MPG test ecoboost vs ecodiesel

Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:

wing_zealot wrote:

Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:

BB_TX wrote:
The surprise is that the diesel did not beat the gasser by more than it did. 2.3 mpg (less than 10%) is not nearly enough to make up the difference in diesel costs.

No surprise at all, test apples to apples and see how it works. The Ford was a super cab that weighed in at 4920# and the Ram was a crew cab that weighed in at 5840# that is 920# difference! Then add in the fact that the Ram had 3.92 gears and the Ford had 3.55 gears.

From the story " Both trucks cruised effortlessly, but the Ford was actually running closer to 1,700 rpm at 65 mph. The Ram was humming at around 1,900 rpm. " Funny my truck has the 3.92 gears and @ 60 MPH it is turning 1550 RPM and @ 65 it is turning a tic over 1600 not 1900 why the difference?

I'll give Ford their due, the Ecoboost line of engines have turned out to be very good engines as well as being fast! But fast does not equal good fuel economy. BTW why do they pump the sound of a V-8 into the cab via the radio lol

The MPG is pennies compared to the big assss rust holes in the fenders and tail gates. I'll never buy another Dodge.

Maybe take care of your vehicles and they won't have big assss rust holes in them. None of my vehicles have rusted out, well there was that Ford Aroestar that rotted out.

all vehicles will rust if you don't keep them clean, yep even a Ford. You guys are funny.

Sorry dodgeboy but Dodge has earned the reputation for poor body hold up. You don't need to try to argue the point just take a close look at some of the older dodges. A very dear friend of mine was a Dodge designer and admits the problem and the lack of Chrysler to address it. I think that the problem was in the past but it sometimes takes a long while to live down.