18 mpg today by the on board computer

[Turbo Terry]

Short road trip 60 miles. Level ground 50-55-60 miles per hour no wind smooth road. +4 f cold front all closed up Fuel
dosed with Amsoil all in one about 1k load with passenger and tool box and sand bags. My best yet

 

[Diesel85]

Very nice!

You won't get that with any gas engine.

 

[AH64ID]

I had a pretty good drive yesterday. Some downhill and 55-60 in there, but plenty of 70 mph driving too. EVIC said 23.2 when I got to the interstate, 110 miles from starting, but dropped to 21.7 by the time I went another 40 miles. About 20 miles at 85, an hour of stop and go for a wreck, and the rest at 35-50.

Had a few hundred pounds in the bed, more gear in the cab, and another guy with me.

Still on the Trashforce tires, which helps. Winter front installed with all flaps open. Temps ranged from 17° to 39°.

 

[Turbo Terry]

So did you do a tune on your truck. That’s pretty good mileage

 

[Turbo Terry]

I know you use Amsoil all in one. That’s good for 2 -2.5 mpg. And you probably running #2 diesel. . The good stuff. I’m on winter fuel until first part of April 50/50 blend. Only place to get #2 in the winter in Alaska is Tesoro at the hub in Glennallen and Tesoro in Fairbanks. Semis with heated tanks headed to the north slope

 

[AH64ID]

So did you do a tune on your truck. That’s pretty good mileage

Engine is 100% stock.

I know you use Amsoil all in one. That’s good for 2 -2.5 mpg. And you probably running #2 diesel. . The good stuff. I’m on winter fuel until first part of April 50/50 blend. Only place to get #2 in the winter in Alaska is Tesoro at the hub in Glennallen and Tesoro in Fairbanks. Semis with heated tanks headed to the north slope

No additive this tank. I only use it occasionally and intentionally for certain conditions. I’ve never seen any mpg improvement from any additive over the years. Same mpgs with or without it, always has been that way for me on 3 different rigs.

The fuel here is winterized and my last fuel was truck stop fuel, but I don’t know if it’s a blend or chemically winterized.

A 50:50 blend has 94.9% the BTU’s of #2, so all other conditions equal 20 mpg on #2 would be 19 mpg on a 50:50 blend and 18 mpg on #1.

 

[bcbender]

Its amazing how efficient these trucks run in that 50~60mph sweet spot. I get similar numbers have seen as high as 24 a few times on the rural 2 lane roads.. hit the interstate and 75~80 it all goes out the window... still not bad 19~20 steady state.. but as Sammy says.. I cant drive 55....

 

[Turbo Terry]

Yes at a constant speed 50-55-60 in 6 th gear truck is running like 1300-1350 rpm something like that Barely working. But these trucks were meat to pull and haul so the mileage drops off pretty fast. My neighbors big 1 ton ford gasser gets 10-11 empty

 

[AH64ID]

I’m surprised how well it holds mileage at 70-75, which is why I often don’t see much passive regen at those speeds.

I did 20 miles today where the EVIC said 40.1 at the end. Of course that was down from skiing. 6K to 3K feet

 

[Turbo Terry]

Down hill overdrive

 

[AH64ID]

Down hill overdrive

downhill 2-4th gears

 

[Turbo Terry]

Yes I sure like that feature on the steering wheel use mine quite a bit also. When it’s too slow for the exhaust brake etc. The way these trucks are set up is just pretty awesome I must say

 

[slowmover]

Its amazing how efficient these trucks run in that 50~60mph sweet spot. I get similar numbers have seen as high as 24 a few times on the rural 2 lane roads.. hit the interstate and 75~80 it all goes out the window... still not bad 19~20 steady state.. but as Sammy says.. I cant drive 55....

60-MPH is reference for a variety of collected data.

In FE it’s that aerodynamic resistance becomes a wall increasing on the square. After 65 there’s no such thing as economy as it’s been relegated out. Tire wear, engine wear, etc.

This is for any vehicle.

As a CTD is expected to work (and is an unstable platform reflecting design compromises made for manufacturer and operator convenience), think of it as 55-65/MPH capable. Handling is such that it’s rollover prone empty or loaded.

With the above in mind it’s easy to maximize available TQ in the expected top range via axle & trans gearing plus tire height, etc. 4-whl disc w/ABS is the other part. Throttle & Brake Response are such that one can push along in that speed envelope without much concern.

One initiates momentum and allows it to build on departing a stop. Up into the favorable rpm cruise range not much throttle change is needed to maintain that headway.

Steady State RPM is king.

Seen over a very long distance it’s that a glide has been established where we don’t want external conditions to intrude any more than necessary (keep separate from traffic so as to more easily deal with road, load and weather).

Under 60-MPH is where we’ve separated ourselves from wind pressure and are above the rolling resistance factor below 45-MPH. The national speed limit of 55-MPH wasn’t a random choice as it worked from both those factors.

Fuel Economy for a given trip is one thing. Long term economy is in least fuel plus tire wear, etc, to keep the vehicle at highest reliability & longest life stress-level.

Fuel burn — versus what’s possible at 60-MPH — is the percent degradation divisor overall when wind resistance comes into play.

High compression flattens grades.
Turbocharging means a higher average MPH.
These trucks are already overpowered.

Pushing past design limits doesn't pay.
We lose the leverage of the money we can’t get back.
That’s a double penalty.

.

 

[Diesel85]

60-MPH is reference for a variety of collected data.

In FE it’s that aerodynamic resistance becomes a wall increasing on the square. After 65 there’s no such thing as economy as it’s been relegated out. Tire wear, engine wear, etc.

This is for any vehicle.

As a CTD is expected to work (and is an unstable platform reflecting design compromises made for manufacturer and operator convenience), think of it as 55-65/MPH capable. Handling is such that it’s rollover prone empty or loaded.

With the above in mind it’s easy to maximize available TQ in the expected top range via axle & trans gearing plus tire height, etc. 4-whl disc w/ABS is the other part. Throttle & Brake Response are such that one can push along in that speed envelope without much concern.

One initiates momentum and allows it to build on departing a stop. Up into the favorable rpm cruise range not much throttle change is needed to maintain that headway.

Steady State RPM is king.

Seen over a very long distance it’s that a glide has been established where we don’t want external conditions to intrude any more than necessary (keep separate from traffic so as to more easily deal with road, load and weather).

Under 60-MPH is where we’ve separated ourselves from wind pressure and are above the rolling resistance factor below 45-MPH. The national speed limit of 55-MPH wasn’t a random choice as it worked from both those factors.

Fuel Economy for a given trip is one thing. Long term economy is in least fuel plus tire wear, etc, to keep the vehicle at highest reliability & longest life stress-level.

Fuel burn — versus what’s possible at 60-MPH — is the percent degradation divisor overall when wind resistance comes into play.

High compression flattens grades.
Turbocharging means a higher average MPH.
These trucks are already overpowered.

Pushing past design limits doesn't pay.
We lose the leverage of the money we can’t get back.
That’s a double penalty.

.

That is why diesel electric locomotives are so fuel efficient for what they do.

I'm really wondering who is going to be the first (meaning the big 3) to come out with a diesel electric vehicle. I really wish Stellantis would've made the RamCharger with a diesel option instead of gasoline. But I'm assuming for initial production, it was easier for a gas power plant to test the waters.

Looking back at my 2002 5.9 Cummins in my 2500, that truck had just the right amount of horse power and torque for the normal person. In fact, I'm very happy with the 260 HP / 480 Ft/lbs torque out of my EcoD. Way more than enough for the average person.

I really don't get the need for a 400+ hp engine in a daily driver, let alone 500+ hp numbers. Even my work 3500 with the SO engine, which is 370 HP is more than plenty.

Lots of folks are hesitant on that new Hurricane engine, even the standard output, just because the numbers are still high for longevity purposes. Curious to see how the mileage numbers will be for those engines in the truck segment.