FishOnOne
The Great State of Texas
Senior Member
Joined: 02/12/2011
View Profile
 Offline
|
One of the main reason why Dodge Ram didn't make the short list when I purchased my truck is they didn't offer DEF and their fuel economy suffered because of it and a diesel was a must have.
Link
'12 Ford Super Duty FX4 ELD CC 6.7 PSD 400HP 800ft/lbs "270k Miles"
'16 Sprinter 319MKS "Wide Body"
|
1320Fastback
Vista, Ca
Senior Member
Joined: 12/04/2016
View Profile
Offline
|
Why would Toyota even waste the money making a hybrid for 2 more mpg? What a waste of money.
1992 D250 Cummins 5psd
2005 Forest River T26 Toy Hauler
|
valhalla360
No paticular place.
Senior Member
Joined: 08/19/2009
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
|
Grit dog wrote:valhalla360 wrote:agesilaus wrote:Who buys a p/u for it's fuel economy?
It wasn't that long ago that getting 15mpg was pretty typical for a full size pickup.
With average miles driven per year somewhere around 15,000.
Assuming $3.50/gallon:
- 15MPG = $3500/year
- 25MPG = $2100/year
- 35MPG = $1500/year
Jumping up to 35MPG is a savings of around $2000/yr. If you own it for 10yrs, that's $20,000 in fuel savings.
So the real question is why wouldn't you consider fuel economy when buying?
PS: and as others have suggested, higher MPG typically translates to longer range between fill ups, which is a nice bonus.
Why? Because your example is ridiculous.
A more realistic goal of 1-2mpg increase in an apples to apples comparison = about $200 or $400 per year respectively.
Spread that out over your theoretical 10 years and that $2000-4000 could easily be doubled or negated by difference in purchase price, repair costs, down time, resale, maintenance intervals, btter or worse financing deal ….I could go on.
Fuel mileage can/may be “a” consideration but if it is the biggest consideration then that person is just preceding their ignorance about the total cost of ownership.
I don't know about you but I can recall the trucks that got 15MPG and several of the new ones are getting 25MPG.
If you don't have heavy duty towing needs, I believe the dodge with the small diesel is rated at 33MPG highway.
So that's a much bigger range than 1-2MPG
Tammy & Mike
Ford F250 V10
2021 Gray Wolf
Gemini Catamaran 34'
Full Time spliting time between boat and RV
|
ppine
Northern Nevada
Senior Member
Joined: 07/04/2016
View Profile
Offline
|
agesilaus wrote:Who buys a p/u for it's fuel economy?
People that buy diesels.
|
Grit dog
Black Diamond, WA
Senior Member
Joined: 05/06/2013
View Profile
Offline
|
valhalla360 wrote:
I don't know about you but I can recall the trucks that got 15MPG and several of the new ones are getting 25MPG.
If you don't have heavy duty towing needs, I believe the dodge with the small diesel is rated at 33MPG highway.
So that's a much bigger range than 1-2MPG
Yes you're correct the baby diesels do appear to get significantly better mileage than their gas engine counterparts, although it appears most all of your mileage knowledge is from the internet...but I digress.
(And I thought we were comparing a Ford Gas/Energizer bunny combo and Tundra....maybe I'm all wacked out and in the wrong thread again! lol)
Actually neither of my current trucks even get 15mpg, except maybe on their best day lol. 2020 5.3 Chevy p/u and and 2016 Dodge diesel.
Granted that is largely due to my driving style and big tires, but it's all relative.
Don't know how many different vehicles you drive or have driven in recent years, while tooling around in the ole V10 (great truck btw!) or catamaran, but I end up behind the wheel of quite a few different vehciles, trucks and cars. And ya know what, save for diesels, 1/2 ton gasser 4x4s still get closer to 15mpg than 25 and there aint a full size truck out there that averages 33mpg. Not even close. Not even if you grampa'd that thing across Kansas with a tail wind...well maybe if the tailwind was strong enough.
It's all relative.
20 years ago, I used to average say 10-11mpg in a half ton 4x4 with a "big" V8. Now, granted they have more power and more gears, I can average 14+ mpg in a similar truck, still driving like I'm late to a fire.
But you figure it however you want. There is still no free lunches out there. And no 35mpg pickup trucks!
2016 Ram 2500, MotorOps.ca EFIlive tuned, 5” turbo back, 6" lift on 37s
2017 Heartland Torque T29 - Sold.
Couple of Arctic Fox TCs - Sold
|
|
|
RoyJ
Vancouver, BC
Senior Member
Joined: 10/19/2006
View Profile
Offline
|
n0arp wrote:RoyJ wrote:I'd say for the vast majority of truck buyers, from light duty to heavy duty (Class 8), fuel consumption is the number 1 priority.
If that wasn't the case all OEMs would stick a supercharged big block crate engine and call it a day...
Fuel economy is a very distant priority for me, and always has been. I buy trucks for performance and capability, first and foremost. I wouldn't say I don't care, but it's barely on my radar... and the same goes for most people I know. The last few trucks I've bought don't even provide EPA estimates, and I'm sure that goes for a lot of people's trucks on here.
Most HD pickup diesels are already optimized for fuel economy, and fairly even across the 3. It's reasonable to use capability / comfort as the next metric.
I use extreme examples to illustrate a point:
If Ram modified a Hellcat/TRX engine for commercial duty (extensive cooling, etc.), shoved it in a 5500, and upped GCW to 50k lbs. Gets 1.7 mpg towing uphill. What's the take rate? I bet less than 5% would pick that over a lower performance Cummins.
|
n0arp
FT
Senior Member
Joined: 08/20/2016
View Profile
Offline
|
RoyJ wrote:If Ram modified a Hellcat/TRX engine for commercial duty (extensive cooling, etc.), shoved it in a 5500, and upped GCW to 50k lbs. Gets 1.7 mpg towing uphill. What's the take rate? I bet less than 5% would pick that over a lower performance Cummins.
I would argue there are other, more significant, reasons for a low take rate with that, but sure, fuel economy would be one of them.
|
RoyJ
Vancouver, BC
Senior Member
Joined: 10/19/2006
View Profile
Offline
|
I should've stated it this way: all things being equal, why not pick the truck with better fuel economy.
Tundra vs F150 powerboost: both half tons, both 3.5ish V6 turbo, both hybrid, both 10 spd auto, similar tow rating, GCW, payload (not counting HD payload pkg), pretty equal IMO.
Toyota may have better reliability historically, but this is a new powertrain, so until proven, it's only a perceived win over Ford.
|
valhalla360
No paticular place.
Senior Member
Joined: 08/19/2009
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
|
Grit dog wrote:Yes you're correct the baby diesels do appear to get significantly better mileage than their gas engine counterparts, although it appears most all of your mileage knowledge is from the internet...but I digress.
I've had the 15MPG trucks and I've had a truck that got 27MPG. Not had a 30+ truck yet but I'm sure you are the internet source who knows better.
|
n0arp
FT
Senior Member
Joined: 08/20/2016
View Profile
Offline
|
RoyJ wrote:I should've stated it this way: all things being equal, why not pick the truck with better fuel economy.
I never said anywhere that if all other things we equal, fuel economy wouldn't be the deciding factor. I said it's a distant priority, after many other things.
I just don't think most truck buyers, especially in the 2500+ segment, are shopping with fuel economy at the top of their priority list. It's in there, sure, just not at the top.
|
|
|
|
