2016 ram 1500 mpg 3.21?

[Thestigmach1]

I finally got to buy a camper. Ended up with a 24ft amerilite gulfstream. 3600lb dry weight.I have the hemi with 3.21 and 8spd and have never had a bit of trouble towing anything from 2k to 10k lbs. Actually got 13 ish towing 8k worth of pickup on a trailer at similar speeds. I was figuring on 10-12mpg pulling this camper especially with it being so light. Pulling it home I got 7.5 with the cruise set at 72. That's where it seemed to be happiest. I tried 65 and it got just as bad so figured might as well make decent time and do 72. This thinthing feels like 10klbs not 3600lbs is that normal for this model or is something more going on?

[LVJJJ]

Thestigmach1 wrote:

LVJJJ wrote:
If you have a flat back trailer, that's the biggest problem, not the front. Flatbacks create a vacuum which tries to pull the trailer backwards when its trying to separate from the air flow. When I had a flatback, I used a deflector on the rear (not front) to direct the air flow down the back of the TT to break up the vacuum (also keeps the back clean). My Trail Cruiser is much more aerodynamic in the front, back and underside.

Did the deflector on the trailer do anything for fuel economy?

Probably, but I don't pay attention to mileage anymore, you get what you get. Made it easier to tow and no swaying at all. If you worry about gas mileage too much you don't have much fun RV'ing. I stick the nozzle into the filler tube of my 42 gallon tank, go sit in the truck til it kicks off, hang up the nozzle without even looking at the pump.

[GordonThree]

Is that what OTR trailers with the fold out cone on the back are trying to accomplish?

[Chuck_thehammer]

some trailers are 7 feet wide... others 8 foot

some are 10 feet tall.. some 13 feet.....


you are towing a bill board....... sideways...

its bad in the front.. an almost as bad at the back...

fuel mileage should be much lower on the "issue" list.

55 or pay the price.

[Thestigmach1]

LVJJJ wrote:
If you have a flat back trailer, that's the biggest problem, not the front. Flatbacks create a vacuum which tries to pull the trailer backwards when its trying to separate from the air flow. When I had a flatback, I used a deflector on the rear (not front) to direct the air flow down the back of the TT to break up the vacuum (also keeps the back clean). My Trail Cruiser is much more aerodynamic in the front, back and underside.

Did the deflector on the trailer do anything for fuel economy?

[drmopar]

I have a sign in my Speed Shop, it reads:
Speed cost money, now how fast do you want to go?
In California the limit is 55 MPH towing, and at that speed I get 16.7 MPG towing my 34 foot Toy Hauler.

[Grit_dog]

Yup, sounds normal. I question 13mpg at 70mph with an 8klb flatbed though.

[ib516]

DakotaDad wrote:
Just to echo the others, it's to be expected. It's not the weight, it's the wind resistance of the travel trailer. You're pulling a barn door into a 72mph wind. The more you slow down, the better it will get in the long run. But it'll never be great. Physics, and all that.

x2

[jerem0621]

You have learned why all TT’s, for the most part, when pullled by gas trucks, get 7-10 MPG.

Pretty much regardless of length or weight. 7-10 MPG.

This is an absolute truth about towing. Aerodynamics play a much greater role in MPG and towing efficiency than weight.

I heard a quote that said don’t worry about towing the weight over Monteagle, it may slow you down a few minutes but then it’s behind you...worry about the two or three days driving into a 30-40 MPH headwind in the Midwest.

Thanks!

Jeremiah

[SidecarFlip]

Time to slow down and enjoy the experience. It's vacation, not the Indy 500. I don't think I've ever ran 72 with my RV and if I did, it was a stupid moment.

[Bedlam]

The hills of MO are not that challenging, but your speed is. You need to slow down when towing verses when driving empty.

If it's any consolation, I used to get single digit mileage pulling a 5k lb boat over 3-4k ft mountain passes with a 4-cylinder engine. It wasn't fast (45-55 mph) and it would get only a third of the mileage compared to unloaded. This was a case of weight and road grade holding me back rather than wind resistance.

[LVJJJ]

If you have a flat back trailer, that's the biggest problem, not the front. Flatbacks create a vacuum which tries to pull the trailer backwards when its trying to separate from the air flow. When I had a flatback, I used a deflector on the rear (not front) to direct the air flow down the back of the TT to break up the vacuum (also keeps the back clean). My Trail Cruiser is much more aerodynamic in the front, back and underside.

[Thestigmach1]

bikendan wrote:
your thinking is kinda wrong.

it's frontal air resistance that is a mpg killer, not the weight. so the faster you drive, the lower your mpg will be. and your tires may rated for 65 mph, not 72 mph.

and putting a camper shell will make very little difference. almost not enough to even calculate.

and a rounded or v-nose trailer will have very minimal improvement in mpg. only something completely streamlined, like an Airstream, will show a slight improvement in mpg.

I want to apologize I think I just notified the moderator on you accidentally. I'm on phone so everything is smudged close together. Any way to unnotify the moderator? I figured to faster I go the more resistance there is. At the same time like I said it didn't seem to care if it was 65 or 72 on mpg through the hills so figured I might as well make good time and less shifting at that speed it seemed. Itd be a long way out before I could buy an airstream so with the brick we continue.

[bikendan]

your thinking is kinda wrong.

it's frontal air resistance that is a mpg killer, not the weight. so the faster you drive, the lower your mpg will be. and your tires may rated for 65 mph, not 72 mph.

and putting a camper shell will make very little difference. almost not enough to even calculate.

and a rounded or v-nose trailer will have very minimal improvement in mpg. only something completely streamlined, like an Airstream, will show a slight improvement in mpg.

[GordonThree]

1320Fastback wrote:
55-62 is where it's at if your interested in mpg.

Drag squares with the doubling of velocity and takes 8 times the power to overcome. This applies at all speeds.

The cruel truth of physics.