F-150 Eco Boost Towing Vs Nissan Titan

[Diamondpilot]

So how many of those Ford and GM trucks getting 15-18mpg were 3/4 ton 4x4's like the Dodge you supposedly owned?
Just trying to keep your data honest...

Not a single one. But look at the weights of a 2003 Dodge 2500 gasser versus say a newer 1/2 ton and there is very little difference. And this newest model of the GM trucks will be built just as heavy.

I have been preaching this for years. The newer 1/2 tons are on par with the 3/4 ton gassers of 10 years ago if ordered properly and the weight shows it.

Chris

 

[Diamondpilot]

I have no problem admitting the Ecoboost has slightly better unloaded fuel mileage than todays competition. I also stand-by the fact that I'm not impressed by it either, it's a waste of technology and engineering when it's hardly any better than it's aging competition...

Do you listen to yourself talk?:confused2: This Eco Boost is in its first version and is already very impressive. The 5.3 GM, the weakest of the 5 1/2 liter range engines, has come a long long way from its introduction about 15 years ago to get to where it is today. Same thing with the Hemi. Same thing with the now shelved Ford 5.4L. It took all these engines some time to mature and some are still getting better.

I feel confident that the Eco Boost will be able to compete with the others stuff for 20 years and will probably be right on par with the little 1/2 ton diesels that are in the works.

Give it a chance instead of instantly writing it off.:confused2:

Chris

 

[Bird]

Thanks for your post.
I can only add that I drove a '06 Titan crew cab, with big tow package, just over 5000miles hauling a 7500lb enclosed cargo trailer and had a trip mileage of about 11.5-12mpg. This was from Maine to Alaska.

My last 4,000 mile trip to Alaska from Dallas (March, 1991) was in a 1989 Chevrolet dually with a 454 engine, 4.10 gearing, Gear Vendors overdrive, and about 10,000# of 32' fifth-wheel trailer, and I averaged about 5.5 mpg on that trip.:laughing: The first day, in the Texas panhandle, we had such a strong headwind that I couldn't exceed 50 mph in second over and wide open throttle.:laughing:

 

[jejeosborne]

Did that once. Ended up with a tank full of water!

Now I see why you hate saving money. I think that I would probably quit trying to save as well after that. You must have bad luck but it could've been worse.......that tank of water could have been a penny more than the one across the street.

 

[Diamondpilot]

My last 4,000 mile trip to Alaska from Dallas (March, 1991) was in a 1989 Chevrolet dually with a 454 engine, 4.10 gearing, Gear Vendors overdrive, and about 10,000# of 32' fifth-wheel trailer, and I averaged about 5.5 mpg on that trip.:laughing: The first day, in the Texas panhandle, we had such a strong headwind that I couldn't exceed 50 mph in second over and wide open throttle.:laughing:

Those old big block motors were pigs. I had a 454 3500 Dually GMC and it was about equal to today's 5L gas motors. I also had one in a boat and it drank gas but was better than the other motor available for that boat, a 5.7L 2 barrel.

Both mine were throttle body injected.

Chris

 

[jejeosborne]

Regarding all this mileage talk, one needs to consider the OTD price of the vehicles in question, no one brought that up. Just this year as previously mentioned I did buy a new truck, and I looked hard at Ford. I was not convinced their eco was for me, but that is another issue.

The eco window stickered as a $995 option when I was looking. I was interested in the 5.0 so that is where I spent most of my comparison time, but in the end I bought a Ram with a couple more options than the Ford for right about $4,000 less out the door. Throw in the eco option and tack on another $1,000 with tax.

So let's say $5,000 for round numbers.

Let's say that the eco gives 25% better over all economy than the Hemi. Doing the math for say 150,000 miles @ $4.00 per gallon means I still have about $500 left in my pocket. That does not take into account the 3.5% interest that I get on that account. Say it takes me 10 years to do that 150,000 miles and factor in that 3.5% interest and I should net another $500.

So in 150,000 miles of ownership using my real world numbers I am still $1000 ahead of the game with the Ram. Remeber you need to look at all aspects of buying and ownership, not just the difference in fuel mileage when considering cost of ownership.

I have only had one cup of coffee this morning so maybe my math is fuzzy. Using your 25% assumption, that would be like comparing 20 mpg vs 16 mpg. 150,000 miles at 20 mpg would burn 7500 gallons vs 9375 gallons at 16 mpg. A difference of -1875 gallons times $4.00 gas is $7500.

Your assumption also assumed gas would stay $4.00 for the next 10 years. If gas averaged $5.00, your extra fuel cost would rise to $9375. $6.00 the fuel cost saving would be $11250.

Again, one cup of coffee so please check my math.

 

[Groo]

I'm surprised the Ecoboost still did that well towing. I figured the numbers would get a whole lot closer than that with a good load.

I moved about 500 miles a couple years back. I did 2 trips towing the big trailer with a 1/2 ton 05 Avelanche, and the last (and heaviest) trip with the then fresh off the lot 09 V10 F-350 SWR. Unloaded and no trailer, there was about 5 MPG difference between these 2 (until I added a flatbed with headache rack). With an empty huge enclosed trailer, the Avalanche was 1-2 MPG better. loaded it was just under 1 MPG better, and that includes the heavier load (more than 3,000lbs heavier load including the snowmobile in the bed of the truck) and faster uphill interstate speeds and acceleration of the V-10. Heck, I even average 8mpg moving a mobile with that V-10. Usually once you get a big load on a truck, most engines average about the same fuel efficiency. I am truly impressed the Ecoboost is keeping its edge with a big trailer.

 

[Storm56]

I have only had one cup of coffee this morning so maybe my math is fuzzy. Using your 25% assumption, that would be like comparing 20 mpg vs 16 mpg. 150,000 miles at 20 mpg would burn 7500 gallons vs 9375 gallons at 16 mpg. A difference of -1875 gallons times $4.00 gas is $7500.

Your assumption also assumed gas would stay $4.00 for the next 10 years. If gas averaged $5.00, your extra fuel cost would rise to $9375. $6.00 the fuel cost saving would be $11250.

Again, one cup of coffee so please check my math.

Your correct - I meant 2.5 MPG not 25%! So at the figures I quoted using the 2.5 MPG it all adds up!

Thanks for catching my typo!

 

[rockshaft]

My last 4,000 mile trip to Alaska from Dallas (March, 1991) was in a 1989 Chevrolet dually with a 454 engine, 4.10 gearing, Gear Vendors overdrive, and about 10,000# of 32' fifth-wheel trailer, and I averaged about 5.5 mpg on that trip.:laughing: The first day, in the Texas panhandle, we had such a strong headwind that I couldn't exceed 50 mph in second over and wide open throttle.:laughing:

I'm sure that was a fun rig going down some of the steep grades on this route as well

Best unloaded mileage I can get out of my Titan is about 16mpg, if I nurse it super easy. I leave it parked under the carport as much as possible! I *do* appreciate it when I need to haul loads though. I haven't experienced any of the newer Ford/Chevy/Dodge, but when I looked at them in '06 I found the Titan had the kindest ride and a very comfortable cabin for me.

 

[jejeosborne]

Your correct - I meant 2.5 MPG not 25%! So at the figures I quoted using the 2.5 MPG it all adds up!

Thanks for catching my typo!

I will redo the math again then using 18 mpg and 15.5 mpg.
I come up with a savings of $5376 using $4.00 gas and $6720 using $5.00 gas.

Using 19 mpg and 16.5 mpg.
Savings of $4785 using $4.00 gas and $5981 using $5.00 gas.

Sounds like a wash to me in the end. Pick the one you like best because the ownership cost are roughly the same. I know someone will now jump in and say that the direct injection and turbos will go out before it reaches 150,000 miles which is speculative. I think the maintenance cost will be about the same.