Ram 1500 EcoDiesel mpg test
Link to video Even with 3.92 gears is got great mpg - 33+ mpg at 65 mph :E. Also of note was the EVIC mpg was low compared to actual, just like the other Ram trucks they tested.
Forum Discussion
I myself would like to see them at least do 70 mph in their tests as well for a more realistic view. When I was at Cummins, I remember reading some tests that were done on how much efficiency vehicles loose at certain speeds. At 65 mph, it is only around 8%, and that more then doubles at 70 mph to a 17% efficiency loss. Doing a speed of 75 mph only drops to a 23% loss of effiency which is not that big of a drop going from 65 mph to 70 mph. So a speed limit of 70 mph in their tests would be a more accurate mpg for most people. My Ram 2500 Cummins gets no where near that 24 mph they got in their tests, but then again I don't drive anywhere near 65 mph.
I see a lot who also only look at mpg of diesel verus gas, but neglect to see the big picture. Currently as I writing this, the US national average for 87 octane is $2.40 while diesel is $.35 higher at $2.75. That would put the 33 mpg they got with this Ecodiesel at 8.3 cents per mile and the 22.8 mpg that the 2.7L Ecoboost got at 10.5 cents per mile. The cost difference changes as the difference in fuel prices changes. The gap is even less with lower mpg vehicles. For instance, the Ram 2500 CTD that averages out at 17 mpg(according to Fuelly.com) which is 16.8 cents per mile and the Ram 2500 6.4L with it's 13 mpg avaerage is at 18.5 cents per mile using the current US average fuel prices.
The major thing I do not get about the 3.0L Ecodiesel is that it is not like the bigger 3/4 and 1 ton diesels where you are paying more for more capabaility, more pulling power, and more fuel efficiency. With the Ecodiesel you only get better fuel efficiency than other engines and do not get more capapbilty or pulling power. In the old days(or how it ussually is with most half ton trucks), you start off with a less powerful and less capable engine option, but it gave you more fuel mileage. Then you had to pay more for a more powerful engine that was more capable, but you knew you had to sacrifice fuel mileage to get it. With the Ecodiesel, you pay more for a less poweful engine and less capablity all for the sake to save money on fuel. That just doesn't make sense. I would wager that due to fuel costs, one would save a lot more money buying a Ram with a 3.6L Pentastar to tow anything 6,000 lbs or under than going with an Ecodiesel. If the Ecodiesel gave more capability and pulling power along with better fuel economy like the diesels do in the HD trucks, then I would probably have a different outlook on this engine.
I see a lot who also only look at mpg of diesel verus gas, but neglect to see the big picture. Currently as I writing this, the US national average for 87 octane is $2.40 while diesel is $.35 higher at $2.75. That would put the 33 mpg they got with this Ecodiesel at 8.3 cents per mile and the 22.8 mpg that the 2.7L Ecoboost got at 10.5 cents per mile. The cost difference changes as the difference in fuel prices changes. The gap is even less with lower mpg vehicles. For instance, the Ram 2500 CTD that averages out at 17 mpg(according to Fuelly.com) which is 16.8 cents per mile and the Ram 2500 6.4L with it's 13 mpg avaerage is at 18.5 cents per mile using the current US average fuel prices.
The major thing I do not get about the 3.0L Ecodiesel is that it is not like the bigger 3/4 and 1 ton diesels where you are paying more for more capabaility, more pulling power, and more fuel efficiency. With the Ecodiesel you only get better fuel efficiency than other engines and do not get more capapbilty or pulling power. In the old days(or how it ussually is with most half ton trucks), you start off with a less powerful and less capable engine option, but it gave you more fuel mileage. Then you had to pay more for a more powerful engine that was more capable, but you knew you had to sacrifice fuel mileage to get it. With the Ecodiesel, you pay more for a less poweful engine and less capablity all for the sake to save money on fuel. That just doesn't make sense. I would wager that due to fuel costs, one would save a lot more money buying a Ram with a 3.6L Pentastar to tow anything 6,000 lbs or under than going with an Ecodiesel. If the Ecodiesel gave more capability and pulling power along with better fuel economy like the diesels do in the HD trucks, then I would probably have a different outlook on this engine.
