โJun-06-2013 12:36 PM
โJun-15-2013 08:50 AM
โJun-14-2013 09:56 PM
TheCodeMonk wrote:CAJW wrote:wintersun wrote:
Cannot compare with so many differences in load carried, speeds driven, elevation gains, and even wind. On a trip last year cover 3000 plus miles up to Yellowstone and back through Utah and into California I averaged 13.5 MPG with a diesel and with a 3700 lb. load in the bed. Recent trip through eastern sierras up Hwy 395 with 4000 lb. load in the bed and dealing with a lot more wind and more elevation gain in total the MPG was 11.1 for the 1400 mile trip.
Wind is the biggest factor. On legs I drive frequently, if there is a 15 MPH head or cross wind the truck's gas mileage is reduced by 25%.
With the high price for diesel fuel (usually about the same or more than premium) and the more expensive initial cost and maintenance costs one should not go with a diesel engine in the misguided belief that they will save money doing so.
Oh now come on.... one can't put a price on having all that extra torque. ๐
That is really the main reason to go diesel, the extra power. The argument of cost savings doesn't really stand up in my experience. ๐
โJun-14-2013 08:37 PM
โJun-10-2013 08:06 AM
CAJW wrote:wintersun wrote:
Cannot compare with so many differences in load carried, speeds driven, elevation gains, and even wind. On a trip last year cover 3000 plus miles up to Yellowstone and back through Utah and into California I averaged 13.5 MPG with a diesel and with a 3700 lb. load in the bed. Recent trip through eastern sierras up Hwy 395 with 4000 lb. load in the bed and dealing with a lot more wind and more elevation gain in total the MPG was 11.1 for the 1400 mile trip.
Wind is the biggest factor. On legs I drive frequently, if there is a 15 MPH head or cross wind the truck's gas mileage is reduced by 25%.
With the high price for diesel fuel (usually about the same or more than premium) and the more expensive initial cost and maintenance costs one should not go with a diesel engine in the misguided belief that they will save money doing so.
Oh now come on.... one can't put a price on having all that extra torque. ๐
โJun-09-2013 09:12 PM
wintersun wrote:
Cannot compare with so many differences in load carried, speeds driven, elevation gains, and even wind. On a trip last year cover 3000 plus miles up to Yellowstone and back through Utah and into California I averaged 13.5 MPG with a diesel and with a 3700 lb. load in the bed. Recent trip through eastern sierras up Hwy 395 with 4000 lb. load in the bed and dealing with a lot more wind and more elevation gain in total the MPG was 11.1 for the 1400 mile trip.
Wind is the biggest factor. On legs I drive frequently, if there is a 15 MPH head or cross wind the truck's gas mileage is reduced by 25%.
With the high price for diesel fuel (usually about the same or more than premium) and the more expensive initial cost and maintenance costs one should not go with a diesel engine in the misguided belief that they will save money doing so.
โJun-09-2013 07:11 AM
โJun-09-2013 02:50 AM
โJun-07-2013 07:59 PM
โJun-07-2013 07:21 PM
โJun-07-2013 07:02 PM
โJun-07-2013 01:05 PM
Sheriffdoug wrote:
This thread, people should state their diff ratio, as with previous 2011 Chev 2500 diesel was 3.73 and new 2012 Ram is 4.1, 20% difference, so lower fuel consumption.
CB
Channel 17Redneck Express
โJun-07-2013 12:51 PM
abslayer wrote:
F350 6.7 Diesel 4000Lb camper at 60 MPH I get around 17 to 17.5 MP Gal
At 70 MPH I get around 14 MPG Speed makes a big difference ๐
โJun-07-2013 12:02 PM
abslayer wrote:
F350 6.7 Diesel 4000Lb camper at 60 MPH I get around 17 to 17.5 MP Gal
At 70 MPH I get around 14 MPG Speed makes a big difference ๐
โJun-07-2013 10:41 AM
โJun-07-2013 09:53 AM
hammer21661 wrote:wski wrote:I find that really hard to believe.
1. I average 14.5 miles per gallon pulling a 34 foot fifth wheel with a 2007 Dodge RAM 2500 5.9L. I usually pull between 60 and 65 MPH.