Will this Tow my 33 OL??
11-03-2014, 07:44 AM
#31
Registered
iTrader: (2)
That's kinda my point, one trip where you're maintaining a constant speed compared to a normal commute day, no way ppl are "getting" 18 MPG. An occasional high MPG is great, but rarely does it average out. My EcoBoost has seen 18-19 on highway trips in the winter, but that's not an accurate representation of the average.
My dashboard gauge (for fuel consumption) is spot on (to the tenth anyway which is the accuracy of the gauge). If I go to the same station and the same pump and park in the same orientation so that the tank is sitting in the same position, then I get very accurate comsumption readings. I can put a gallon more or less in the tank depending on whether the truck is oriented slightly up hill or down. Heck, the odometer is probably not that accurate.
Now on the 496 in the boat, fuel consumption is not measured but calculated (which it may be on the 6.7 also) from injector opening times and rpm. In that case the boat actually uses 2-3 gallons more on 50 consumed than reported by the Smartcraft instrumentation.
At the end of the day it really doesn't matter, just so long you know your equipment.
The problem with the diesel is not 17 or 18 or 19 mpg, the problem is the tax structure that puts diesel at $0.50+ per gallon more than the more expensive to produce 87 octane gas.
Dan
11-03-2014, 07:13 PM
#32
Registered
Thread Starter
Well, price comparison on fuel price vs mpg was a net compared to to my jeep with 35s jacked up hitting 14.5 to 15mpg.
Although this truck is a lot quicker than my lil 4dr wrangler!!!
Although this truck is a lot quicker than my lil 4dr wrangler!!!
11-03-2014, 07:37 PM
#33
That is interesting. Before the 6.7 I had a 2011 Eco Boost. Loved the truck. I hardly ever saw above 17.5 with it though and in the winter it was worse. I blamed that on cold tires and increased rolling resistance. I always thought the eco part of Eco Boost was stretching it, the boost part was spot on though. It was a beast. Whoever designed oil filter and drain location should be shot on sight however.
My dashboard gauge (for fuel consumption) is spot on (to the tenth anyway which is the accuracy of the gauge). If I go to the same station and the same pump and park in the same orientation so that the tank is sitting in the same position, then I get very accurate comsumption readings. I can put a gallon more or less in the tank depending on whether the truck is oriented slightly up hill or down. Heck, the odometer is probably not that accurate.
Now on the 496 in the boat, fuel consumption is not measured but calculated (which it may be on the 6.7 also) from injector opening times and rpm. In that case the boat actually uses 2-3 gallons more on 50 consumed than reported by the Smartcraft instrumentation.
At the end of the day it really doesn't matter, just so long you know your equipment.
The problem with the diesel is not 17 or 18 or 19 mpg, the problem is the tax structure that puts diesel at $0.50+ per gallon more than the more expensive to produce 87 octane gas.
Dan
My dashboard gauge (for fuel consumption) is spot on (to the tenth anyway which is the accuracy of the gauge). If I go to the same station and the same pump and park in the same orientation so that the tank is sitting in the same position, then I get very accurate comsumption readings. I can put a gallon more or less in the tank depending on whether the truck is oriented slightly up hill or down. Heck, the odometer is probably not that accurate.
Now on the 496 in the boat, fuel consumption is not measured but calculated (which it may be on the 6.7 also) from injector opening times and rpm. In that case the boat actually uses 2-3 gallons more on 50 consumed than reported by the Smartcraft instrumentation.
At the end of the day it really doesn't matter, just so long you know your equipment.
The problem with the diesel is not 17 or 18 or 19 mpg, the problem is the tax structure that puts diesel at $0.50+ per gallon more than the more expensive to produce 87 octane gas.
Dan
