Towing mpg Chevy vs Nissan vs Ford vs Ram - half tons

[ib516]

The players, all towing a 7000# cargo trailer that was 20' long:

Nissan Titan 5.6L - 8.6 mpg
2017 Ford F150 3.5L EcoBoost (with 10 speed auto) - 9.1 mpg
2016 Ford F150 3.5L EcoBoost - 8.5 mpg
Chevy 1500 with 6.2L V8 - 10.6 mpg
Ram 1500 EcoDiesel - 13.3 mpg
2016 Ram 5.7L Hemi (5600# cattle trailer) - 8.5 mpg

Yes, I know it's not apples to apples as the one Ram had a diesel which is almost always going to get better towing mpg. BUT, what surprised me was that the Chevy, with the big 6.2L V8 spanked the Ford EcoBoost, even with the new 10 speed auto transmission Ford has.

It's also pretty comparable to towing an RV as they used a full sized, tandem axle cargo trailer, not a flat deck trailer loaded with flat steel like the OEMs typically use for their internal testing.

CHEVY VIDEO WHERE THEY TALK ABOUT THE OTHER RESULTS

[ShinerBock]

johndeerefarmer wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:

johndeerefarmer wrote:
Anyone towing heavy, in the heat or mountains should be running premium anyway. If you don't the pcm will be pulling timing and taking away power that you need.

Yes the 6.2 gasser beats the ecoboost in towing fuel economy but it doesn't have the low end torque of the ecoboost and I have no interest in driving a truck that is constantly downshifting like NA trucks do. The ecoboost has the low end torque similar to a diesel but hp numbers more like a gasser. They are great at both acceleration and towing.
The ecodiesel is way low on hp and wouldn't be worth a darn for acceleration or passing

I pulled over 9k over the Rockies from Texas to Moab Utah twice and never used premium in my 2011 EB.

Do what you like but you are leaving power on the table. Then throw in the small CAC on the ecoboost and you are losing even more power due to excessive IAT2 temps. Put an aftermarket CAC on it and it will quit retarding timing as IAT2 rises

I was easily able to do the speed limit the whole up the mountain passes. So there were no issues with power nor did i need any more. I ran regular to save costs on the trip. If I would have needed more power then I would have ran premium, but it was not need on either trip.

[mooky_stinks]

johndeerefarmer wrote:
Anyone towing heavy, in the heat or mountains should be running premium anyway. If you don't the pcm will be pulling timing and taking away power that you need.

Yes the 6.2 gasser beats the ecoboost in towing fuel economy but it doesn't have the low end torque of the ecoboost and I have no interest in driving a truck that is constantly downshifting like NA trucks do. The ecoboost has the low end torque similar to a diesel but hp numbers more like a gasser. They are great at both acceleration and towing.
The ecodiesel is way low on hp and wouldn't be worth a darn for acceleration or passing

I hear what you're saying about constant downshifting. I hate that. But it's non-existent with the 6.2 / 8 speed. Constant downshifting and high RPMs was the main reason I got rid of my 6.0 HD. I won't get another one until they change the powertrain.

[johndeerefarmer]

ShinerBock wrote:

johndeerefarmer wrote:
Anyone towing heavy, in the heat or mountains should be running premium anyway. If you don't the pcm will be pulling timing and taking away power that you need.

Yes the 6.2 gasser beats the ecoboost in towing fuel economy but it doesn't have the low end torque of the ecoboost and I have no interest in driving a truck that is constantly downshifting like NA trucks do. The ecoboost has the low end torque similar to a diesel but hp numbers more like a gasser. They are great at both acceleration and towing.
The ecodiesel is way low on hp and wouldn't be worth a darn for acceleration or passing

I pulled over 9k over the Rockies from Texas to Moab Utah twice and never used premium in my 2011 EB.

Do what you like but you are leaving power on the table. Then throw in the small CAC on the ecoboost and you are losing even more power due to excessive IAT2 temps. Put an aftermarket CAC on it and it will quit retarding timing as IAT2 rises

[ShinerBock]

johndeerefarmer wrote:
Anyone towing heavy, in the heat or mountains should be running premium anyway. If you don't the pcm will be pulling timing and taking away power that you need.

Yes the 6.2 gasser beats the ecoboost in towing fuel economy but it doesn't have the low end torque of the ecoboost and I have no interest in driving a truck that is constantly downshifting like NA trucks do. The ecoboost has the low end torque similar to a diesel but hp numbers more like a gasser. They are great at both acceleration and towing.
The ecodiesel is way low on hp and wouldn't be worth a darn for acceleration or passing

I pulled over 9k over the Rockies from Texas to Moab Utah twice and never used premium in my 2011 EB.

[FishOnOne]

Did ram fix the emissions on the eco diesel after they got caught cheating? Or was this a 2016 model?

[johndeerefarmer]

Anyone towing heavy, in the heat or mountains should be running premium anyway. If you don't the pcm will be pulling timing and taking away power that you need.

Yes the 6.2 gasser beats the ecoboost in towing fuel economy but it doesn't have the low end torque of the ecoboost and I have no interest in driving a truck that is constantly downshifting like NA trucks do. The ecoboost has the low end torque similar to a diesel but hp numbers more like a gasser. They are great at both acceleration and towing.
The ecodiesel is way low on hp and wouldn't be worth a darn for acceleration or passing

[brulaz]

mooky stinks wrote:
My 15 6.2 will ping like crazy with 87. I run a mix of premium (93) and 87 to reach 90-91 octane and straight 93 while towing.

Guess that's why premium is "highly recommended" for the 6.2L but only just "recommended" for the Ecoboost.

I ran premium for a few thousand miles when towing my ~8K trailer with a 2011 F150 Ecoboost. I saved some in fuel economy but otherwise didn't really notice any difference. Never any pinging. Maybe in the heat and when towing something heavier ...

[mooky_stinks]

My 15 6.2 will ping like crazy with 87. I run a mix of premium (93) and 87 to reach 90-91 octane and straight 93 while towing.

[ShinerBock]

Bionic Man wrote:


"what I am not wanting to post"? Really? Seems to me I am the one that posted the link to the owners manual.

The link, which CLEARLY states that "for best overall vehicle and engine performance, premium fuel with an octane rating of 91 or higher is recommended".

You can add your own adjective of "power" if you want. Ford did not put it in there. You did. Maybe they wanted to say for the best engine longevity, use premium. Maybe they wanted to say "for the smoothest performance, use premium".

The owners manual states they recommend Premium. They don't say why. I take it at face value.

The sky is blue. Let's argue about that.

Really? I though you were done?

I don't know how you can miss the big 87 OCTANE and the words "designed for 87" in the owners manual link that you posted. Here let me show you a the image just incase you cannot click on your own link.



It clearly states that the EB is designed to run on 87 -BUT- for over all performance (which is in the form of MORE POWER) then they recommend 91. PUTC even backed it up by posted how much power is gained by running premium. I don't know where you are getting that they recommend only or at all times especially when they just state that you can if you want more power. You don't need to run the truck on premium because it was designed to run on 87(like it clearly states) unlike the 6.2 which was designed to run on premium. If you want more performance, then you can run premium.

I know you have this undying hate for me, but that is no reason to brush of the facts.

[sele]

Unless I missed it seems a key ingredient is missing, the rear end gear ratio. If you make comparisons make them apples to apples not a marketing ploy by a manufacture which they are all guilty of.

[Bionic_Man]

For Shiner

Check out 8.41 into the video. They test with 91 octane. Same as the 6.2.

[Bionic_Man]

And, if you watch any of the FLT videos, they make a point of saying they use the recommended fuel for every vehicle. They just put 87 octane in the Colorado in the video I just posted. And I would bet (and I will go check) that they used Premium in the EcoBoost in all their tests.

From the Ford owners manual, they would have worse performance (I assume this to mean both acceleration and MPG) with 87 octane (which is still mid-grade, at least in Colorado). So the difference in MPG between the Ford and all the other trucks would be more significant in that case.

[Bionic_Man]

ShinerBock wrote:

Bionic Man wrote:
No. It says:

For best overall vehicle and engine performance, premium fuel with an octane rating of 91 or higher is recommended.

But you are never wrong. So I am done.

Why are you not posting all that it says?

Here, let me post what you are not wanting to post....

"Your vehicle is designed to operate on regular unleaded gasoline with a minimum pump (R+M)/2 octane rating of 87.
Some fuel stations, particularly those in high altitude areas, offer fuels posted as regular unleaded gasoline with an octane rating below 87. We do not recommend these fuels.
For best overall vehicle and engine performance(i.e. POWER) , premium fuel with an octane rating of 91 or higher is recommended. The performance(i.e. POWER) gained by using premium fuel is most noticeable in hot weather as well as other conditions, for example when towing a trailer. See Towing a Trailer. "


Again, it is designed to run on regular, but if you want more power, then run premium. How is this so hard to comprehend?

"what I am not wanting to post"? Really? Seems to me I am the one that posted the link to the owners manual.

The link, which CLEARLY states that "for best overall vehicle and engine performance, premium fuel with an octane rating of 91 or higher is recommended".

You can add your own adjective of "power" if you want. Ford did not put it in there. You did. Maybe they wanted to say for the best engine longevity, use premium. Maybe they wanted to say "for the smoothest performance, use premium".

The owners manual states they recommend Premium. They don't say why. I take it at face value.

The sky is blue. Let's argue about that.

[Bionic_Man]

Back on topic, I am not sure if this has been posted. But here is where they run the Colorado/Canyon on an abbreviated loop. Towing a 6100 pound horse trailer. They did mention they were bucking the wind.

The diesel got 12.7 MPG.

The V6 gasser got 8.7.

So, percentage wise, the diesel still is about 50% more efficient than the gasser.

Interesting that the EcoDiesel, pulling a heavier trailer, still gets better MPG than the Duramax.

And the 6.2, pulling a heavier trailer, gets better MPG than the V6 mid size.

I wonder how bad the wind was.

FLT Test