Ecoboost 3.5 Towing MPG Sucks

[Grodyman]

Hi all, back after a couple years without a RV......I jumped back in with a Passport Ultra Lite 153ML, GVWR of 4500lbs.

I just returned from picking up the trailer and pulled it with my 2017 F150 3.5 Ecoboost with 3.55 gears.

I was astonished to pull such a lightweight, aerodynamic trailer and the best MPG I got was 10.2 MPG. I went as low as 8.5 MPG.

I could have done better than that with my F250 with the 6.2 V8.

I am surprised how dreadful the towing MPG is with truck considering the overall weight of the truck/trailer combo is a couple thousand pounds lighter than I usually travel.

Unloaded this truck is great, but if you are on the fence about a F150 and a F250, go with the F250 gasser all the way UNLESS you drive a lot of unloaded miles.

The truck had plenty of power, no issue there, but I simply cannot imagine pulling 7K-10K lbs with this truck, the MPG's must be around 5.

My current range is about 250 miles pulling this Ultralight, given the fuel tank size. So, essentially, adding an ultralight trailer dropped my MPG nearly in half. Not what I expected.

Gman

[Grit_dog]

More rvnet.com geritol fueled theories at work here!

[twodownzero]

dodge guy wrote:
10.2 is pretty good considering! Not sure what you were expecting?

Wait til he discovers that the engine is worn out at 80,000 miles, too. There is no free lunch. Ecoboost might get you better loaded mileage but it comes at the expense of low end torque and longevity. Everything in engineering is a tradeoff! Enjoy your V6 fullsize pickup; the results were predictable but the EPA MPG numbers were too good to pass up.

[philh]

Slowmover wrote:
You’ve never tested nor researched, have you?

The penalty is 40%.

If MPG has meaning to you (apparently not) it would be obvious the EPA COMBINED is close to that number.

Researched 🙂 BAWAWAWA

I'm a licensed professional engineer working for an automotive OEM, specifically working in powertrain group.

Want to try again and cite the exact source of this alleged 40% penalty claim?

[mich800]

BarabooBob wrote:
I always thought that the EPA combined mileage was the mileage that you should expect when you have combined city and highway driving. I would love my towing mpg to be the EPA combined mpg. My towing mpg is about 50% reduction of my highway mpg while not towing.

It is. It is the weighted average of city and highway. Any correlation to towing mpg is coincidental.

[Slowmover]

What’s the percentage change?

Your TV loaded as if for camping, passenger weight simulated is the mark. Only change is no TT. WITH TT it’s 60% of above as benchmark.

MORE than 40% extra means problems. Vehicles, rigging & driver.

If one CANT exceed EPA, he’s not doing a good job. Doesn’t much care.

60-mph is the standard.

Test. Correct your bad driving habits. Verify mechanical condition.

[BarabooBob]

I always thought that the EPA combined mileage was the mileage that you should expect when you have combined city and highway driving. I would love my towing mpg to be the EPA combined mpg. My towing mpg is about 50% reduction of my highway mpg while not towing.

[Slowmover]

You’ve never tested nor researched, have you?

The penalty is 40%.

If MPG has meaning to you (apparently not) it would be obvious the EPA COMBINED is close to that number.

[philh]

Slowmover wrote:
The EPA COMBINED number is the tow number.

Where in the world did you dig up that factoid?

None of the EPA numbers have anything to do with to towing.

[Slowmover]

The EPA COMBINED number is the tow number.

The towing penalty is 40%. 1969 tow vehicle or 2019 tow vehicle.

Some extra rolling resistance in towing, but it’s the AERO penalty that matters.

The tests must be the same with the single exception of the trailer.

1). TV loaded for camping. Passenger weight simulated.
2). Same speed solo as towing. 100% use of cruise control
3). Speed not to exceed 60-mph. Roundtrip of 200-miles to same fuel pump. Stop ar first auto-shutoff

Do the tests. If you’re above 40% penalty time to investigate. Alignment, brake drag hitch rigging, etc.

A truly aero TT will come in at under 40% fuel burn penalty. Careful attention to details can get it closer to 30%.

Mines at 36% currently. Work yet to come.

The absolute number doesn’t mean much. The AVERAGE MPG is the thing.

But first, FIND OUT HOW HIGH IT CAN BE.

[ktmrfs]

RoyJ wrote:

whjco wrote:
A major factor in fuel economy when towing a travel trailer is the frontal area of the trailer. It takes energy to push all of that air out of the way and that's more of a factor than weight.

I have a 24' enclosed car trailer and I get the same mileage empty as I do with a 4500# vehicle in the trailer. I also drive charter buses and we pretty much average about 6 mpg whether we're loaded or empty. I think if you really want good fuel economy, get a pop-up or a crank-up that doesn't have the frontal area.

Bill J., Lexington, KY

In the past, Honda would list a different towing capacity for boats versus campers on their Pilot, reason being the boat is a lot more aerodynamic. Not sure if they still do.

When I was trucking, a dry van or reefer also made very difference loaded or empty, on flat ground. In the rockies it was a different story!

yup, wind resistance comes into play at all times. Effect of different weight is a "depends"

Weight basically comes into play when you change velocity or change altitude. work needs to be done to change speed (either by brakes or engine) or change altitude (again, either brakes or engine) So around town or lots of speed changes or climbing mountains weight has an effect on mileage that can be signficant.

On reasonably level ground at a reasonably constant speed it has minimal effect on mileage. Yes, there is likely an increase in rolling resistance and a few other minor effects from weight but they are minor at reasonably constant speed or reasonably level ground.

[RoyJ]

whjco wrote:
A major factor in fuel economy when towing a travel trailer is the frontal area of the trailer. It takes energy to push all of that air out of the way and that's more of a factor than weight.

I have a 24' enclosed car trailer and I get the same mileage empty as I do with a 4500# vehicle in the trailer. I also drive charter buses and we pretty much average about 6 mpg whether we're loaded or empty. I think if you really want good fuel economy, get a pop-up or a crank-up that doesn't have the frontal area.

Bill J., Lexington, KY

In the past, Honda would list a different towing capacity for boats versus campers on their Pilot, reason being the boat is a lot more aerodynamic. Not sure if they still do.

When I was trucking, a dry van or reefer also made very difference loaded or empty, on flat ground. In the rockies it was a different story!

[dodge_guy]

10.2 is pretty good considering! Not sure what you were expecting?

[ksss]

whjco wrote:
A major factor in fuel economy when towing a travel trailer is the frontal area of the trailer. It takes energy to push all of that air out of the way and that's more of a factor than weight.

I have a 24' enclosed car trailer and I get the same mileage empty as I do with a 4500# vehicle in the trailer. I also drive charter buses and we pretty much average about 6 mpg whether we're loaded or empty. I think if you really want good fuel economy, get a pop-up or a crank-up that doesn't have the frontal area.

Bill J., Lexington, KY

That is very true. I pull a 28' toyhauler bumper pull with an 08 Duramax. It gets about 8-9 mpg doing it. The trailer which is set up to work out of and not as an RV weighs 13K. I pull a 16' enclosed trailer on occasion at about 6000 pounds and with that trailer I get the very same mileage. The frontal area of the two trailers is very similar even though the weight isn't even close.

[whjco]

A major factor in fuel economy when towing a travel trailer is the frontal area of the trailer. It takes energy to push all of that air out of the way and that's more of a factor than weight.

I have a 24' enclosed car trailer and I get the same mileage empty as I do with a 4500# vehicle in the trailer. I also drive charter buses and we pretty much average about 6 mpg whether we're loaded or empty. I think if you really want good fuel economy, get a pop-up or a crank-up that doesn't have the frontal area.

Bill J., Lexington, KY

[tragusa3]

LanceRKeys wrote:
Watching those Ike gauntlet videos makes me want to take my rig up there just to see how it would do, I don’t think I could push mine as hard as they do.

I remember around the time I purchased my Ecoboost (2013), FLT had recently done one of their first runs with that engine up the IKE. I happened to tow it myself that following summer. What is not mentioned (and is true to some extent for other trucks) is that with the limit of 60mph, you don't get the full picture. Granted, I was towing about 6.5k instead of 10k, but I could have run up the IKE at any speed I chose to, quite easily. I would have run into handling issues, tire speed ratings and common sense long before the engine held me back.