TFL Towing MPG Comparison

[Rustydodge]

GMC 6.2 10 speed Max tow package (3.42 gears) = 9.8 on 91 octane
Ram 5.7e 8 speed ORG w/ air (392 gears) = 9.2 on 87 octane
F150 3.5eb 10 speed (3.31 gears) = 8.7 on 87 octane

This is relatively consistent with The Car Guide (canada) results, where the Ram won in towing MPG (possibly due to the use of different fuel)
https://www.guideautoweb.com/en/articles/48705/full-size-pickup-comparison-test-battle-royale/

Explain to me again, why the ol' 5.7 is such an outdated, poor performing engine?

Edit: Discovered TFL used 91 in the GMC only, and 87 is the Ram and Ford, per TFL response (post #42 of linked thread below)
https://www.gminsidenews.com/forums...cient-towing-truck-america-292285/index3.html.

 

[DonsRam19]

GMC 6.2 10 speed Max tow package (3.42 gears) = 9.8
Ram 5.7e 8 speed ORG w/ air (392 gears) = 9.2
F150 3.5eb 10 speed (3.31 gears) = 8.7

I think they used 91 octane for all

This is relatively consistent with The Car Guide (canada) results, where the Ram won in towing MPG.
https://www.guideautoweb.com/en/articles/48705/full-size-pickup-comparison-test-battle-royale/

Explain to me again, why the ol' 5.7 is such an outdated, poor performing engine?

The 5.7 hemi is an amazing motor ram in my opinion is unbeatable overall I doubt I'll ever go back to a Chevy/Ford again!

 

[Electrical]

Outdated. Naw, more like time-tested.

People who want new motors every year should be careful what they ask for.

 

[Zinger]

GMC 6.2 10 speed Max tow package (3.42 gears) = 9.8
Ram 5.7e 8 speed ORG w/ air (392 gears) = 9.2
F150 3.5eb 10 speed (3.31 gears) = 8.7

I think they used 91 octane for all

This is relatively consistent with The Car Guide (canada) results, where the Ram won in towing MPG.
https://www.guideautoweb.com/en/articles/48705/full-size-pickup-comparison-test-battle-royale/

Explain to me again, why the ol' 5.7 is such an outdated, poor performing engine?

I never realized that the GM 6.2L required 91 octane or higher. That right there takes away any MPG advantage it has, since the real metric we should be focused on is $/mile.

Quick example, the difference between 87 and 93 around my parts is $0.50/gallon. So right now $2.58 for 87 vs $3.08 for premium, or 19% more. So basically take 19.3% off any engine that requires premium fuel to get the effective MPG if you could run it with 87.

So 9.8 becomes 7.91 for the GM, for example. Even if you use midgrade instead of regular for the comparison it's $0.30 more in these parts you still end up with more effective $/mile for the GM.

I always find these discussions funny because there is this obsession with getting the best MPG number, without considering other factors. If it's all about finances, then why even focus on MPG at all? It should be cost/mile!

 

[Troop2865]

Hey Zinger, as I was reading your post above, you said we should be focused on $/mile. In just reading quickly, what I read was $mile as in smiles per gallon. I know; corny, but I think the Ram definitely provides that. TFL did give it the golden hitch award and it did very well up the Ike Gauntlet..

 

[Zinger]

Hey Zinger, as I was reading your post above, you said we should be focused on $/mile. In just reading quickly, what I read was $mile as in smiles per gallon. I know; corny, but I think the Ram definitely provides that. TFL did give it the golden hitch award and it did very well up the Ike Gauntlet..

I totally agree. I rarely look at MPG at all, and when I do it's only as a possible indicator of a problem.

Trucks are pay to play. If you want the ability to tow 11,000 you're going to pay, nuff said.

My point in my post was more for the folks who do these comparisons, and that they should be highlighting a different metric. Or at least including a different metric,.

 

[Rustydodge]

I never realized that the GM 6.2L required 91 octane or higher. That right there takes away any MPG advantage it has, since the real metric we should be focused on is $/mile.

Quick example, the difference between 87 and 93 around my parts is $0.50/gallon. So right now $2.58 for 87 vs $3.08 for premium, or 19% more. So basically take 19.3% off any engine that requires premium fuel to get the effective MPG if you could run it with 87.

So 9.8 becomes 7.91 for the GM, for example. Even if you use midgrade instead of regular for the comparison it's $0.30 more in these parts you still end up with more effective $/mile for the GM.

I always find these discussions funny because there is this obsession with getting the best MPG number, without considering other factors. If it's all about finances, then why even focus on MPG at all? It should be cost/mile!

For the 6.2 I believe the book calls for 93 for best performance, but they will all run on 87. If i owned one, I'd run 91.

Yes it is funny how puffed up folks get about MPG, when they all pretty much perform within 10% of each other real world.

If i was to get 10% better MPG, i would save a whopping $150 per year. Who is going to make a $60,000 decision based on saving $150? Not to mention, if i had to buy 91 octane, I'd actually have to spend more $ on fuel every year even though i'm getting better MPG.

 

[NEVER AGAIN]

IMO

1. 6.2L 10 speed (Phenomenal Combo)
2. 5.7L Hemi
3.
4.
5.
6. Ecoboost ( Great performance but can't get passed the 6 cylinder strategy)

 

[Reduxalicious]

And Again Ford doesn't bring the 5.0 ,

I really don't get why they ignore that thing, I understand the Ecoboost is a good for being a V6 bla bla bla but there's some people like myself and my father who rather have a V8, And having driven both the F150 and Mustang Second Gen Coyote's, Those are some quick fun high revving engines, Would really like to see how it does in towing compared to a 5.7 Hemi, On paper they're pretty evenly matched,

Both 395 HP with the F150 Coyote producing peak HP at 5,750 RPM's and the Hemi making it's 395 at 5'650.
Coyote has 10 less foot pounds at 400 lb-ft @ 4,500 rpm, With the Hemi being 410 lb-ft @ 3,950 rpm,

Pretty damn close on paper.

 

[Rustydodge]

And Again Ford doesn't bring the 5.0 ,

I really don't get why they ignore that thing, I understand the Ecoboost is a good for being a V6 bla bla bla but there's some people like myself and my father who rather have a V8, And having driven both the F150 and Mustang Second Gen Coyote's, Those are some quick fun high revving engines, Would really like to see how it does in towing compared to a 5.7 Hemi, On paper they're pretty evenly matched,

Both 395 HP with the F150 Coyote producing peak HP at 5,750 RPM's and the Hemi making it's 395 at 5'650.
Coyote has 10 less foot pounds at 400 lb-ft @ 4,500 rpm, With the Hemi being 410 lb-ft @ 3,950 rpm,

Pretty **** close on paper.

2018 trucktrend pickup truck of the year comparison had a 5.0 vs 5.7 if you're interested. I also would opt for the 5.0 if I was to get an F150.

 

[Rustydodge]

Stop the presses....

TFL used 91 for the 6.2 only, and 87 for the Ram and Ford.

Post #42
https://www.gminsidenews.com/forums...cient-towing-truck-america-292285/index3.html

That makes the Ram look even better in this comparison, the clear winner, with lower cost to operate and best ride when towing

 

[Zinger]

Stop the presses....

TFL used 91 for the 6.2 only, and 87 for the Ram and Ford.

Post #42
https://www.gminsidenews.com/forums...cient-towing-truck-america-292285/index3.html

That makes the Ram look even better in this comparison, the clear winner, with lower cost to operate and best ride when towing

Exactly what I stated earlier. $/mile is the metric that should be the focus of a comparison like this, not raw MPG.