Adam R wrote:
I still agree with the OP. Mileage is directly related to how hard you push an engine
And I never debated the fact that mileage is directly related to how much horsepower you demand from the engine.
Adam R wrote:
and the 1500 to 2500 fuel mileage comparison was still far from apples to apples. Did you notice the 1960lb curb weight difference? The 2500 sits taller and is less "flat" on the underside so it's cD is not the same as the 1500. Going down a level/flat road, the vast majority of fuel used is in overcoming wind resistance. Mechanical losses are actually pretty miniscule. That's way it takes 20 hp to go 60 mph in a sedan and over 600hp to go 200 mph
A gasoline 3.5L V6 Honda Pilot is further from apples to apples to a gasoline 5.7L V8 Toyota Sequoia yet you still said that was a good comparison for your argument and was more inline to what you were trying to say. I bring up a comparison between a V6 diesel 3.0L Ram 1500 to say I6 diesel 6.7L Ram 2500 and all the sudden these aren't valid comparisons per the topic yet a V6 Honda Pilot versus a V8 Toyota Sequoia is to you. I don't understand that one.
Adam R wrote:
Regardless, life, like engines, is a bunch of compromises. I'll take the big engine that returns 20 mpg and be just fine with it. If someone wants a 28 mpg truck, then they will need to accept the limitations that brings.
I am with you on that one and is exactly what I have said to many small diesel owners. They bought them for fuel economy so don't expect or try to say that it pulls like a big diesel. On the flip side, big diesel owners bought their diesels for pulling power so don't try to say you can get small diesel fuel economy.
