Forum Discussion
45 Replies
rhagfo wrote:
Cummins12V98 wrote:
I think everyone knows I am a RAM/CUMMINS guy but there is no way that truck got 14mpg on such a short run. Maybe run 300 miles the 14 would be possible. The Lie O Meter is more accurate under this condition.
This fill two click is a joke! Fill the SOB to the top until fuel starts running out that is the only way the test can be fair. Also same pump matters also, at least they did that.
I agree the capless fill is a joke! I will be getting a cap from Geno's for mine.
Kent get that missing tooth fixed!
X2
This is a sham of a mileage test! :S
There is no way to get an accurate reading with a pump refill even from the same pump!! A real mileage you need to run at least 300 miles! Then check the mileage.
Yes, another RAM/Cummins guy saying sham.
X3
But we didn't buy these things for MPG.... more like Torque for towing.buddyIam wrote:
29,000 lbs at 73 mph?
6.3 mpg while pulling an open sail at that speed must be a world record. ;)
Hope you found a fuel station in those 46 miles.
But you probably have enough inertia with all that weight to coast 50 miles. LOL
For a while at 75 it was averaging 5mpg. The pic was after the wind let up a little. Yes we really had to pay attention to fuel stops!Cummins12V98 wrote:
I assumed the Ford would be better. I really don't care too much about mileage as seen in this photo. Getting there is sometimes more important.
I guess gearing does make a difference. With my 4.10's, I am just slightly lower in RPMs at that speed, but am in 6th.blofgren wrote:
Better fuel mileage from the only medium duty diesel available in a pickup truck. Sounds like a win-win to me :B
What are you saying, I have a 6.6 Duramax in a 5500 medium duty vehicle.- 29,000 lbs at 73 mph?
6.3 mpg while pulling an open sail at that speed must be a world record. ;)
Hope you found a fuel station in those 46 miles.
But you probably have enough inertia with all that weight to coast 50 miles. LOL - I assumed the Ford would be better. I really don't care too much about mileage as seen in this photo. Getting there is sometimes more important.
- Final thought from me, and then onward and awkward as I say. :B
But I have owned both vehicles in this test. My current Ram, and a 2011 version of the tested Ford. Both with 3:73 axle ratios.
The Ram does get slightly better fuel mileage. Not a huge difference, but yes, it is better.
And I've replicated conditions with both vehicles. Moved my son out to Washington state in 2012 and used the Ford to tow loaded U-haul out there. Now he moved back to South Dakota so last fall used my new Ram and another U-haul, moving the same stuff, back here.
If memory serves me right, I got about 1/2 to 3/4 of a MPG better with the Ram compared to my Ford with the exact same loaded trailer.
Ford was in the 13.5 range and Ram just at 14.0 or so.
Hey, I drive for fuel economy. :B - Like others have said, a longer test may have provided better precision and accuracy. But they did the best they could to provide identical testing conditions. If they could repeat the same exact test several times and average the results that give more confidence in their testing procedure.
I can beleive the Ford only got 12 mpg. In my second job we just had a new F350 dually 4x4 crewcab diesel delivered. The lie-o-meter indicated 13.1 mpg when they dropped it off. It came from eastern Washington to Tacoma, so it was highway driving up and over a mountain range. - They did drive both directions. But wind could still be a factor. Even if slight.
That is why the EPA uses a dyno.
I do like those guys also. I suppose they do the best they can.
This board and all the arm chair critic's are sure to find a problem somewhere with their tests. ;)
I want to see the eco diesel and boost both hooked up to the same trailer.
I also want to see some tests on the rolling plains hills. Those go on for hundreds of miles and are a greater test than the Ike climb.
Boseman Mont. to Wiliston N.D. into a head wind will test any tow vehicle. - Good point the previous poster made. Sure, all distances were the same, but were the WIND conditions the same as the previous test??????
And boy, living where I do, with the wind all the time, it makes a huge difference.
Regarding the speed, I noted with my 2011 Ford that the speedometer was slower than what my GPS showed also. If memory serves me, about 2 MPH slower, so pretty much the same as what they found in the video.
I cannot recall to be honest about how my Ram matches up, RE speedometer versus GPS, since I have been using only the built in navigation features in the Ram. I'll have to check on that when I next drive around.
An enjoyable video though. I kind of like those guys, and if one does not get overly serious with the product they deliver, one can enjoy these for the fun they should be.
