6.4L Hemi mpg

My last 4 tanks are

EVIC Actual
11.6 10.3
7.1 6.5
8.5 7.7
14.9 13.9

As you can see the EVIC is a little optimistic.

The middle two tanks had the toy hauler in tow for part of the miles.My Ford V10 made better mileage then the Ram so far. Ram is better running solo. Only about 1200 miles on so far.

nevadanick wrote:
I dont agree with the part about running in 4cyl mode. One trip to Utah i got 19 and was running speed limit which is 75 here and 80 across Utah and it was only in 4cyl mode going downhill.

To do 75 to 80 no cylinder deactivation system will be able to shut off cylinders, just to much HP required to stay at that speed.

Except like noted above "going downhill"!

Chris

I dont agree with the part about running in 4cyl mode. One trip to Utah i got 19 and was running speed limit which is 75 here and 80 across Utah and it was only in 4cyl mode going downhill.

proxim2020 wrote:


TFL did some MPG tests with Rams earlier this year and each time they found the EVIC was pretty close to the hand calculations. Actually each time the EVIC underestimated the MPG (the truck did better). They found this to be true in the 1500, 2500, and 3500. I think the 1500 and 2500 were unloaded and the 3500 was loaded.

I have found the EVIC to be accurate or an underestimate. Actual is the same or slightly better than EVIC.

FishOnOne wrote:
I think the key component for a 6.4 to achieve good fuel economy as demonstrated by the OP is for the engine to be able to run in the 4 cylinder mode. I suspect running into a stiff headwind or running larger tires will prevent cylinder deactivation and fuel economy will suffer.

I'd agree with that.

I love my 2014 Ram 3500 srw 6.7 but will have to say the lie o meter is always 1.5 to 3 mpg better than hand calculated. Same thing when I had a 2005 Ram 2500 5.9. Seems to me they could make it more accurate. I thought it would be nice if they gave us a way to calibrate it.

By the way. I hand calculate everytime I fill up and I cant recall the lie o meter ever reading less than true mpg.

I don't track mpg that much either , what I do take notice of is time between fill-ups, with fiver hitched up I usually get 4 and a half to 5 hrs burn time on a tank of gas depending on terrain and city or highway & speed.

I think the key component for a 6.4 to achieve good fuel economy as demonstrated by the OP is for the engine to be able to run in the 4 cylinder mode. I suspect running into a stiff headwind or running larger tires will prevent cylinder deactivation and fuel economy will suffer.

I drove out to our deer camp last Friday with no head wind and achieved 21mpg, but driving back home with a stiff head wind the mpg dropped to 19.2 when I got home.

In addition I don't hand calculate my fuel economy anymore since the trucks computer is within .1 mpg of the hand calculated value.

Lantley wrote:

goducks10 wrote:

Lantley wrote:
That is pretty good mileage if that's your thing. I'm not a MPG guy. MPG is unimportant to me in a heavy duty truck.
I want the truck to get the job done MPG's are secondary. It's a truck not an economy car.
I prefer power over MPG's in a truck. Different strokes.

So you'd be happy getting 16mpg vs 18+mpg when both are equally capable?

Yes because I'm not tracking my MPG's. As long as the truck is performing as I expect I really don't care what MPG's are.
There is not enough dollar difference in the grand scheme of things 2 MPG's to matter.Over 1000 miles the difference is $65.00 or so.
If I want better MPG's I can simply slow down and drive gently.
I'm not interested in changing my driving style/approach either.
I want a TV that can tow a heavy trailer up a grade without a struggle or a lot of loud revving. MPG's are further down my list of concerns, nevertheless the OP's MPG numbers are impressive for a gasser. But they don't change my approach or opinion of what I want in a heavy duty truck. Given a choice I prefer more power vs. more MPG's.

I'm the same way, the wife checked the mpg in the HHR we had but I've never checked. Rode Honda Goldwings for 200,000 miles, people would ask what kind of mileage I got with it. Told them I don't know, never have checked it.

goducks10 wrote:

Lantley wrote:
That is pretty good mileage if that's your thing. I'm not a MPG guy. MPG is unimportant to me in a heavy duty truck.
I want the truck to get the job done MPG's are secondary. It's a truck not an economy car.
I prefer power over MPG's in a truck. Different strokes.

So you'd be happy getting 16mpg vs 18+mpg when both are equally capable?

Yes because I'm not tracking my MPG's. As long as the truck is performing as I expect I really don't care what MPG's are.
There is not enough dollar difference in the grand scheme of things 2 MPG's to matter.Over 1000 miles the difference is $65.00 or so.
If I want better MPG's I can simply slow down and drive gently.
I'm not interested in changing my driving style/approach either.
I want a TV that can tow a heavy trailer up a grade without a struggle or a lot of loud revving. MPG's are further down my list of concerns, nevertheless the OP's MPG numbers are impressive for a gasser. But they don't change my approach or opinion of what I want in a heavy duty truck. Given a choice I prefer more power vs. more MPG's.