F150 2.7 EB vs 5L V8 towing mpg

BenK wrote:
After your trip info...if me, I'd get the Accord Hybrid


Was going to get a Honda Accord Hybrid, but am now noodling my next vehicle to replace the 2000 Honda Odyssey (bought used) and it will be another Odyssey. Mini Vans suit me best these days. Never thought I'd ever say that. A sedan doesn't have enough seats for the folks in my crowd and many of them can't get up and into the Sub.

Am going to rebuild the K3500, 7.4L Suburban in phases. 5.38 diff's and a 0.7 GearVendor's to turn the 4L80E into an 8 speed with double OD....then the engine and a 1K-HP rated 4L80E with a 3-year warranty. No hurry on that

A guy in town has one of the below. Interesting and will investigate some more


Canadian Electric Vehicles

Canadian Electric's Mighty E

EV's are too expensive for what I want/need and over kill for now.


For in town am looking at this


For my use, several deducts...don't need the bed dump feature, but soooo interesting, and will ask if they have AC (boy am I getting old)

A 3 meter turning "CIRCLE" !!!

The 25MPH max speed will keep me out of trouble. The guy in town has meaty tires, that makes his look like a hot rod

This would become a project to keep me busy. Maybe solar panels

We're going to give the Accord Hybrid a serious look when the time comes.

Those EV links are interesting and practicl for certain applications. I looked at the specs and appreciated their honesty about range. Here's a quote from their online brochure.

"Driving Range: Up to 50 miles (80km) *battery/load/temp/terrain dependent."

I sometimes feel that EV manufacturers 'hide' factors like the effect that extreme cold temps can have on range and rapid draining of battery capacity. Not so with this manufacturer it seems. Maybe because they are making them in Canada and in many parts of Canada the first thing you want to know, is how will the vehicle do in a long, tough, cold winter. The fall, summer, spring weather is a cakewalk in my area, compared to our winters. :E

If we had a country property I would think something like this would be good for working. Be interesting to see if a snowplow attachment is available, etc.

Sounds like an exciting project for your one ton (3500) Suburban. Always have liked these and yours is well equipped...one ton, big block Rat motor and the prospect of having a Gear Vendor...8 speeds with your HD 4L80E...with 5.38 gears...wow gear and power wise ...you can have your cake and eat it too ! :D

One van I miss, is our '97 Astro. Ordered it new...with HD suspension, Eaton G80 locker, rear heater, 235/65-15 tires...which I eventually replaced with Michelin LT X 225/70-15's as they had a stiffer sidewall and good tread for snowy roads. Ordered the 3.42's, but in hindsight wished I had the 3.73's as we towed a lot with it. Had the Vortec heads on the Chevy 4.3 V6.

Had it for 10 years, still miss it.

After your trip info...if me, I'd get the Accord Hybrid


Was going to get a Honda Accord Hybrid, but am now noodling my next vehicle to replace the 2000 Honda Odyssey (bought used) and it will be another Odyssey. Mini Vans suit me best these days. Never thought I'd ever say that. A sedan doesn't have enough seats for the folks in my crowd and many of them can't get up and into the Sub.

Am going to rebuild the K3500, 7.4L Suburban in phases. 5.38 diff's and a 0.7 GearVendor's to turn the 4L80E into an 8 speed with double OD....then the engine and a 1K-HP rated 4L80E with a 3-year warranty. No hurry on that

A guy in town has one of the below. Interesting and will investigate some more


Canadian Electric Vehicles

Canadian Electric's Mighty E

EV's are too expensive for what I want/need and over kill for now.


For in town am looking at this


For my use, several deducts...don't need the bed dump feature, but soooo interesting, and will ask if they have AC (boy am I getting old)

A 3 meter turning "CIRCLE" !!!

The 25MPH max speed will keep me out of trouble. The guy in town has meaty tires, that makes his look like a hot rod

This would become a project to keep me busy. Maybe solar panels

Thx Ben for the info on the Accord Hybrid. I agree, think this is the vehicle to consider.

We were away for a week + on holiday to visit our daughter and her family. Drove through three prairie provinces there and back, 700 miles + in a day, 12 hour driving days, we do the drive in one 12 hour day. MPG was quite good...high 30's (we use British Imperial Gallon...20 % larger than U.S. Gallon)...so MPG is 20 % higher...same distance. It is nice to fill up our gas tank on the '15 Impala 3.6 V6, IC and get about 500 miles of range in about 5 minutes.

On the prairies we no longer have any provincial/inter provincial bus or passenger train service...so 'public transportation'...has to be our personal vehicle. We do have plane transportation, but not to small towns, which was our destination.

There is also very little if any EV vehicle charging infrastructure out here, great distances between points, very cold, long winters...so I don't see EV's as a safe or viable alternative as of yet.

I think the hybrid has a lot more appeal/practicality/safety (no one wants to be 'juiceless' by the side of the road, sitting in your EV, on the lone prairie when it's 30 below) for these conditions. When you run out of electrical power, your IC cuts in..the way to go during any transitional, 'bridging' time period I would think.

BTW, I have just noticed more Tesla articles on The Fast Lane. Some issues with speed of repair.

Thx for the advice, Les

Forgot...we experienced the Grape Vine both ways...reduces MPG both ways...loooooooong incline & hilly

Trunk had a weeks luggage for 5 (both sisters had 2 each to my one) and food/drinks

Sis says she got +40 MPG on her trip to Washington state a few months ago

She filled right after a long stretch on highway 5

I Trust her...she just retired from Genentech (scientist) so she knows HOW2 take data and figure accurately

Look at the Accord Hybrid

Sister has one and we just came back from a round trip from SF to LA and back

About 450 miles one way and averaged +30 MPG. Commute traffic in SF and LA, why +30, as pure highway would be higher MPG

Could have made it on one tank, but refueled just to have reserve for the LA commuter traffic (reports of heavy congestion). Battery was full most of the trip, so there were many reserve miles (don't know how much, guess you can look that up)

Was in the back seat the whole time. Comfortable and am 185 lbs & 6 foot. Other sister in passenger seat. She has a Mercedes E class diesel and noticed the Accord has more room back there than the Mercedes

On the highway (route 5), she was cruising between 75 to 89 MPH

Trouble free and bought it new 3 years ago

She regrets not getting the plugin option

BenK wrote:
Hey Les,

Please report back on what you find on both the 1.5L and 2L.

Had just skimmed the headers in my morning RSS inputs while on vacation last week and did not dive into the meat of the articles. Only know that in cold weather, below -7*F, fuel gets into the engine oil and fuel fumes in the cab

Guessing different application...towing vs car, therefore duty cycle very different...the why cold instead of hot based issues and why 1.5L and 2L on a car...

Thx Ben. I checked into the problems with the turbo 4 in the new Accord and you're correct.

I live in a very cold climate where the issue seems to be more prevalent due to the cold climate. Unless Honda gets this fixed, it's a deal breaker. Your advice re; wait awhile is sound and I will see if or not Honda gets this fixed, before we make any decisions.

We're not in any hurry as our '15 Impala works great, we really like it ...but in the next year or so, will probably trade it in.

Unfortunate as if GM still produced the Impala or big Buick LaCrosse...it would of been a slam dunk...we would of got one of those. I hope Mary Barra and GM know what they're doing.

I'm usually fairly good about researching things out carefully in order to make an informed decision. Didn't use my due diligence this time, as I think I just assumed if it's Honda the mechanicals would be up to snuff.

As the old saying goes if you just ...assume...you know what happens. :B

Thx for the info.,

Les

I think there are 2 important differences between a turbo gas engine (like a 3.5L EcoBoost) and a turbo diesel (like a 6.7L Powerstroke).

The turbo gasser is made for fuel efficiency with no power compromise. Think of the advertisements for EcoBoost - heck, even the names tell a tale. The ads brag of the mpgs.

The turbo diesel is made to tow and haul and is built, designed, and tested accordingly. The diesel also has much higher cylinder pressures and is built to withstand those pressures which inherently makes it more durable (when built correctly). The ads here are all towing/hauling ratings bragging rights and tq numbers.

Apple/orange.

Turtle n Peeps wrote:

Groover wrote:
I still don't feel like anyone has explained why turbocharging a gas engine is so much less effective than turbocharging a diesel.

I don't know what you mean by less effective?

Mostly I am referring to durability. I think the fact that most turbo-diesels are built for commercial use while historically many turbo-gas engines have been built for performance have led some people to conclude a turbo-gas engines are not durable and unsuited for truck use. I support the notion that most engines will last as long as they are designed and built to last, the type of combustion is at most indirectly related to durability.

I guess that I was just commenting on what I perceive as prejudice against turbo-charged gas in trucks that is founded more in history than current reality.

Groover wrote:
I still don't feel like anyone has explained why turbocharging a gas engine is so much less effective than turbocharging a diesel.

I don't know what you mean by less effective?

You can get WAY more power out of a turbocharged gasoline engine than a turbocharged diesel engine if all things are equal.

You turbocharge a gas engine for way different reasons than turbocharging a diesel engine.

You turbocharge a gasoline engine to make more power because of stoichiometry. The more fuel AND air you pack into a gasoline engine the more power you make. One can turn a little 3.5 gasoline engine into a 7 liter engine or even a 10 liter engine or more.

Remember, with a gasoline engine you have to have stoichiometry. You don't with a diesel engine. There is no stoichiometry with a diesel engine. The more fuel you can pack into a diesel engine the more power you can make until the engine melts down or hydrolocks. That is the two limitations of a diesel engine. You turbocharge a diesel engine to make it burn more efficient and to keep the EGT's down so you won't start melting pistons and other parts.

One can make a ton of power with a N/A diesel. It just gets really hot and starts to melt down. If you turbocharge the engine you can make more power and keep it from melting down.

The more you turbocharge a gasoline engine the hotter the EGT's get. The more you turbocharge a diesel engine the cooler the EGT's get.

That is an important difference.

rjstractor wrote:

BenK wrote:
Then how many square inches per piston top...there in lies the answer to thermal limits to duty cycle...therefore the difference in tow ratings and the higher HP for the bigger NA engine

And likely the reason we yet don't see a turbocharged gas engine in a 25/35 series pickup. The 3.5 Ecoboost is in available in the Transit 250/350, but with lower power and tow ratings than the F150, and it's not available in cab/chassis models at all.

For speculation about what the 3.5 Ecoboost would do in any truck you should stick with data from trucks. The Transit is designed for carrying, not towing, and doesn't have the frame for towing.

I still don't feel like anyone has explained why turbocharging a gas engine is so much less effective than turbocharging a diesel. I will buy into the idea that 3.5 was not designed for Super Duty work but all the same I have not heard any reports of them not holding up to work within their ratings. Oh sure, I have heard rumors, mostly from people without first hand knowledge, but all the local shops I have asked tell me that they very rarely see any issues with Ecoboost engines in trucks.

As far as the discussion about combustion temperatures, that is mostly determined by inlet temperature and compression. Turbo's still have a slight rise in inlet temp even after the intercooler and that is dealt with by slightly lowering the compression ratio. This does lead to a slight loss in efficiency. For that reason a naturally aspirated engine can give a little better mileage under heavy load.