Towing our chosen TT

[Pam_s_Dennis]

We are going from a class c to a travel trailer and are curious about a tow vehicle. The chosen TT is a Flagstaff 25KS and we are trying to find a used but not abused Ford F150 Ecoboost or a Dodge 1500 Ecodiesel. The tow vehicle will replace our Honda Odyssey. A 2004 Honda CR-V is our errand runner around town. We do not want to purchase a new truck so it is likely that the Ford 150 Ecoboost will end up in our driveway. I haven't seen too many Dodge 1500 diesels on the used market yet. Scarce as hens teeth. Any comments about the Ford or Dodge or any other tow vehicle will be welcome. We are looking at economy and do not want the constant maintenance of the motorhome even when not in use. The only towing done in the past was popup and then we jumped into the motorhome years later and towed the Honda CR-V. I do not like towing and not being able to back up without disconnecting the towed vehicle.

[Community Alumni]

Mike Up wrote:

The Ram Ecodiesel is really just a grocery getter with no payload to do any real work. The payload is less than 1000 lbs so you really can't have a heavier tongue weight and people in the truck at the same time without going over GVWR.

That's simply not true. The only models with sub 1000 payload were the Laramie Longhorn 4x4 and Laramie Limited 4x4. As with the top of the line model with any manufacturer, the payload will be significantly lower than other models. Regular cab models top out at 1583 and Crew cabs at 1480 which is just about par with any run of the mill 1/2 ton.

OP - you're not going to find many on the used market. They only started hitting the streets around March/April and Ram expects to only sell maybe 20,000 at the most this year. Over at Fuelly it looks like people are averaging between 23 and 27. Most of the towing test have been with flatbeds or boats, but the reported MPG always comes back around 18. Probably closer to 14-16 MPG for a TT of that size.

The 5.7 might be a better option. If you compare the rated MPG of the two trucks and current fuel prices alone then you'll see that it's almost a wash at the end of the year. The 5.7 will have a similar payload, maybe a little higher. The 5.7 might be easier on the pocket book. The diesel is $2,850 more than the 5.7 and you can find a ton of 5.7s used. If you foresee upgrading in the future then the 2500 6.4L would be an even better option.

[Doug33]

I don't have any towing experience with Ford or Dodge, and have nothing agains them. However, is there any particular reason you don't have Chevy/GMC 1/2 tons as an option? If you are looking at availability, there are a lot of used Chevy Silverados out there with the 5.3 L engine. They should be capable to tow the TT in question.

[mbopp]

My 2012 EB had the condensation sputter a few times but I've not experienced it since the dealer did the latest air deflector fix and re-flashed the computer.
I'm real happy with the EB so far. Granted, we have a small trailer but it's nice being able to use the uphill passing lanes and go by slower vehicles. Power, stability, and fuel capacity are way better than the Envoy it replaced.

[Speedogomer]

OH48Lt wrote:
Serious problems with the early EcoBoost F-150's? Extremely misleading and patently untrue. The had some issues with a minute amount of trucks stalling under very certain conditions, and they have a FREE fix for it. Most trucks will never see that problem. Also a minor amount of coil packs going bad, its a $85 part and anybody with a couple of tools can change one in a half hour or less. That does not add up to "serious problems". The 3.5 EcoBoost has been out longer than the 5.0 that you're cheerleading (3.5L Eco first available in March 2009 in the Flex). The current 5.0 is a good engine, but previous editions of the 5.0 are completely different engines.

Please don't attempt to spread unfounded or untrue statements.

As far as an Eco towing the OP's TT, no problem. A 3/4 ton would be better, only because its heavier. The trade-off is you're going to get almost half the fuel mileage when not towing. My experience towing with the Eco is over 11 mpg. Normal driving 18+, highway much more, deduct 1.5 mpg in the winter unless you use 91+ octane fuel.

And as far as the torque available only in higher RPM's, also totally untrue. 90% of the EcoBoost's 420 ft lbs of torque is available at just 1900 RPM.

An EcoDiesel (cute name, wonder where they borrowed that one from...) has very little payload. And its a $4000 option. You'd likely never make that back on fuel savings. You're much better off getting a hemi if you go Fiat/RAM.

Chevy has had their Ecotec line of engines for many years (since the 1990s). Guess that makes Ecoboost a "cute" name too.

Also the Ecodiesel is a $2800 over the hemi V8. It's true though, with the higher cost of diesel and increase in price, it would take a long time to make of the difference in cost.

[OH48Lt]

Serious problems with the early EcoBoost F-150's? Extremely misleading and patently untrue. The had some issues with a minute amount of trucks stalling under very certain conditions, and they have a FREE fix for it. Most trucks will never see that problem. Also a minor amount of coil packs going bad, its a $85 part and anybody with a couple of tools can change one in a half hour or less. That does not add up to "serious problems". The 3.5 EcoBoost has been out longer than the 5.0 that you're cheerleading (3.5L Eco first available in March 2009 in the Flex). The current 5.0 is a good engine, but previous editions of the 5.0 are completely different engines.

Please don't attempt to spread unfounded or untrue statements.

As far as an Eco towing the OP's TT, no problem. A 3/4 ton would be better, only because its heavier. The trade-off is you're going to get almost half the fuel mileage when not towing. My experience towing with the Eco is over 11 mpg. Normal driving 18+, highway much more, deduct 1.5 mpg in the winter unless you use 91+ octane fuel.

And as far as the torque available only in higher RPM's, also totally untrue. 90% of the EcoBoost's 420 ft lbs of torque is available at just 1900 RPM.

An EcoDiesel (cute name, wonder where they borrowed that one from...) has very little payload. And its a $4000 option. You'd likely never make that back on fuel savings. You're much better off getting a hemi if you go Fiat/RAM.

[rexlion]

It has been my understanding that the condensation problem was due to the intake air cooler being too efficient, and that they'd corrected it. Plenty of happy ecoboost owners out there, as someone pointed out. That said, I think the 5.0L is an excellent engine also. You could be happy with either one.

As for Ram 1500 diesels, no you aren't likely to find a used one. And they have some special requirements, like low-ash synthetic oil and diesel exhaust fluid. They might get you 16-17 mpg, but the higher diesel fuel price and higher initial cost offset that to a great degree.

I wouldn't hesitate to tow that trailer with an F150. And there are a ton of used ones out there, which helps with the pricing.

[All58Parks]

I'm pulling something heavier and longer than what you're proposing with my new 1/2 ton ecoboost. I'm under on payload and towing capacity, axle ratings, everything. And it tows like a dream. Up and down hills, twisting roads or interstates. I LOVE MY FORD!

[jaycocreek]

Caveman Charlie wrote:
I just checked it out. You can pull that with a half ton. Just get it set up right. No big deal.

+1

Pulling a 25ft trailer with a modern F-150 is child's play.

[Caveman_Charlie]

I just checked it out. You can pull that with a half ton. Just get it set up right. No big deal.

[Caveman_Charlie]

aftermath wrote:
Pam's Dennis, I feel for you. After posting a nice question about your idea of a TV, it took just 15 posts to convince you that your choice was ALL wrong. This crowd wants everyone to drive a 3/4 ton and preferably a diesel.

I did read about some ecoboost issues in the early years but there are far more owners who sing the praises of this truck. Having one guy blast it shouldn't make you go off in a new direction. Hopefully more happy owners will chime in.

I don't have a Ford but drive a Tundra and I am happy with it. I also like the half ton but then it fits my style of camping. So, before you go off and get a big truck take some time and think about how you camp, what you take along when you do and what will you do with the truck when you are not hooked up to the trailer. I know nothing about your trailer so the weights there might suggest a heavier truck. When we camp it is just the wife and I, no pets and very little in the bed. I take along a generator and some extra water and, on occasion, a little fire wood. I am close to my limit but the Tundra handles very well and has plenty of power and torque.

Hopefully more happy ecoboost owners will post and support your decision. Finding a "good", "slightly used" quality vehicle these days is a real challenge. Good luck in your hunt.

Agreed. This is a great site but, only you can make the decision on how comfortable you are with any towing setup. Many of the members here are into overkill. I do not know the weights of your setup though so I don't know what you really need.

Be careful too if you ask about a weight distribution hitch. With your set up you may probably need one, I don't know. But, some of these guys will tell you need one of those just to pull a lawnmower trailer.

[EcoBullet]

I must admit that I have no experience with the 5.0 V8, and do not have any expertise in horsepower and torque measurements. My previous truck was a 5.3 Chevy, and I assumed the 5.0 Ford might perform similarly, possibly a poor assumption.

What I do know is that the 5.3 Chevy had to downshift and wind up to 4K+ RPMs to pull most hills, while the Ecoboost just purrs on up with the cruise control on and rarely needs to downshift. The Ecoboost seems to take off much more quickly from a start while under load also. I know they say V8s are designed to rev, but not having to rev is much more relaxing to me.

[gcloss]

After reading this thread my head hurts:S

[Speedogomer]

I have no complaints at all with my Ram 1500. No sway issues, truck rides nice, plenty of power.

If I was towing cross country often, I'd definitely have a 2500. No question a 2500 will tow a trailer easier. I daily drive my truck, so a 2500 was out of the question for me. I tow maybe 10 days a year, I didn't want to sacrifice ride and fuel economy for the other 355 days a year.

My Cousin's 2013 hemi Ram 2500 empty rides as rough as my 2013 Ram hemi 1500 loaded and towing my trailer. Since 99% of my driving is empty without a trailer, I chose the 1500.

I wouldn't ever criticise anyone who did choose a 2500 to tow, just for me a 1500 was a better fit.

[Mike_Up]

EcoBullet wrote:


I don't know why Mike Up is so against the EcoBoost, other than jealousy.

Have nothing against the Ecoboost other than answering honestly about the issues with both it and the Ram. Obviously troubles and maintenance are a big issue to the OP, as they stated this right in the heading.

I believe the OP did say this,

Pam's Dennis wrote:
Any comments about the Ford or Dodge or any other tow vehicle will be welcome. We are looking at economy and do not want the constant maintenance of the motorhome even when not in use.

[Mike_Up]

EcoBullet wrote:
Mike Up,

When towing on the highway, who wants to drop to low gears for torque when you can keep on quietly truckin'?

Wheel horsepower and torque are more important as flywheel power can be a pipe dream as is seen with the 2009/2010 5.4L power output. My 2012 5.0L has much more torque at lower and higher rpms despite my 2010's 5.4L flywheel torque being supposedly higher at lower rpms.

Here's a more representative dyno with an apples to apples comparison. No tuning to favor the other, just straight up apples to apples thanks to Pickuptrucks.com

CLICK PIC BELOW TO GO TO WEBSITE