Gas vs PSD
Elder User
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
From: Spokane, WA
https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/9...-question.html
It is threads like this that are my point. From my buddies 90s 7.3, to newer 7.3s, I have never seen a psd not be able to accelerate with only 8k behind it, up only a 6 or 7% grade. I know, I know, that is not the cherised 3v, that would outpull every PSD made any day of the week at any elevation.
It is threads like this that are my point. From my buddies 90s 7.3, to newer 7.3s, I have never seen a psd not be able to accelerate with only 8k behind it, up only a 6 or 7% grade. I know, I know, that is not the cherised 3v, that would outpull every PSD made any day of the week at any elevation.
Postmaster
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,724
Likes: 4
From: Rogersville, TN
https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/9...-question.html
It is threads like this that are my point. From my buddies 90s 7.3, to newer 7.3s, I have never seen a psd not be able to accelerate with only 8k behind it, up only a 6 or 7% grade. I know, I know, that is not the cherised 3v, that would outpull every PSD made any day of the week at any elevation.
It is threads like this that are my point. From my buddies 90s 7.3, to newer 7.3s, I have never seen a psd not be able to accelerate with only 8k behind it, up only a 6 or 7% grade. I know, I know, that is not the cherised 3v, that would outpull every PSD made any day of the week at any elevation.
Need some input from all the veteran V-10 drivers. I have a 2000 V-10, 2V. and tow a 12,5K fifth wheel. When I hit those long 6% and 7 % grades at about 10,000 feet, my rpms start dropping to near 2,000 in 2nd gear. When I drop it down to first they climb to about 4,500. The question is, "Do I back off in first to let them drop to around 4,000 or do I stay at about 4,500 rpms? these grades are generally 1-2 miles long
Elder User
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
From: Spokane, WA
Yeah, 14 would make sense at around 65 unloaded. The v10 I was around on the highway was 12, but that is 75 mph speed limit, usually at 80 and the lowest elevation around here is 3,000 feet, highest is 11,000, at least highest you can take a vehicle. Where I get about 16 at 80 and 18-19 at 65. My mpgs did not really change with my mods.
Elder User
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
From: Spokane, WA
First of all, the guy says he is towing a 12,500 lb trailer, not 8,000. He is also at 10,000 feet elevation. And he is also asking if he is going to hurt his engine by running it 4,500 rpm. It is beyond me why these people think they are going to blow an engine up when they aren't even running it anywhere near peak hp, much less over revving it. Probably an ex diesel driver that doesn't realize it's ok to rev it over 3,000 rpm.....
Postmaster
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,724
Likes: 4
From: Rogersville, TN
About your mpg's, do you not think elevation has something to do with that? If you are driving between 3-11k feet, then your gasser is losing power, having to be ran harder and is using more fuel than one that isn't driven at those elevations.
Elder User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 650
Likes: 0
From: WV
Yeah, 14 would make sense at around 65 unloaded. The v10 I was around on the highway was 12, but that is 75 mph speed limit, usually at 80 and the lowest elevation around here is 3,000 feet, highest is 11,000, at least highest you can take a vehicle. Where I get about 16 at 80 and 18-19 at 65. My mpgs did not really change with my mods.
EDIT: 14 is on relatively flat highway, at least flat compared to WV highways. I only travel highways on the way back to northeast Ohio (to see family). Otherwise we take the wifes car because it get 30 mpg on the highway.
Elder User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 650
Likes: 0
From: WV
https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/9...-question.html
It is threads like this that are my point. From my buddies 90s 7.3, to newer 7.3s, I have never seen a psd not be able to accelerate with only 8k behind it, up only a 6 or 7% grade. I know, I know, that is not the cherised 3v, that would outpull every PSD made any day of the week at any elevation.
It is threads like this that are my point. From my buddies 90s 7.3, to newer 7.3s, I have never seen a psd not be able to accelerate with only 8k behind it, up only a 6 or 7% grade. I know, I know, that is not the cherised 3v, that would outpull every PSD made any day of the week at any elevation.
BTW, the reason most people like the 3V is because of the better power and the tranny. Most 2V had the 4R100 were as the 3V had the 5R110. So you not only had better power, but a better tranny.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
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
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
Cargo Master
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,624
Likes: 7
From: OR and UT
We're not talking 2-speed Power-glides these days.
Oh, and just to keep this on topic...
V10 wins!
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 42,561
Likes: 423
From: Long Island USA
It would be interesting to see what a 2-valve V10 with the Torqshift in an E-series van is like when towing. Or even the an E-series chassis cab motorhome.
Post Fiend
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 23,849
Likes: 20
From: McKenzie River
Wow, I don't feel so bad now. I get 10.5mpg with my 460 towing the boat, and carrying the cab over camper and gear over 6% grades at 6,000ft at 60mph. Best ever mpg was 13.4mpg unloaded.
Postmaster
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,724
Likes: 4
From: Rogersville, TN
The SD's don't come with a 7 speed and the ones from the same era as mine have 4 speeds(and not very good ones at that). If you look at Ford's page they claim higher mpg's for the manuals even with the current automatics(usually a 1-2 mpg difference).
Thread Starter
|
Modular motor junkie
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 6,190
Likes: 8
From: Texas
I can't get that out of my 460 empty.
Elder User
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
From: Spokane, WA
SorryI missed these...
That shows why you should not be stating things as fact. The emissions on the 6.0 do not affect mpg. The 6.4 only affects mpg because the dpf uses additional fuel to burn out the bad stuff from the engine. The only additional emissions stuff on the 6.0 is the exhaust gas recirculation, which just pushed exhaust gasses back into the turbo, and does not require additional fuel. Read through the 6.0 threads and you will see what I am talking about. My mods were not about fuel mileage, just about reducing my EGTs and programming the transmission so the truck drives better.
In 9 years, the techonology has improved, and so has fuel mileage, dramatically, so that just proves my point. Go check out MSN autos and you will see the mileage I am talking about.
The 11 is purely city driving, 15 is highway. So a mixture of 13 is reasonable. Here is the link:
2002 Ford F-150 Engines and Fuel Economy - MSN Autos
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...
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...
The 11 is purely city driving, 15 is highway. So a mixture of 13 is reasonable. Here is the link:
2002 Ford F-150 Engines and Fuel Economy - MSN Autos