Horrific Gas Mileage Hemi eTorque

[Rustydodge]

The most recent EPA standard tests have a max highway speed of 80 mph, even though the average is still 48mph. (It's supposed to help create a more accurate acceleration curve to better replicate how people drive)

Not according to this, unless their site is out of date:
https://www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-fuel-emissions-testing/dynamometer-drive-schedules

 

[riccnick]

Not according to this, unless their site is out of date:
https://www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-fuel-emissions-testing/dynamometer-drive-schedules
View attachment 16750

Scroll down a little on that same page, it's there under the "US06 or Supplemental FTP Driving Schedule"

 

[Rustydodge]

Scroll down a little on that same page, it's there under the "US06 or Supplemental FTP Driving Schedule"

Right...that's a supplemental driving schedule. That is not the test schedule they use to create the highway EPA number. The one i provided, is titled Highway Fuel Economy Test. The US06 is also an average speed of 48, with vastly varying speeds, so etorque would have a slight positive impact. It would still not be representative of setting your cruise at 70 MPH

 

[Rustydodge]

The supplemental test is not part of the highway rating apparently:

You can see the 10 mile distance corresponds with the distance in the EPA Highway Fuel Economy Test chart

EDIT: Apparently EPA hasn't properly updated part of their site. This link provides different information on how they conduct the tests. https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/P100IENB.PDF?Dockey=P100IENB.PDF
So they do utilize all 5 test cycles. They do not specify how they are weighted in determining the hwy number. They do state, that the "high speed" cycle (the US06 i believe) is what primarily drives the hwy rating now. Not sure why the distance doesn't line up (8 mile US06 vs 10 miles in "how are vehicles tested" section. Possible that certain portions of each test are combined and averaged.

 

[rhill]

Kinda, here's the exact verbiage:

Like I said. They test trucks with approx. the same weight, engine size, trasmisson, etc. They don't diiferentiate between cabs like crew, quad, or regular. Nor do they differentiate between tire types, sizes, rear ends, options, bed length such as 5'7" or 6' 4".. They do test different trucks with different size engines or trasmissions, and 4WD vs 2WD. They have to test the model that they think will be the best seller in the group, thus the crew cab is tested, not the quad or regular. ( This prevents them from using the one they think will be the most efficient).I found this out in an article about the hybrid ford c-max and the ford hybrid fusion. I own a c-max. Ford used the Fusion to test because they thought it would be their best seller. It had the exact same drive train and approx. weight as the C-max. They didn't take into account the C-max is much taller and less aerodynamic than the Fusion, so thus the highway mileage was several miles per gallon less. Since they didnt violate EPA rules, they didn't get in trouble, but they voluntarily sent C-max owners checks totaling $750 for the difference in cost of gas over a 5 year period. I got the check and explanation from Ford on why they were rated the same mpg and why they were doing a goodwill gesture of reimbursing owners for the difference. They were not forced to, because they had followed EPA guidelines.

 

[DanSkan]

Ford sent me a check for about $1000 since our 2013 Lincoln MKZ Hybrid wasn't getting the epa sticker of 45 mpg highway and would onot get 40 mpg.

 

[Rototerrier]

Guess we should all complain individually so we can get those checks before someone class actions and we all get a coupon for an oil change or something useless.

 

[RamTruckMan]

Guess we should all complain individually so we can get those checks before someone class actions and we all get a coupon for an oil change or something useless.

Unfortunately, I think they are unlikely to issue any $$ unless there is a CA. Hopefully the keep working on tweaking the software for improvements...

QUESTION: I've remote started my truck a few times and when I've gotten in the Engine was in about normal but the tranny temp didn't budge, contributing to worse mileage. And Often it doesn't even warm up over the 7 mile highway portion of my daily commute when it's really cold outside... Is this normal for this truck? My F-150 used to heat up better all around, faster

 

[Edwards]

Unfortunately, I think they are unlikely to issue any $$ unless there is a CA. Hopefully the keep working on tweaking the software for improvements...

QUESTION: I've remote started my truck a few times and when I've gotten in the Engine was in about normal but the tranny temp didn't budge, contributing to worse mileage. And Often it doesn't even warm up over the 7 mile highway portion of my daily commute when it's really cold outside... Is this normal for this truck? My F-150 used to heat up better all around, faster

I've always seen the same on my tranny. Takes a good 15 miles or so to get mostly warmed up in ~50 degree weather.

 

[RamTruckMan]

I've always seen the same on my tranny. Takes a good 15 miles or so to get mostly warmed up in ~50 degree weather.

Thanks for that... It's a question b/c I read some earlier stuff about tranny heaters and mileage suffers while it's cold.

 

[Gman]

I guess I'm one of the few that are able to get the EPA numbers if I work at it. I don't need an explanation or a credit of some type. I'm not seeing anything unexpected in that regard.

I do still have quality/fit & finish concerns about my new truck.

I believe the warm-up priorities for the truck are engine, then cabin, then transmission.

 

[RamTruckMan]

I guess I'm one of the few that are able to get the EPA numbers if I work at it. I don't need an explanation or a credit of some type. I'm not seeing anything unexpected in that regard.

I do still have quality/fit & finish concerns about my new truck.

I believe the warm-up priorities for the truck are engine, then cabin, then transmission.

What's the average temperature around you?


2019 Ram 1500 Bighorn | 5.7L eTorque | 3.92 R.A.R.

 

[Gman]

Depends on the day. Lately it has been pretty chilly. I think it was 10 the other morning when it took a while for stop/start to kick in.

One thing that I do find impressive is how much heat these trucks hang onto hours after you shut them off. I went to an IT user group mtg. at 3pm. When I got out after 5pm it was snowing pretty heavily, but the truck was still warm and defrosted the windows right away. It's 24 and still snowing right now.

My latest energy bill is showing the average temp this month was 31. Same month last year the average was 37. I wonder how much global warming I'll have to shovel in the morning?

 

[RamTruckMan]

I guess I'm one of the few that are able to get the EPA numbers if I work at it. I don't need an explanation or a credit of some type. I'm not seeing anything unexpected in that regard.

I do still have quality/fit & finish concerns about my new truck.

I believe the warm-up priorities for the truck are engine, then cabin, then transmission.

G-
I noticed from your profile that you live in CO at an elevation of approximately 5900 ft. I live in CT at a 49' elevation. Elevation can be a wonderful thing for MPG and using a lower octane and getting the same results. I found this handy short article explaining how wonderful thinner air is and where it falls short. LINK ->The Effect of Elevation on Gas Mileage.
Thanks for your reply!

 

[Gman]

I'm very aware of my elevation, thanks. We discussed our lower octane requirements at elevation in depth in a thread about the preferred gas to use in the Hemi.

 

[RamTruckMan]

I'm very aware of my elevation, thanks. We discussed our lower octane requirements at elevation in depth in a thread about the preferred gas to use in the Hemi.

I'm not trying to offend you. I think it may be the answer for you actually hitting EPA numbers


2019 Ram 1500 Bighorn | 5.7L eTorque | 3.92 R.A.R.

 

[rhill]

That's not how testing works. You always need a control to validate the validity of the testing methodology. You can argue what a good control would be, but in this case they at least used another truck of similar size that was EPA rated, so it's fairly apples-to-apples. Without a control they could just measure from the top of the Ike Gauntlet and claim a Rebel gets 99 miles to the gallon, or conversely from the bottom and say it gets 10. Without a control the results are practically meaningless.

The problem with using the Chevy 4 cylinder for a comparison is that GM actually tested this combination since it would be a volume seller with that drivetrain. Ram doesn't actually test the rebel itself. It uses its volume seller as a crew cab, 5.7 e-torque, 3.21 gears. That doesn't take into account the offroad and 3.92 rearend or more aggressive tires. Those things alone, would more than make up for it posting a 4 mpg drop from EPA ratings. Ram uses the all season tires for its tester. Variables such as off road height, suspension differences, rear end ratio, and tire type are not taken into consideration. Blame tbe EPA for their stupid rules. A better control from General Motors would be their AT4 off road version, which would have not been EPA tested either, since it is not a volume seller either.

 

[Gman]

I think it has more to do with the 3.21 RAR, not being a Rebel, and my right foot.

TFL Truck is just up the road.

 

[josepy121380]

Local dealer said to me. I should see improvement with 8-10k miles on it.

 

[Electrical]

Look, we’re not accusing anyone of anything. I know what was said, I came up with the dialogue. The stickers says 17 19 22. Nothing says otherwise in regards to the truck that number applies to.

Frankly, when we were sold the truck with the knowledge it is rated, I repeat, RATED at 22 and returned 18 (of course, in the real world), yeah, we were more than a little shocked. I think, honestly, that’s why this whole thread exists actually.

Look we are by no means the end all be all in MPG ratings. We of course have flaws in our tests and procedures, we recognize that (hence why we did a third loop). We are simply doing our very best to come up with valid tests and report the honest results. You can interpret those results as you may.

We greatly appreciate you guys for watching. This forum is a great resource for owners and enthusiasts alike. Thanks all for being part of the conversation!

The Fast Lane Truck Team

Is this Roman? Hey Roman! I don't wanna debate the fine points but would like to say you guys are doing a bang up job! I really enjoy your content. I'm a big fan.

Tell all the guys WASSUP from the 5th Gen forum