We put a full season of camping into our new 2014 40ft Salem Hemisphere 346QBUD last year. As camping season is spinning up for us, I've been chatting with my wife about down-sizing. We are weekend warriors -- usually doing 4-5 day trips, really don't need or use 40 ft of camper, and could be happy yanking something smaller around. My camper is about 11,000 lbs with all our stuff and I average 11.5 mpg with my 2012 Ford diesel at a cruise set speed of about 65-67mph. Can be a littler higher when towing completely flat, closer to 11 when pulling up into the mountains. Was wondering what I could roughly come to expect from towing a smaller/lighter travel trailer in the 25'-28' range and likely grossing around 7500-8000 lbs. Also wondering what the truck camper guys are getting with a similar setup? Not sure I can squeeze my family easily into a truck camper, but I find them very intriguing. Also looking at used Airstream trailers as the new ones are going to be out of my price range. I'm slowly gathering information on this topic in other areas of the forum as well, just don't have a lot of evening time to read right now.The reason I am asking about mileage isn't from a cost savings perspective, but more of a range perspective. I know if I stick to about 200ish miles from home with my current setup, I don't have to plan a stop for fuel along the way. Wondering how much that range may be extended with a smaller travel trailer or truck camper.Thanks in advance.

I think the offset difference in mpg costs will not even come close to expenses you'll incur switching rv's. Just my guess.Ron

lanerd wrote:I think the offset difference in mpg costs will not even come close to expenses you'll incur switching rv's. Just my guess.RonThanks, Ron. Not really about the expense. Our current rig has a bath and a half -- which equates to more tanks to maintain and with more interior space, more to clean on the inside and outside. Just trying to simplify, make it easier to get in and out of tighter CGs, have less slides to deal with (currently have 3), etc.

You seem to be getting respectable mpg for any fiver over about 28 feet. That weight seems very low for a 40 footer. It really isn't the weight that sets your fuel usage. It is the frontal area. A short, light, fiver has about the same wind drag as a long, heavy one. The nose shape can make a VERY slight difference, but driver habits are far more important.

The way I see, a few thousand lbs less isn't going to make much difference as most of the problem is frontal area of the trailer. Its like pulling a wall down the road. JMO

Allworth wrote:You seem to be getting respectable mpg for any fiver over about 28 feet. That weight seems very low for a 40 footer. It really isn't the weight that sets your fuel usage. It is the frontal area. A short, light, fiver has about the same wind drag as a long, heavy one. The nose shape can make a VERY slight difference, but driver habits are far more important.Yeah....that makes sense...and kind of what I was figuring. Seeing guys with truck campers claiming 11-15 with their diesel rigs. Have yet to read about Airstream guys to see if that sleek-ish front helps. My 40-footer is pretty light for its size...which is why we chose it. Based on the 3 times I've weighed it heading toward camp and fully loaded, we run about 11,200-11,400 depending on length of trip (more food and such) and if I'm carrying any water in the fresh tank. But 11,200 is about right for us.

Fuel Mileage vs. Fiver | Good Sam Community

32 Replies

Deb_and_Ed_M
Explorer II
Mar 23, 2014
We get 22 mpg with our 2011 F-350 2WD, SRW diesel when "cruising" - and average about 12 when pulling our 5er, which is a mid-profile (11' 8" tall) 28' Laredo at #10,000 when fully loaded. We usually drive about 65-68 mph.

I agree with others: "punching the hole through the air" is the biggest drawback - the weight and length are secondary.
Slowmover
Explorer
Mar 23, 2014
My grandparents and parents both used aero, all-aluminum TT's to travel the U.S., Canada and Mexico; my parents had theirs 27-years. MPG for a full-size or luxury car was 8-10 mpg (13k, GCW). I wanted better than this, as this ownership of this TT type -- where Airstream is the best known, but was the bargain brand -- is measured in decades, not years.

My goal, for both TV and TT was longest life at lowest cost with highest reliability. This rig meets that with ease. A Dodge with manual and Cummins was a no-brainer as TV. The SILVER STREAK was sentimental, but lower cost and higher reliability than Airstream also made it easy. AVION may be the best choice.

I found over a dozen reports from the South and South Central U.S. showing that with this TV (2003-2007 Dodge) that an 8-11k TT of this type from 28-35' was consistently showing 14-16 mpg given 65-mph or less travel speeds. My average is 15-mpg on level ground with a 65' combination (signature). GCWR is 18k.

I use a truck as a fulltimer and previously for business. Most of these TT's do not require a truck (and the penalties in braking/handling plus operational expense).

The latest DEF-equipped diesel trucks should be the same if not slightly better in mpg. My solo mpg at the same highway speed is not less than 24-mpg, so towing extracts about a one-third penalty. CPM fuel burn numbers in sig (at $4/gl diesel).

Aero is what matters as to fuel burn AND road performance.

.
ddschuman
Explorer
Mar 19, 2014
We had a 27' TT before our current 37' FW. We have seen little to no change in mileage.
SideHillSoup
Explorer
Mar 19, 2014
It's funny reading about how good of mileage you get with the different rigs and set ups. They way I look at it who care.
I chose the life of RVing and budget a certain amount of cash per day when traveling with the 5er. The rig I have is exactly what I ( what DW desired) wanted for the life we lead. I got the Durimax , the new 5th wheel is an Open Range Light and the fuel it takes to travel where we want to is all park to the game. I do take good care of all my equipment and always check tire pressures, oil changes, filter changes etc.
The way I gage my mileage up here in the mountains is how many hours you can drive on the top 1/2 of the fuel tank. This way I can check wheel bearings, check out the truck 5er and have a stretch.
Do trailers use less fuel, than a 5er, don't know, don't care. All I know is the rig we have works for our needs and we have to put fuel in the truck to move. If I had I wanted better fuel mileage and possibly loose some of the comfort items we have, I know that wouldn't happen in our house, but to each there own
Good luck with your choose
Soup
N-Trouble
Explorer
Mar 19, 2014
DazedNConfused wrote:
Thanks for the feedback, everyone. I was thinking with TTs having less frontal area since they aren't as tall, people would be seeing at least a few mpg better...but apparently not. This is why I asked. Always appreciate everyone's time.

Most assume the same. You can think Of a tow rig and TT as two separate masses going down the road each having their own wind resistance. A tow vehicle and 5er (while bigger) act as a single mass due to how close they are. Air will pass over the truck and front of the 5er as a single flow without much turbulence.
avvidclif1
Explorer
Mar 19, 2014
I have found wind to be the biggest factor. My RV is 13' tall with the sculptured front. I also have the RV tailgate (slatted V) which lets the wind under the rv get out easier, my thought anyway.

On normal interstate towing ( reasonably flat) with no wind I get 10.2 cruise set on 62. Add a tailwind (10-20) and it goes up to over 11. Add a 10-20 headwind and down to 9. Go up to 30+ and 8. All with the cruise set at 62-63 range.

It seems I'm always driving into a headwind. Last month we went down to Southern Louisiana. 35 MPH headwind going down, 7.8 MPG. Coming back 3 days later it had shifted to a north wind (cold front moving in) but only abt 10-15 and got just over 9. Mother nature makes sure I'm always driving into a headwind.

Local running, no trailer, 16-17. I don't know about what it would do on the freeway because if we're on the freeway the trailer is behind us.
colliehauler
Explorer III
Mar 19, 2014
My opinion will differ from others. The larger I went the less I used it. I spend my time outside and as long as I have a comfy bed and room for the Collies I'm happy. I can go a lot more places in a 18' to 24' range then a 35'.
billmac
Explorer
Mar 19, 2014
I understand what your saying and kind of feel the same way. My rig is bigger than I need and my next one will be smaller.

My opinion is with the cost of switching rigs, fuel mileage is a weak argument. Being more nimble and opening up more available campsites, seems more logical. Also, if my rig was smaller and not so tall, I could pull onto more Walmart and grocery store parking areas. Plus when I roll into a campground at 4pm, a smaller 50 amp rig would cool off quicker.

Even with these listed advantages, I do not intend to give up my nice well maintained unit, for a costly new one that will likely need bugs worked out. But someday, I will look for a smaller unit.
laknox
Nomad
Mar 17, 2014
dbbls wrote:
Slowing down to 60 will do wonders for your fuel mileage.

Yup! I'll pick up about 1 mpg.

Lyle
dbbls
Explorer
Mar 17, 2014
Slowing down to 60 will do wonders for your fuel mileage.

Forum Discussion

Fuel Mileage vs. Fiver

32 Replies

About Fifth Wheel Group

Related Content

Ram fuel mileage

Fuel mileage

First mileage test result.

Fuel mileage

Fuel mileage