cancel
Showing results forย 
Search instead forย 
Did you mean:ย 

Ram and Chevy MPG Test Part 2

FishOnOne
Explorer III
Explorer III
Test run ~100 miles with very little wind. Obviously this is not a comparison since these trucks are not similar.

Ram: 16.8 mpg (5.7 E-Torque Rebel)
Chevy: 24.2 mpg (2.7 Turbo)

Link


Noteworthy:
The Ram was previously tested by TFL making significant understated fuel economy performance, but was assumed the engine wasn't broken in.

The Chevy was previously tested by Car and Driver again making significant understated fuel economy and was actually worse than the 5.3.
'12 Ford Super Duty FX4 ELD CC 6.7 PSD 400HP 800ft/lbs "270k Miles"
'16 Sprinter 319MKS "Wide Body"
24 REPLIES 24

RGar974417
Explorer
Explorer
I have a 2018 Nissan Titan XD with the Cummins 5.0 diesel. The best mileage I have gotten so far is 22.5. I saw another mileage test among Chevy,Ford,Dodge and Nissan. Chevy was first,Nissan 2nd ,Ford 3rd and Dodge last. But I believe it was a test of combined city/highway.

1320Fastback
Explorer
Explorer
eflyersteve wrote:
GWolfe wrote:
1320Fastback wrote:
Grit dog wrote:
^ Yup, and u can roll coal!! Double win!


I'll admit to short shifting passing a few others while towing up mountains.


What is so cool about "rolling coal"? I know what it is I just don't get it.


Nothing is cool except in their own minds. Probably the same ilk that put huge semi stacks through their bed cause they think they have a 'real' truck.

I've never found a ram that I couldn't catch after someone rolled coal on me. And that includes my wr250 single cylinder motorcycle.


I don't get stacks either. I use my truck as a actual truck all the time and need to tie off to the front corners a few times a week.
1992 D250 Cummins 5psd
2005 Forest River T26 Toy Hauler

eflyersteve
Explorer
Explorer
GWolfe wrote:
1320Fastback wrote:
Grit dog wrote:
^ Yup, and u can roll coal!! Double win!


I'll admit to short shifting passing a few others while towing up mountains.


What is so cool about "rolling coal"? I know what it is I just don't get it.


Nothing is cool except in their own minds. Probably the same ilk that put huge semi stacks through their bed cause they think they have a 'real' truck.

I've never found a ram that I couldn't catch after someone rolled coal on me. And that includes my wr250 single cylinder motorcycle.
2019 Coachmen Freedom Express 204RD
2011 F150 Super Crew FX4, 5.0L V8
Husky Centerline WD Hitch

FishOnOne
Explorer III
Explorer III
mich800 wrote:
ib516 wrote:

Sort of.

The numbers Ram quote on the window sticker they slap on the Rebel for the EPA mpg are for a Ram 1500 4x4, Hemi, E-Torque, crew cab, short bed.

What Ram doesn't do (but should) is test a Rebel model specifically and give it it's own EPA mpg rating like Chevy does with the Trail Boss, which gets a lower mpg rating than a regular Chevy 4x4.

The Rebel is lifted, has no chin spoiler, and has off road tires. I bet it gets 2-3 mpg less than the same powertrain in the same cab and bed configuration in a "normal" Ram 1500 4x4, and even less than one equipped with the "lowering at highway speed" air suspension.


I am also questioning the etorque as a fuel saver. I have not noticed any seat of the pants improvement in power or mpg. It is much smoother on the restart for stop/start.


I agree... the improvement is probably mostly aimed at the stop/start process. Having said that I wouldn't pay for this option and would apply that money towards other features.
'12 Ford Super Duty FX4 ELD CC 6.7 PSD 400HP 800ft/lbs "270k Miles"
'16 Sprinter 319MKS "Wide Body"

1320Fastback
Explorer
Explorer
GWolfe wrote:
1320Fastback wrote:
Grit dog wrote:
^ Yup, and u can roll coal!! Double win!


I'll admit to short shifting passing a few others while towing up mountains.


What is so cool about "rolling coal"? I know what it is I just don't get it.


Nothing really, I guess the first few times it's fun because it's different but now you just watch your fuel gauge go down and think of all the $$$ that just went out the pipe.
1992 D250 Cummins 5psd
2005 Forest River T26 Toy Hauler

mich800
Explorer
Explorer
ib516 wrote:

Sort of.

The numbers Ram quote on the window sticker they slap on the Rebel for the EPA mpg are for a Ram 1500 4x4, Hemi, E-Torque, crew cab, short bed.

What Ram doesn't do (but should) is test a Rebel model specifically and give it it's own EPA mpg rating like Chevy does with the Trail Boss, which gets a lower mpg rating than a regular Chevy 4x4.

The Rebel is lifted, has no chin spoiler, and has off road tires. I bet it gets 2-3 mpg less than the same powertrain in the same cab and bed configuration in a "normal" Ram 1500 4x4, and even less than one equipped with the "lowering at highway speed" air suspension.


I am also questioning the etorque as a fuel saver. I have not noticed any seat of the pants improvement in power or mpg. It is much smoother on the restart for stop/start.

FishOnOne
Explorer III
Explorer III
ib516 wrote:
They posted another video and re-ran the test. Turns out Andre was using the manual shift mode which defeats the 4 cyl mode. They got 17.8 mpg on the retest. Still pretty short of 22 mpg though. I wonder if it would make 20 if they went 60 mph?

They messed up - mpg shocker part 3


interesting update ....
'12 Ford Super Duty FX4 ELD CC 6.7 PSD 400HP 800ft/lbs "270k Miles"
'16 Sprinter 319MKS "Wide Body"

ib516
Explorer
Explorer
mich800 wrote:
GWolfe wrote:
The problem with the Rams EPA numbers is the fact that Ram got those numbers using a regular Ram truck and not a Rebel. The off road package and tires sure don't do the Rebel any favors. TFL talks a little about it here starting at about 4.40.


Re-watch the retest video. According to them at the 4 minute mark the EPA rating on their window sticker is in fact for the Rebel version. So it comes down to are they correct on that original video or this most recent one.

Sort of.

The numbers Ram quote on the window sticker they slap on the Rebel for the EPA mpg are for a Ram 1500 4x4, Hemi, E-Torque, crew cab, short bed.

What Ram doesn't do (but should) is test a Rebel model specifically and give it it's own EPA mpg rating like Chevy does with the Trail Boss, which gets a lower mpg rating than a regular Chevy 4x4.

The Rebel is lifted, has no chin spoiler, and has off road tires. I bet it gets 2-3 mpg less than the same powertrain in the same cab and bed configuration in a "normal" Ram 1500 4x4, and even less than one equipped with the "lowering at highway speed" air suspension.
Prev: 2010 Cougar 322QBS (junk)
02 Dodge 2500 4x4 5.9L CTD 3.55
07 Dodge 3500 4x4 SRW Mega 5.9L CTD 3.73
14 Ram 2500 4x4 Crew 6.4L Hemi 4.10
06 Chevy 1500 4x4 E-Cab 3.73 5.3L
07 Dodge 1500 5.7L Hemi 3.55 / 2010 Jayco 17z
All above are sold, no longer own an RV

mich800
Explorer
Explorer
GWolfe wrote:
The problem with the Rams EPA numbers is the fact that Ram got those numbers using a regular Ram truck and not a Rebel. The off road package and tires sure don't do the Rebel any favors. TFL talks a little about it here starting at about 4.40.


Re-watch the retest video. According to them at the 4 minute mark the EPA rating on their window sticker is in fact for the Rebel version. So it comes down to are they correct on that original video or this most recent one.

GWolfe
Explorer
Explorer
1320Fastback wrote:
Grit dog wrote:
^ Yup, and u can roll coal!! Double win!


I'll admit to short shifting passing a few others while towing up mountains.


What is so cool about "rolling coal"? I know what it is I just don't get it.
2005 Sun-Lite Eagle
2011 Silverado

GWolfe
Explorer
Explorer
The problem with the Rams EPA numbers is the fact that Ram got those numbers using a regular Ram truck and not a Rebel. The off road package and tires sure don't do the Rebel any favors. TFL talks a little about it here starting at about 4.40.
2005 Sun-Lite Eagle
2011 Silverado

1320Fastback
Explorer
Explorer
Grit dog wrote:
^ Yup, and u can roll coal!! Double win!


I'll admit to short shifting passing a few others while towing up mountains.
1992 D250 Cummins 5psd
2005 Forest River T26 Toy Hauler

mich800
Explorer
Explorer
ib516 wrote:
They posted another video and re-ran the test. Turns out Andre was using the manual shift mode which defeats the 4 cyl mode. They got 17.8 mpg on the retest. Still pretty short of 22 mpg though. I wonder if it would make 20 if they went 60 mph?

They messed up - mpg shocker part 3


I think they would. But still they should get better than the city rating for the loop they performed.

ib516
Explorer
Explorer
They posted another video and re-ran the test. Turns out Andre was using the manual shift mode which defeats the 4 cyl mode. They got 17.8 mpg on the retest. Still pretty short of 22 mpg though. I wonder if it would make 20 if they went 60 mph?

They messed up - mpg shocker part 3
Prev: 2010 Cougar 322QBS (junk)
02 Dodge 2500 4x4 5.9L CTD 3.55
07 Dodge 3500 4x4 SRW Mega 5.9L CTD 3.73
14 Ram 2500 4x4 Crew 6.4L Hemi 4.10
06 Chevy 1500 4x4 E-Cab 3.73 5.3L
07 Dodge 1500 5.7L Hemi 3.55 / 2010 Jayco 17z
All above are sold, no longer own an RV