you did that.

 

I know, but I was the one brought in the whole thing about an F150.

My V10 CC 4x4 get 14 mpg highway unloaded, and that's hand calculated. I rarely look at the mpg calculator on board. I do however have a bunch of receipts with hand written numbers on the back he is more than welcome to take a look at lol

 

Did you even look at the sticker? That is a 2wd with 3:55 gears in an F-150, under the old system (for those of you who don't know, around 2007, they changed the system why basically lowered the ratings to a more realistic rating). I got the 11/15 from MSN autos on a 4wd, not sure on the gear ratio. So, when you try to post the "gotcha" moment, do it with a comparable truck, cause you just proved my point. A 2wd F-150 gets 14/19, put it in a much heavier truck, that is higher and more wind resistant, up the gears to 4:10, and add 4wd, and yeah, I think 11/15 is even too high. LOL

 

Besides the other stuff that you are THEORETICALLY correct about, gearing is a funny thing... Tire size has as much to do with TOTAL gearing as gear ratio does. I'm willing to bet that the Superduty has larger diameter tires than the 150, so the effective gearing is closer than you would think.

Also, gearing wise, the modulars do not suffer when going with lower gears (higher numerically), and definitely get better mileage pushing/pulling higher weights when using lower gears.

So even though the Superduty does weigh more, lower gears would offset that, AND offset the aerodynamic drag.

 

I haven't gone through those threads, but my father in law had a 2002 extended cab long bed with a v10 and he got the same as my Chevy 6.0, basically 12 unloaded and 8 towing. Though with my heavy toy hauler at elevation and trying to stay at 70 I would get 5 or 6. From other things I have read, 12 unloaded and 8 towing is pretty close to normal for the v10. I will browse through there. Of course, the 6.0 forum, there are way more people claiming 18 and up than like Josh says, 10 to 15.

 

How many of those are stock and with all the emissions equipment though? The ones that I talked to at work were all company trucks that had to be inspected and weren't modified in any way. My cousins was bone stock as is my neighbors.

 

LOL... you really think the gears and 4x4 are going to drop it down that much?

Here, is this a better comparison? This is under the "new" system.
http://fordlabels.webview.biz/webvie...FC69630&ref=VL.

It's supercrew, 4x4 with 3.73 gears (they don't put 4.10 in anything but the raptor any more). So with going from 4x2, with 3.55 gears and under the old system to 4x4, with 3.73 under the new system we went 15/19 all the way down to 14/18. We lost 1 mpg... still looking for that 11/15 you're seeing.

I've had 3 F150's with 5.4's and have never gotten anything lower than 13 except when I was using 4x4 constantly or towing heavy loads (i.e. over 7,000 lbs.). They didn't have the on board mpg calculator either, I did it all by hand, entered into a spread sheet, and took number from over many months and years. On the highway I normally got about 17 mpg. I know people that had 4x2's with manuals that were in the low 20's, and that was hand calculated too. Although they didn't have 5.4's.

If you don't believe me, why don't you just go into the F150 section and look around. I doubt you will see anyone reporting 11 mpg unless they are towing or in 4x4 all the time. Even Motor Trend got 13 mpg on their long term tester, and we all know how nice and easy they drive. But they even said, most of the people who used it, were towing something and that's why they took the truck. (it was a 2004 4x4 supercrew FX4 with a 5.4, not sure of gearing)

Sorry, I find the 11 mpg in an empty F150 as believable as the 6.4 getting 24 mpg. I'm getting 10.4 mpg in the city in my F250 with a V10, and you want to believe that a lighter, better geared F150 with a 5.4L is going to only get 0.5 mpg better than me...

 

That sounds about right for a V10. I get 10.4 in the city and about 14 highway empty. Towing is to dependent on how much I'm towing, but 8 isn't far off for a decent load.