Ford Trucks to Get 62 MPG?

[Diamondpilot]

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...

Yes, they all use the same best possible situation to do the testing. They want the best foot forward.

Ford has never bought into the hype of the cylinder shutdown, hybrids trucks, ect. They know it just does not work in the real world.

The 100 mpg carburetor of the 70's is also a farce. Simple physics and chemistry prove id does not work. Fuel only has so many BTU's per gallon. Efficient fuel delivery can only do so much.

Chris

 

[Scooby074]

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

I was going to post some Colani designs... Hes WAY out there:thumbsup:

On the truck / trailer thing.. a standard design would have to be created to allow interchange. Some have experimented with accordion bellows to fill the gap between truck and trailer. This allowed some flexibility in design. Another thing is much of the rear of the trailer is just fairing. It smooths out the air. When docking the fairing is collapsed to allow the truck to back to the dock. A company had created a rear fairing that was for retrofit onto a current generation trailer. Called the trailertail. Ive read 12% savings when combined with a side skirt. http://www.atdynamics.com/

Mercedes (i think) had a design for a trailer based on the Boxfish. Its capacity was equal to a "cube" and it was considerably more efficient aerodynamically. Unfortunately i cant find the link to the truck, but how about the car.

It was getting 70 MPG out of a 138 hp diesel engine. No fancy hybrids here, just mostly areo and engine. Mercedes-Benz Bionic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Diamondpilot]

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!!!!!!

It would be nice but not practical on a large scale. The current system to deal with NG is too small to support automobiles. Pipelines, stations, transport systems, ect ect would have to be built. No one wants to look long term, they want to look today.

Not that its NG but I have looked into a wind mill for my home. $60,000. I think not. It cost me $1500 last year in electricity for my 2400SQ FT home and 52x44 barn. Its all electric except for my propane heat which was $1600 last year. 30 years to repay.

I then looked into Geo-Thermal. $20,000 to install. 13 years to break even.

It just does not work to retrofit. Now starting from scratch it may but we have a system in place to support gas.

Chris

 

[Egon]

Maybe this can be an answer?:thumbsup:
http://i.treehugger.com/files/th_images/smart 4fun.jpg

 

[JasG]

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.

There is very little logic with this statement. We have also read about fusion, cold fusion, nuclear air planes, aglea fuel, the air car, turbine powered car and a whole host of "ideas" and waves of the future that never came to be. Is big oil buying them also? Are the men in black helicopters taking the ideas? I just don't buy that is what is happening.

If every idea I ever saw in Popular Mechanics came to be, we would have a totally different world today. Many of these stories are based on hype to create "buzz" around a company to drive stock prices or other reasons. In the 1970's and over the last few years a car company would dominate if they could increase milage over the others.

Many things die due to in the end they can not make it work or make it work and last, or get it down to a price people can or will pay. Honda, John Deere, Caterpillar, etc have all had many things that never came to market. Fuel cells is a good example, right now they can not get the price of the cells down to a point people will pay.

Oil goes into a lot more than just fuels, if gas demand was reduced they would find a market for it.

 

[deerefan]

There is very little logic with this statement. We have also read about fusion, cold fusion, nuclear air planes, aglea fuel, the air car, turbine powered car and a whole host of "ideas" and waves of the future that never came to be. Is big oil buying them also? Are the men in black helicopters taking the ideas? I just don't buy that is what is happening.

If every idea I ever saw in Popular Mechanics came to be, we would have a totally different world today. Many of these stories are based on hype to create "buzz" around a company to drive stock prices or other reasons. In the 1970's and over the last few years a car company would dominate if they could increase milage over the others.

Many things die due to in the end they can not make it work or make it work and last, or get it down to a price people can or will pay. Honda, John Deere, Caterpillar, etc have all had many things that never came to market. Fuel cells is a good example, right now they can not get the price of the cells down to a point people will pay.

Oil goes into a lot more than just fuels, if gas demand was reduced they would find a market for it.

I am simply following the trail and it seems to lead back to oil companies. Men in black helicopters? Give me a break. I am not some nut chasing aliens and conspiracy theories, just stating some observations I believe to have some validity. I am not saying I am 100% correct, no where in any of my posts did I say that. I just think it is an idea worth discussing. It is something that goes on in big business, so who is to say the oil companies do not have an influence on the auto manufacturers. Can it be proven they do or don't? I don't know, I am simply adding a piece to the discussion. As I stated before, I am well aware of how many things the petroleum industry is involved in. Fuel is just a piece of the pie, albeit a large one.

 

[Rancher Ed]

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. 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?

I believe it is the EPA more than the oil companies that are preventing it. A ~4L 4 cyl diesel in a half ton truck with ~250hp and 550 torque should be able to get 30mpg with no problem if the EPA would let it be build to the pre 2004 regs. They could even build it with a 200hp 500 torque setting for mileage and when you put it in tow haul it would bump up to 300hp and 600 torque.

I would also like to see a dual-cluch transmission designed for a diesel and the torque it make. The way these work it would also be very easy to have 2 reverses (a high and low) to go with your 6 or 8 forward gears which would be very nice. This would seem to me to offer the best mpg and should still be able to tow 10k.

Ed

 

[Diamondpilot]

I am simply following the trail and it seems to lead back to oil companies. Men in black helicopters? Give me a break. I am not some nut chasing aliens and conspiracy theories, just stating some observations I believe to have some validity. I am not saying I am 100% correct, no where in any of my posts did I say that. I just think it is an idea worth discussing. It is something that goes on in big business, so who is to say the oil companies do not have an influence on the auto manufacturers. Can it be proven they do or don't? I don't know, I am simply adding a piece to the discussion. As I stated before, I am well aware of how many things the petroleum industry is involved in. Fuel is just a piece of the pie, albeit a large one.

I agree with you to a point but they do it though pricing, not buying up magic carburetors. Every time gas hits a new high level the car companies start talking about new technology. To put a halt on that they simply lower the cost of fuel. This makes it un economical to peruse new technology. Its simple business. Run your competitor out of business.

Chris

 

[slowzuki]

Any aero car with a 30 hp motor will get 60 mpg, but no one in the US buys them. No magic.

The carb is not the secret to mpg, small underpowered cars on skinny tires are. You can fancy up a carb however you want, but it won't get 100 mpg do 0-60 in 8 s with a 6000 lb truck. Oil companies haven't bought anything up, all kinds of tech out there.

I know of a local guy here that put a 3 cylinder Perkins diesel forklift engine in a 1965 Mustang and regularly gets 60+ MPG. If he can do that in a backyard garage, just imagine what technology is already available but kept quiet by oil companies.

I remember a story in a Hot Rod magazine back in the 1980's that featured a Carburetor that produced around 100 MPG. I'm sure it was bought up by the oil companies as well.

 

[slowzuki]

Actually turbo's always improve an engines efficiency as long as the wastegate is closed. All they are doing is expanding the gases and stealing a little bit of heat that was getting wasted anyways. Its only a 1-5% gain, but hey, its an improvement. If you only install a turbo without reducing displacement, it won't help much. Ford did it right though.

same thing I was thinking.... and considering the F550 sitting in the driveway only gets 6mpg.... they have a LONG way to go..
The ECo-Boost truck is a farse also... since when did applying turbochargers to an engine make it ECO friendly....