|
|
09-24-2007, 02:58 PM
|
#41
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chittenango
Posts: 789
M.O.C. #1011
|
We finally got enough mileage on our GMC for an oil and filter change. Today coming from Chambersburg, PA to Hershey, Pa. we got 15.9 towing. We were shocked.
The mileage is getting better now that we have some miles on the truck.
|
|
|
09-24-2007, 03:01 PM
|
#42
|
Montana Fan
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Zachary
Posts: 324
M.O.C. #4142
|
If we are going to PLAY WE GOTTA PAY.
|
|
|
09-25-2007, 08:45 AM
|
#43
|
Montana Fan
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Crown Point
Posts: 382
M.O.C. #4726
|
Chuck and Carol you are my new hero's. If I can reach that mpg out of my 2007.5 chevy then I definitely made the corret choice. My 95 Ford 7.3 never saw anything close to this in mpg. I'm believing that the 3485 is a little heavier than mine so again it should work in my favor. All things considered. Thanks for the new update on mpg. Don't tell Dsprik. Dave's wanting to get a few more years of use before buying a new truck. -))))
Chuck
|
|
|
10-04-2007, 05:25 AM
|
#44
|
Seasoned Camper
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Emery
Posts: 93
M.O.C. #150
|
the new dodge we have is about the same as your ford, Stiles. only 6500 mi. now. 10 mpg. when towing. i am wondering if the new pollution equipment on the new trucks will effect the mileage. i too hear that as miles increase on truck the fuel mileage should increase. hope that will be true.
|
|
|
10-04-2007, 08:06 AM
|
#45
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Ridgeville
Posts: 20,229
M.O.C. #2839
|
Lets see..You are watching Tv at 2Am in the morning and a infomercial is on and a fast talking guy is saying that here we have this amazing device that will get you 2 maybe 3 MPG per gallon better than you are getting now and if you call this number during the program you purchase the device for the low, low price of $5,300.00..how fast do you reach for your checkbook..Well the device is called a 08 diesel motor and I got one...What a deal/////
|
|
|
10-04-2007, 03:47 PM
|
#46
|
New Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Glen Allen
Posts: 4
M.O.C. #7726
|
And I was thinking of trading my 01, 250, 7.3 next year... Think I will hold on a bit longer to see how the milage streches out. At 86k sounds like she's just thinking about settling in.
|
|
|
10-04-2007, 04:11 PM
|
#47
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Snohomish
Posts: 579
M.O.C. #5583
|
Mark,
I too was thinking of trading next year. But I sure don't like what I'm hearing about mileage. Need to get more input from those with a 3.73 rear end ratio on the new 6.4L engines. May be willing to give up a little mileage but not as much as I'm hearing. The 6.0's were supposed to get better mileage than the 7.3. What happened on the 6.4's? Or is everyone buying lower ratio rear ends that is causing the problem? All I want is more pin weight capability and bigger brakes other wise totally happy with my 2003 Ford F250 Lariat 7.3L, 3.7 RE. I got an average of slightly over 12 MPG going over and coming back over the Cascade Mountain pass - Stevens Pass recently pulling a fully provisioned 3400RLK. 7 miles of 6% grade West to EAST. I'm really surprised the new 6.4's are getting so much less. Somebody tell me the reports are wrong.
|
|
|
10-04-2007, 04:48 PM
|
#48
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Ridgeville
Posts: 20,229
M.O.C. #2839
|
I think it is to early to tell on the new 6.4L motor. Even over on the FTE (Ford truck Enthusiast forum) no one has racked up enough diesel miles to make a determination. These new Emission standards and new fuel standards will have a effect on MPG on all the new motors. Now that I have a Diesel of my very own I can poke fun at all the diesel myths, and wives tales that I have been hearing for the last 3 years..however this 08 Ford 6.4 is a brute and it seems to run better every week( even if it is noisy and stinks) I am using it as my daily driver trying to get hours on the motor and am doing 12 and 13 in my version of city driving (semi rural) and did 8.8 towing on the ind and Ohio Tpk.On a 22 mile run to camper world on I-480 and I-71 it did a respectable 15.6. we only have 54 hours on the motor.My 05 V-10 averaged @ 8.5MPG towing the 3400 anchor and If the 6.4 can do 2 or maybe 3 MPG better, and I think it will, I will be satisfied... The days of good MPG.. Big block gas or diesel are over..
|
|
|
10-05-2007, 08:28 AM
|
#49
|
Montana Fan
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: No Telling
Posts: 207
M.O.C. #7430
|
At this point in my life, I don't really care about mileage. Sure higher would be better, but as long as I can afford the truck/trailer, I can afford the fuel. I have a couple of friends on my boat dock with twin 502 CID V8s...complaining about the cost of fuel, and the GPH, not MPG. These trucks are economy models compared to big power boats...with twin 100 gallon tanks.
|
|
|
10-05-2007, 08:49 AM
|
#50
|
Montana Fan
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: morgans point
Posts: 403
M.O.C. #6292
|
After listening to you guys, I am glad I am putting in a 50 gal. aux. tank so I can at least get the new "Beast" between gas stations. I am averaging around 13.8 on the first 225 miles. I got excited once when the average was 14.3 on the open highway at 65 mph, but I if I get 11 or 12 mpg towing I will be a happy camper.
|
|
|
10-05-2007, 08:51 AM
|
#51
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sunshine
Posts: 1,445
M.O.C. #538
|
Eagle Man: It is funny to hear people talk about staying in $50.00 a night RV park and then complain about the price of fuel.
|
|
|
10-05-2007, 03:05 PM
|
#52
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Snohomish
Posts: 579
M.O.C. #5583
|
A couple comments. If I were to get 11 or 12 mpg pulling a full load with a 6.4 I wouldn't worry about it. But I'm hearing in the 8 to 9 mpg range. That's close to a 40% reduction. That will add up big time. $400 more to AZ and back. Roughly $1500 more a year. Small leaks sink big ships! :-) I wasn't aware there was such a thing as a $50 a night RV Park(Resort?). Highest we have ever paid is $32.00 a night and it wasn't worth it at all. We have stayed in $16 a night parks that were better.
I'm not sure carrying around an extra 400 lbs of fuel makes any sense either. Counter productive for good mileage. I was humored on our last trip back home. I thought I better fill up before we went over the Siskayou mtn passes between CA and OR. Paid 20 cents a gallon higher price than what the diesel fuel PRICE was at the peak. THAT WAS A NEW ONE ON ME.
|
|
|
10-05-2007, 03:53 PM
|
#53
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Ridgeville
Posts: 20,229
M.O.C. #2839
|
I read about those 8 to 9 mpg range on the new 6.4l on other forums and I am hesitant to believe that right now. We did 8.8 on a brand new motor on the ind and Ohio tpk and on a short 100 mile trip down to Southern , Ohio last week we did 9.6 and that included some fair grades. I am very light of foot , run 63/65 MPH and watch my RPM's.Driving skills have a lot to do with MPG..I think i will get in the 10's or better when we get 100 hours or so on the motor. We shall see.....
|
|
|
10-05-2007, 05:18 PM
|
#54
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Leona
Posts: 6,382
M.O.C. #2059
|
I have turned 4000 miles on my 2008 F350 PSD 4X4 w/4.30 RE. The mileage is improving. Got to make a 1500+ mile run from Akron, NY to Houston, TX towing. I will report on the results.
|
|
|
10-07-2007, 08:08 AM
|
#55
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Ridgeville
Posts: 20,229
M.O.C. #2839
|
We are encouraged by the performance of the 6.4 thus far. We had expected @ 2 or 3MP better than our 05 V-10 and not towing we are getting better than that with only 65 hours on the motor. It is not as quick from the start as the V-10 but it is no slouch..
|
|
|
10-13-2007, 08:34 AM
|
#56
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Oceanside
Posts: 20,028
M.O.C. #20
|
Rich, you probably don't want to hear this but about two weeks ago when we were making our emergency trip back to Kansas from Connecticut we towed that same highway you referenced. I-80 across Ohio and Indiana. We were driving faster than I normally do when towing because of the situation. The cruise was on 70 mph and I got 11.2 mpg on that stretch. It would have been better at a lower speed.
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Recent Threads |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|