Towing MPG

[Eric_18]

Hi All!
Pretty serious about changing from Class C motorhome to Truck-trailer combo, due to overall costs associated with driving it.
The biggest trailer we're looking at is about 8,000 dry & 10,400 GVW.
My plan is to get a Ford F150 or Dodge 1500.
Curious what kind of towing MPG people are getting.
The best we've gotten in our motorhome is 7.4 MPG with the F450 chasis & V10.
Thank You!
Eric

[deltabravo]

old guy wrote:
You will be sorry if you get a 1/2 ton to tow that kind of weight.

Ditto.

And with the likely minimal difference in price between the two, it's a more logical choice to go 3/4 ton.

[drsteve]

Don't tow if you want good mpg.

[FishOnOne]

Grodyman wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

twodownzero wrote:
The ecoboost is not doing any better in the real world than a small V8.

I disagree with this statement. A few months ago I drove a new F150 2.7 EB, 4x4 CC from Houston to Dallas and back. It made a solid 24mpg.

Later that week I drove a new 1500 Silverado 5.3 CC 2 wheel drive the same route and made 20.5mpg.

To add the EcoBoost simply made more power at lower rpms than the Chevy 5.3 which had to rev higher to make its power. The EB was simply a more enjoyable experience and very impressive to boot.

Unloaded, yes, towing any kind of load, no. Don't go for the Ecoboost if you want towing MPG.
Gman

You mean don't go for a gasser if you want towing mpg

[mountainkowboy]

stevemorris wrote:
nothing beats the sound of a hemi at wide open throttle at 4500+ rpm and for a couple of minutes!!

A screamin old school big block.

[librty02]

Grodyman wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

twodownzero wrote:
The ecoboost is not doing any better in the real world than a small V8.

I disagree with this statement. A few months ago I drove a new F150 2.7 EB, 4x4 CC from Houston to Dallas and back. It made a solid 24mpg.

Later that week I drove a new 1500 Silverado 5.3 CC 2 wheel drive the same route and made 20.5mpg.

To add the EcoBoost simply made more power at lower rpms than the Chevy 5.3 which had to rev higher to make its power. The EB was simply a more enjoyable experience and very impressive to boot.

Unloaded, yes, towing any kind of load, no. Don't go for the Ecoboost if you want towing MPG.
Gman

Gman AND TOWING MOST DEFINITELY
I have owned the V8's too Ford 5.4 and then the new 5.0
The 5.4 got 7mpgs pulling a dang pop up
Traded it for an 2011 5.0...towing the pop up it got 8.5 on its best day. Went to the 3.5 Eco same pop up got 12.5 and now with the trailer in the sig I get 10mpg with the 2011 and now 10.5mpgs with the 2018. I've towed my trailer in sig with 2 different F250s before with the 6.2 V8 and they got 8mpgs at best so sorry your statement is completely FALSE :S
Oh and I have over 40k towing on the 2011 3.5 Eco too all through the mountains in the east 20k on the previous 08 5.4 and about 5k on the 11 5.0 I absolutely hated the V8s towing never again NA engine.

[stevemorris]

some real numbers!
2017 ram 1500, 4 door, with full topper, 8 speed hemi
not towing, 105-110 kph highway driving, we see 9.5-10.5 l/100 km
that's 23 mpg
towing 6500 lb tt @ highway speed
average around 18l/100 km
that's 13 mpg
numbers are on flat road, no perceptible wind, very light traffic
those numbers are from the dash board display but agree very closely with fuel cost over a 6500 km trip

we did see the consumption go right off the scale!! it tops out at 99l/100 km. going up a 17% grade(3 or 4 km long), passing a slow moving car. went from 40 kph at the bottom, accelerated up to 90 near the top in a passing lane. nothing beats the sound of a hemi at wide open throttle at 4500+ rpm and for a couple of minutes!!

[Grodyman]

FishOnOne wrote:

twodownzero wrote:
The ecoboost is not doing any better in the real world than a small V8.

I disagree with this statement. A few months ago I drove a new F150 2.7 EB, 4x4 CC from Houston to Dallas and back. It made a solid 24mpg.

Later that week I drove a new 1500 Silverado 5.3 CC 2 wheel drive the same route and made 20.5mpg.

To add the EcoBoost simply made more power at lower rpms than the Chevy 5.3 which had to rev higher to make its power. The EB was simply a more enjoyable experience and very impressive to boot.

Unloaded, yes, towing any kind of load, no. Don't go for the Ecoboost if you want towing MPG.
Gman

[Grodyman]

You will not be happy with the MPG pulling with a F150/3.5 Ecoboost. I got as low as 8.5 pulling an Ultra-Lite 4500 GVWR trailer. You should go for the diesel.

Gman

[Tachdriver]

I see it as this. What is the useful end of life before requiring overhaul or replacement? How many of us go beyond 300,000 miles to see the end of life? Yes the engines work harder but putting the proper tool to the use is the key. My 2011 EB engine pulled my 7k TT just fine. Did it matter that it worked harder than the newer 5.0 Coyote engine? Maybe. Did that make a difference to me? No.

Either way I loved the power when needed and economy when it was there. Would I pull 10,000lbs? No.

So far I do not hear of these engines breaking down prematurely. It would be interesting to see the engine repair rates against normally aspirated engines that do not include accessories and appliances including turbos.

[FishOnOne]

BenK wrote:
the why of an internal engine oil spray system squirting to the bottom of the pistons to keep the pistons from melting...that they are forced fed with enough air/fuel to be in the same volumetric arena of a big block (that tiny displacement consumes about the same volumes of air and fuel as my big block)...and a big ETC, ETC...

Todays large cubic inch diesels spray oil to the bottom of the pistons too and are forced fed with a turbo as well.

Your convincing me everyday that your not a logical engineer but more of a jealous old fan boy.

[BenK]

TwoDown...completely agree...suggest taking a couple headache pills...

Most don't understand of which you speak...combustion chamber PSI ???....PSI on the piston top is the basis for all ICE's torque/HP ???...the why of a brand new block to have the internal cast in strengthening webs/gussets/etc...the why of an internal engine oil spray system squirting to the bottom of the pistons to keep the pistons from melting...that they are forced fed with enough air/fuel to be in the same volumetric arena of a big block (that tiny displacement consumes about the same volumes of air and fuel as my big block)...and a big ETC, ETC...

An okay thing, as not many are gear heads, wrenches...nor boy racers anymore...

Like to ask folks who want to try to convince me..."what is a ridge reamer"...."why is that needed"..."why most block architectures CAN NOT have the piston/rod assembly removed from below"...

[FishOnOne]

twodownzero wrote:
The ecoboost is not doing any better in the real world than a small V8.

I disagree with this statement. A few months ago I drove a new F150 2.7 EB, 4x4 CC from Houston to Dallas and back. It made a solid 24mpg.

Later that week I drove a new 1500 Silverado 5.3 CC 2 wheel drive the same route and made 20.5mpg.

To add the EcoBoost simply made more power at lower rpms than the Chevy 5.3 which had to rev higher to make its power. The EB was simply a more enjoyable experience and very impressive to boot.

[FishOnOne]

ib516 wrote:
Our EcoBoost Police vehicles (F150/Explorer/Taurus) have been holding up every bit as good as the NA engines Ford produces.

Like they say though, there's either Eco, or Boost. Can't have both.

Think of the turbo's as a 4 bbl carb. When you run it easy the carb run's in 2 bbl mode, but when you step on it the 4 bbl kicks in and therefore more fuel is burned.

Because of the new 10speed transmission, and the servo controlled turbos the 2 gen EB makes better overall fuel economy than the first gen because they can control turbo boost better.

[Flapper]

Atlee wrote:
If you don't own a 3.5L Ecoboost, how do you know that engine is worked to death, and it's insanity to try to do so?

I also have a F150 HDPP and 3.5 Ecoboost. This past summer, we traveled from Virginia to New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, and South Dakota before coming back home.

We were in the Rockies a lot. At no time was my 3.5L Eco every over worked going up the steep grades. And when I had to slow way down until a slower vehicle got out of my way while going up a steep grade, I had zero problem getting from the low speed back up to the speed limit. And no, the engine was not screaming while doing so. Usually, 3500 rpm was all I needed to get back to speed.

The only problem was going down steep grades. I really had to manually down shift sometimes to 2nd gear to keep my speed down and not have to use too much braking.

Now, I would not begin to tow 10k GVWR trailers with my 3.5L F150.
My trailer is 6500# GVWR and it worked fantastic behind my F150 3.5L Eco w/ HDPP.

Ditto on all this! The F-150 in my sig. duplicates the above description. In 14,500 miles to all 3 coasts, including MANY mountains, the average MPG was 11.5 with the old Jayco 5th. It is now 8 mpg with the Grand Design pull-behind over 4,000 additional miles. I blame it on the aerodynamics.
If buying new - it is a must to get the HDPP. They then out match most f-250's.

[ib516]

Our EcoBoost Police vehicles (F150/Explorer/Taurus) have been holding up every bit as good as the NA engines Ford produces.

Like they say though, there's either Eco, or Boost. Can't have both.