Ram Eco-Diesel vs F150 2.7 TT - Davis Dam
You just know it's not gonna be close! So which is better? Horsepower or torque lol. (The answer is both, apparently.)
Forum Discussion
Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:Hybridhunter wrote:Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:Hybridhunter wrote:goducks10 wrote:
Just got my latest Trailer Life mag. They did a test of a Ram 1500 Ed and a Lance 1995 TT. Lance is 9'9"Hx8'x23'9". Weighed 4860lbs.
The Ram ED has 3.92 gears and is the Outdoorsman model. It got 22mpg solo and 12.6mpg towing. About the same as an Eco Ford.
Shocking!
Or not......
Nice try, but the 22 would be the city mileage and your Eco Ford might be able to hit that on the highway with a good tail wind.
Even if you don't like the data presented, at least acknowledge that the source has very little perceived bias,, if anything, the author tends to favor diesels and the data is comparably generated relative to the other data from other vehicle. Fact is, that is not great towing mileage for that combo.
Driven conservatively, the ecoboost engines can get excellent mileage. Eco or boost, pick one, right?
What I was pointing out is the 22 MPG is the city rating for the Eco-diesel, the same mileage the Eco-boost is rated to make for highway mileage. The eco-boost can make decent mileage but nowhere near 28+ MPG. BTW I'm sure goducks10 was not slamming the Eco-diesel but when posting a snippet of a story you should note what the post represents ie city, highway or combined.
Don
The article simply stated 22 mpg solo. I was assuming that was mixed driving. It also stated that the ED with 4x4 and 3.92 gears is rated at 19 city and 27 hwy. Better than the ECO on solo but about the same when towing with 12.6 mpg and towing a lower profile TT at 4800lbs. Not slamming either truck. Each has it's merits.
