Ford Trucks to Get 62 MPG?

[deerefan]

Sorry deerefan, but I have to say it: "Oh puh-leeze!" You want one good reason? What are you driving? What are your friends/family driving? I can find you a half dozen cars that get 40 mpg on the market today....why don't you own them? Because they sell like none of them because nobody wants them (until gas hits $4 like it has recently).

There is no secret beyond basic physics to get a lot better mileage. Lower weight. Lower aerodynamic drag (shape and frontal area). Lower rolling resistance (high pressure, narrow tires). Lower mechanical & standby losses in the drivetrain (like stop-start technology instead of idling, smaller engines, and better transmissions). Use more efficient engine technologies (diesels, turbos, direct injection, etc). And of course - much lower power/weight ratios. All of these cost money or create tradeoffs that people don't want to choose (simple fact - you REALLY need smaller vehicles with less power to get better mileage). Then there is the emissions bogey. In the US that ends up being a huge strike against diesels due to the EPA. That could be corrected by Congress or the EPA, but it is a reality right now.

If you really think there are vast conspiracies going on, then you haven't seen the collective intelligence of either the government or private industry in action.

But this is America and you are entitled to whatever opinion you like. Doesn't make it scientific or fact. Yes, I know this is a fruitless argument, but every now and then I have to say it...

And you can find well more than half a dozen that do not come anywhere near 40mpg. Yes, demand drives what manufacturers build. With the technology available right now, there is no reason a 1/2 ton truck with a 9k lb tow capacity cannot get 30mpg. There is no conspiracy. For instance, if you sold shoes that helped people run faster and someone else invented a shoe that could triple the speed they achieved with your shoe, would you not try to buy them out to keep yourself profitable? It is a very common business practice. That is exactly what oil companies are doing. If every vehicle on the road (non-commercial) was able to achieve a minimum of 30mpg, the oil companies would take a substantial blow to their record profits. It is cheaper for them to "buy" the idea or patent than to lose the revenue. It is perfectly legal to do this.

 

[Scooby074]

Trucks get the mileage that they get due mostly due to weight, not aerodynamics. A Z06 Corvette gets close to 30MPG hwy with close to 500HP..Why?...It weighs half what a truck does and can tow/haul virtually nothing.

The Corvette is lighter for sure, but its also quite streamlined. It also uses other techniques to improve mileage. Weight is an issue but there are savings that are available due to aerodynamic improvements.

For example, bear in mind these are heavy trucks, vehicles with some of the worse mileage. The improvements here are samples of whats possible ignoring weight and concentrating on aerodyynamics

The MAN concept S

"Thanks solely to its aerodynamic form, the MAN Concept S with an appropriately modified trailer uses up to 25 per cent less fuel than a comparable, conventional 40-tonne semitrailer tractor. At the same time, this fuel saving also means a reduction of up to 25 per cent in CO2 emission. The MAN Concept S manages to do all this while providing the same amount of space for its driver as he has always been used to and the same loading capacity as a conventional truck. 徹ur Concept S in conjunction with an aerodynamically optimised semitrailer is as streamlined as a modern passenger car. We proved it in the wind tunnel. The savings in consumption are absolutely realistic, says Holger Koos, head truck designer of MAN Nutzfahrzeuge."

Renault has one as well

With all this, the concept truck was designed to maximize its performances on long-distance freight hauling routes and can move 25 metric tons by burning 4.5 fewer liters per 100 km.

So you say... "Those are just Eurotrash concepts.. never see the light of day"

The NA companies have realized the improvements possible as well do to aerodynamics. Take the Cascadia a production truck. And thats with a mild body style... more aggressive designs could lead to greater savings. The savings are there, just somebody has to break the mold.

"The aerodynamic shape and features of the Cascadia, along with features like the ultra-efficient DD15 engine, can reduce fuel consumption by 10-20 percent, according to the EPA."

Even simple trailer skirts can improve mileage by 4-7% due to aerodynamic improvements

FleetSmart: Section 5

A redesign of the traditional pickup could lead to similar improvements.

 

[dstig1]

And you can find well more than half a dozen that do not come anywhere near 40mpg. Yes, demand drives what manufacturers build. With the technology available right now, there is no reason a 1/2 ton truck with a 9k lb tow capacity cannot get 30mpg. There is no conspiracy. For instance, if you sold shoes that helped people run faster and someone else invented a shoe that could triple the speed they achieved with your shoe, would you not try to buy them out to keep yourself profitable? It is a very common business practice. That is exactly what oil companies are doing. If every vehicle on the road (non-commercial) was able to achieve a minimum of 30mpg, the oil companies would take a substantial blow to their record profits. It is cheaper for them to "buy" the idea or patent than to lose the revenue. It is perfectly legal to do this.

Patents are issued by the government, and are publicly available. Find me one or more that have been bought by the oil companies that fit your assertion. I doubt you can find one.

The common business practice you state is actually to buy some better idea and implement it so you have a greater advantage than your competitors. Patents are not forever, and when you are in business you would be amazed how short they seem. I've seen several of our patents expire and it feels like they were just filed "yesterday." It hurts when it happens and it is a really good idea. Most ideas/patents are not really that ground-breaking, so when those rare events happen, you run hard with them. You don't hide them.

 

[mjncad]

If not, them give me one good reason why we do not have cars and trucks getting north of 40mpg.

There are some cars getting over 40MPG and I believe the VW Jetta TDI approaches 50MPG.

But to get a pickup to achieve 30 - 35 MPG, never mind the 62MPG in the article will probably take a radical change in powerplant, driveline, and aerodynamic design. At some point, and I suspect we are close to it, getting more blood from the internal combustion turnip is not going to happen. I kept hoping that hydrogen and/or fuel cells would be the answer; but it seems that technology has dropped off the radar...for now.

Guess I'm the typical "ugly American" to our non-US friends...So be it. My ancestors left Europe et.al. for a reason.

:thumbsup:

The MAN diesel aero-truck is an interesting concept; but freight companies won't buy into giving up that much volume in the trailer for an aerodynamic shape. COE's are big in Europe due to narrow streets and tight corners; but they are inherently the most inefficient design aerodynamically. Conventionals used here in the states have the possibility of being the most efficient aerodynamically.

The other issue with some of the designs from MAN and the guy below is that the trailer is matched to the tractor. If these aero-trucks made it to reality, how often would trailers stay with the tractors they are matched to?

Now if you want so see some wet dream designs for vehicles and other items, then check out the following link.

luigi colani - Google Search

 

[Diamondpilot]

And you can find well more than half a dozen that do not come anywhere near 40mpg. Yes, demand drives what manufacturers build. With the technology available right now, there is no reason a 1/2 ton truck with a 9k lb tow capacity cannot get 30mpg. There is no conspiracy. For instance, if you sold shoes that helped people run faster and someone else invented a shoe that could triple the speed they achieved with your shoe, would you not try to buy them out to keep yourself profitable? It is a very common business practice. That is exactly what oil companies are doing. If every vehicle on the road (non-commercial) was able to achieve a minimum of 30mpg, the oil companies would take a substantial blow to their record profits. It is cheaper for them to "buy" the idea or patent than to lose the revenue. It is perfectly legal to do this.

I do not buy this. If they sold 1/2 as much fuel they would simply raise the prices to keep profits where they need to be. End of the day they are in the fuel business to make a profit. I do not blame them for that.

There are cars that get 50mpg and many that get 40mpg but the problem is most of us do not want to drive them. Me included. Maybe someday we will be forced to but for now we drive gas guzzling trucks. Its the American way, good or bad.

Chris

 

[zmoz]

Please, somebody find me just ONE ACTUAL EXAMPLE of an oil company "buying out" a fuel saving idea. JUST ONE!

Ok. And how many electric cars are there vs gas guzzling trucks and suvs? They let a little go to save face.

That's because electric cars are new technology (especially the batteries) and because people like me wouldn't be caught dead driving one of those ugly things. The oil companies have NO SAY in how many they "let go". *sigh*

The fact of the matter is, the government says to the auto MFGs "your vehicle MUST get X MPG or else you can't sell it in the US". If there was ANY technology available to get significantly more mileage than what is currently available, they would **** sure be using it. They spend millions to engineer just a fraction of a MPG more out of their cars.

The biggest thing we should be doing in the US to save fuel is going to small diesel engines in passenger vehicles, like the rest of the world, but the EPA doesn't like that. They don't even use diesels in hybrid cars and that is just stupid, and it is entirely the EPA's fault.

PS - you know oil companies have investments in electric cars, electric companies, fuel saving research, and natural gas electric production too, right?

 

[zmoz]

Even simple trailer skirts can improve mileage by 4-7% due to aerodynamic improvements

FleetSmart: Section 5

A redesign of the traditional pickup could lead to similar improvements.

I recently went on a road trip and I'd say at least half the trucks I saw on the freeway had some sort of side skirt like that. WAY more than just a few years ago...

 

[Gobblin Tom]

All I know is that my 2010 Cheverlot Silverado 1500 Crew cab goes from an 8 cylinder to a 4 cylinder while going down the road, one of the reasons why I bought the Chevy over Ford was because of the gas mileage ratings on the window stickers. The chevy said 15-21mpg and the ford was around 14-18, I have not been lucky enough to get even the 15mpg in the chevy and I am very light on the pedal!!! My truck does not even have 7,000 miles on it in over a year. I believe when they do the testing for MPG it must be done on a flat surface somewhere.... If they where made to come to PA (Or anywhere else that has uneven terrain) and test their vehicles they would probably not sell the vehicles once people saw what they really got!!! I feel they should do real testing for the state you live in and post that on the windows for MPG...Oh yeah JMO...

 

[deerefan]

Please, somebody find me just ONE ACTUAL EXAMPLE of an oil company "buying out" a fuel saving idea. JUST ONE!


That's because electric cars are new technology (especially the batteries) and because people like me wouldn't be caught dead driving one of those ugly things. The oil companies have NO SAY in how many they "let go". *sigh*

The fact of the matter is, the government says to the auto MFGs "your vehicle MUST get X MPG or else you can't sell it in the US". If there was ANY technology available to get significantly more mileage than what is currently available, they would **** sure be using it. They spend millions to engineer just a fraction of a MPG more out of their cars.

The biggest thing we should be doing in the US to save fuel is going to small diesel engines in passenger vehicles, like the rest of the world, but the EPA doesn't like that. They don't even use diesels in hybrid cars and that is just stupid, and it is entirely the EPA's fault.

PS - you know oil companies have investments in electric cars, electric companies, fuel saving research, and natural gas electric production too, right?

If you read back in one of my prior posts, you will see that I do not disagree with you or other posters as to the best way to make a difference starts with what we drive. Car companies will match the demand. I am well aware of investments made by oil companies as I have worked alongside many execs and project managers building and desiging the necessary equipment to support petroleum based endeavors such as plastics, electric car and automobile accessory manufacturing, etc. There is a huge movement right now in the oil industry to build plants that get 25% of their power from solar. They would be foolish not to invest in the future.
My argument is quite simple. If a truck can be built to achieve 30+mpg and the american demand is for suv/truck, where is it? Why is it not here? We can write magazine articles for years on it, but can't produce it? That tells me there is something delaying the process, and since higher mileage leads to a decline in fuel used, who is penalized the greatest? The oil companies. I am one of the few people on this site that simply cannot buy a car. I don't have that luxury. I make my money and feed my family with my truck, thru farming and construction. Both my wife and I have careers that require towing and hauling. A car is completely out of the question. If they can find a way to increase the mpgs in trucks and actually get it to the lot, I will buy it. Until then, quit teasing hard working people with silly magazine articles and produce the thing. Who here would not buy a fullsize truck with a 9-10k tow capacity that gets 30mpg over one with the same capacities that gets 16?

 

[Gobblin Tom]

With the Natural Gas boom/rush here in PA, WV, OHIO and NY. I would vote to go with good ol natural gas vehicles and to keep everything here in the good old U.S.A. Wouldn't it be great to starve out all of the foreign oil!!!!!!