Tundra MPG Expectations

[srennier]

I have a '13 Tundra with the 5.7 engine. It gets about 9-11 MPG towing a 34-ft/7000-lb trailer. I'm considering downsizing the trailer (to 25-ft, 4500-pounds), and am wondering what improvement in gas mileage I might see. The two trailers have comparable aerodynamics. Any educated guesses? Better yet, does anyone else have a similar set-up (5.7 Tundra with 4500-pound white-box trailer) who could share some actual mileage results? Thanks.

[MitchF150]

I agree, seems all the V8 1/2 tons get around the same MPG.

So does the little 3.5L twin turbo V6 that puts out as much (or more) power as the gas V8's.. Once you get into those turbos, it's gonna suck the fuel, but it sure is nice only pulling 2800 rpms going 60 mph up a 6% grade with plenty of pedal to spare... 🙂 🙂

Mitch

[Ron3rd]

atreis wrote:
Nearly every TV seems to get between 9 and 11 depending on speed and the shape of the trailer. In a careful test pulling from home to NJ and back (through OH/PA one direction, and DE/MD/WV/OH the other, towing at 60 mph, tailwind while going east, roughly equal headwind while going west), I averaged 11 mpg overall (12-13 going east, 9-10 going west). I get about 23 when not towing.

Before I bought this trailer, I towed a PUP and got around 17 mpg in this car (only towed the PUP with it a couple times before the new trailer arrived), and 15 mpg in the WindStar that preceded it.

I agree, seems all the V8 1/2 tons get around the same MPG.

[atreis]

Nearly every TV seems to get between 9 and 11 depending on speed and the shape of the trailer. In a careful test pulling from home to NJ and back (through OH/PA one direction, and DE/MD/WV/OH the other, towing at 60 mph, tailwind while going east, roughly equal headwind while going west), I averaged 11 mpg overall (12-13 going east, 9-10 going west). I get about 23 when not towing.

Before I bought this trailer, I towed a PUP and got around 17 mpg in this car (only towed the PUP with it a couple times before the new trailer arrived), and 15 mpg in the WindStar that preceded it.

[CKNSLS]

hookie wrote:
How is it that some people get such great MPG? No matter what combo I've had over all the years the best I could get was 9.5 mpg. In fact I barely got 15 mpg with a Windstar pulling a PU! And I know what some will say, slow down, etc. I know that so don't bother saying it here again. Then again math was never my favorite subject,it must be that new math you guys are using that I never caught onto.

It happens all the time on the car and truck forums. I call it "Internet Millage".

[EcoBullet]

Regarding handling with a lighter trailer: My former trailer was about 7 feet longer and 500 pounds or so heavier. I don't notice any difference towing on the highway unless it is windy. Then it is obvious. The shorter trailer is also much easier to navigate in gas stations, campgrounds, etc. where tight turns are involved.

I agree that fuel calculators need to be verified.

We had a 2003 Toyota Camry that typically showed 32 mpg average, but calculated to about 30. The speedometer also showed faster than the Garmin GPS by about 2-3 mph.

My F-150 seems to be pretty close. Sometimes a tank will be off by up to 0.5 mpg, but it is possible that I didn't refill to the exact level. That is close enough for a retired government worker.

[tekman741]

My signature has not been updated but I'm a proud owner of an 08 dc tundra 4x4 5.7. The kid who owned it did a bunch of mods. duel exhaust, k&N air intake (lets the engine breath), updated ecm for better shifting with the mods, bigger brakes, tires, shocks, extra springs. took my keystone springdale 296bh "big White box" approx 8500lbs loaded, up to the white mountains and the Adirondacks. I donot remember the exact mpg but it was right at 8mpg avg speed about 60-65 on rt 16 in nh and in the Adirondacks very little highway mostly 2 lane rds and lots of hills. The chevy k3500 in my signature got 6 or 7 mpg can't remember exactly it was 2yrs ago the tundra was this year. So to get 15mpg it must be absolutely perfect conditions no hills maybe a long down hill lol..

[DaveF-250SD]

@W.E.Bgood,

There was an article about it in MSN autos a few years ago, in 2009-2010 time frame, and also in automotive trade publications a few weeks prior to the MSN column. Toyota, possibly sensing an oncoming investigation, admitted theirs being off by three percent. I have personal knowledge of it's authenticity as well. A long time friend of mine will only buy Honda vehicles. He moved his family to another city, and their new house is exactly 100.2 miles from my house, verified by my three Domestic vehicles, and a rented 2013 Ford Fusion, which also showed 100.2 miles. Every one of their Hondas show 106.0 miles for the same distance. A 2004 Accord, 2007 Pilot, and a 2011 Odyssey. He even tried his son's 2009 Civic, same thing, 106.0 miles. Not sure if they have corrected the issue since 2011, but he is considering buying a 2014 Honda. Not sure if Toyota has corrected theirs, either. Hope your cough gets better soon.

[Tystevens]

The digital fuel calculators in my current vehicles are very close, close enough that I seldom hand check anymore. I have never seen more than a .5 disparity between the digital readout and my hand calculations when I have checked. I don't think my GM has ever shown less than I hand calculated, but the Ford has been more likely to show slightly lower than higher, interestingly.

I have had vehicles where it was pointless. Our 2002 Dodge Durango was laughable -- it was 2-4 mpg optimistic; it was never w/in 1 mpg correct a single time that I checked it!

[MitchF150]

My F150 has the "gallons used" meter, and it's typically about .1 to .3 lower than the pumps on fillups. It's also been 'bang on' a couple of times compared to the pump gallons.

On my last camping trip of over 650 total miles and some 53 some odd gallons of gas (going by memory now, but I calculated it at home), the total amount the meter was off from the pumps was .3 less than the tickets.

Good enough for my books! I don't bother to keep record of it anymore and just go with the meter and just compare at fillups. As long as it remains constant I'm going with the meter.. If it starts getting more than 1 gallon off, then I'll re consider..

Your mileage may vary.. 🙂

Mitch

[N-Trouble]

W.E.BGood wrote:

DaveF-250SD wrote:

hookie wrote:
How is it that some people get such great MPG? No matter what combo I've had over all the years the best I could get was 9.5 mpg. In fact I barely got 15 mpg with a Windstar pulling a PU! And I know what some will say, slow down, etc. I know that so don't bother saying it here again. Then again math was never my favorite subject,it must be that new math you guys are using that I never caught onto.

Toyota digital odometers are programmed off by three percent in Toyotas favor. Shortly after Honda was exposed for a five percent error, in their favor as well, Toyota admitted to theirs being off. Both Companies stated that it was not done in malice, it was done to make their customers think they are getting better mileage than they are actually achieving. This was a few years ago, but it had been going on since the inception of digital odometers combined with vehicle speed sensors (in lieu of speedometer cables).

You wouldn't have a link to a factually-substantiated source for that (cough, cough) "story" would you?:R

This is not new news... I can only speak for GM trucks but go on any of the popular GM forums and you'll find guys who compare hand calc MPG figures to the DIC (drivers info center) reading always find that they are either spot-on or read high, BUT NEVER LOW. Imagine that...

Before people treat their trucks MPG monitor as the gospel they need to first characterize its reading by comparing to hand calculated figures for several tanks of fuel. My 2012 GMC Duramax has read 5-7% higher MPG from day one. Now that I have "characterized" it I just knockoff that amount in my head. Unfortunately many people don't bother with doing this and just "assume" its accurate.

[N-Trouble]

Campfire Time wrote:

N-Trouble wrote:
Most of the time people exaggerate their mileage, go by inaccurate MPG gauges or are simply bad at math. You just have to read between the lines and not believe every claim out there. 15MPH towing with a gasser is pretty optimistic...

He tows an Airstream. Big difference in aerodynamics. While I suspect that at 65mph he won't get 15, I also think in the right conditions its possible he can get it at 55. I emphasize, the right conditions. No wind, or a tail wind, flat terrain, moderate temperature.

Yes anyone (and a lot of people do this...)can get on the highway under perfect conditions, reset their MPG monitor to get an inflated number, then come on here and brag about it. Now, go drive a 500mi+ round trip and come back and post numbers and I'll bet they're a bit more realistic. Instant or averages taken over a short period "under perfect conditions" doesn't mean much in my book. Averages over long hauls under varying conditions are all that matter when its time to put fuel in the tank.

[goducks10]

Regardless of what I tow I get my best mpg's on the internet:B

[otrfun]

W.E.BGood wrote:

DaveF-250SD wrote:

hookie wrote:
How is it that some people get such great MPG? No matter what combo I've had over all the years the best I could get was 9.5 mpg. In fact I barely got 15 mpg with a Windstar pulling a PU! And I know what some will say, slow down, etc. I know that so don't bother saying it here again. Then again math was never my favorite subject,it must be that new math you guys are using that I never caught onto.

Toyota digital odometers are programmed off by three percent in Toyotas favor. Shortly after Honda was exposed for a five percent error, in their favor as well, Toyota admitted to theirs being off. Both Companies stated that it was not done in malice, it was done to make their customers think they are getting better mileage than they are actually achieving. This was a few years ago, but it had been going on since the inception of digital odometers combined with vehicle speed sensors (in lieu of speedometer cables).

You wouldn't have a link to a factually-substantiated source for that (cough, cough) "story" would you?:R

Can't substantiate DaveF-250SD's Toyota "story", but Honda did lose a class-action lawsuit a few years back because of their optimistic odometers. I received a settlement letter for my 2006 Civic that extended the factory warranty about 1500 miles as compensation.

[otrfun]

Previously drove a 2011 5.7 DC Tundra. Currently drive a 2012 5.7 DC. Get the same mpg's with both. The same 5.7 engine has been used in 2007-2014 Tundras with very few, if any, changes.

Used to pull a 4,500 lb. TT (loaded). I could get 12 mpg if I kept it at 55 mph (flat, no wind). Dropped to 11 mpg at 60 mph. Currently pull a 7,000 lb. (loaded) TT and get 11 mpg at 55 mph and 10.0 - 10.5 mpg at 60 mph.