Ram Eco Diesel towing 3500# 1300 miles

[Diamondpilot]

So what is a 12' single axle 3500# trailer "lightly loaded"? Is that 3500 pound rated trailer with 1000 lbs or 2000 or 3500? ....plus the three big guys plus all their luggage ...........seems like an anecdote that leaves out details to help diss Ram . (a mission in life it seems) These trucks have their purpose and are solving the needs of many pickup truck drivers that do not need a heavy hauler . (a substantial demographic piece of the pie).

His guess is the total weight was 1000# of stuff. Say 1250# for the trailer and it's under 2500#.

One guy is 200, one 220, one 160 lbs.

Total luggage was 60# tops.

I flew it all home.

Chris

 

[DarkBlack]

Obviously we all have different standards of ethics here.
I for one, sure wouldn't start a new,independent thread, based on hearsay.

 

[dodge man]

If it's a box trailer it's the wind it catches, not the weight. The got 12 mpg some of the time or the total average? It just doesn't seem quite right.

 

[buickanddeere]

Yes, that's lower than I would have thought MPG wise. My friends and I hunt in Colorado. I have driven and pulled trailers there a number of times from Upstate South Caroline to past Gunnison, CO. My 2006 F-150 5.4 Triton pulled a tandem axle box trailer there with 4 wheelers, Rokons, and gear when it was brand new. Trailer weight about 7,500# total. I got 6 MPG out and 8 MPG back. That's the only time this truck was used ;-) In fact, I almost traded it while in Gunnison for Silverado 2500 diesel I was so mad. I only had 3,000 miles on the truck. It really struggled going up the continental divide. For camparison, my buddy's 2005 6.0 F-350 with same load a year earlier got about 11 MPG out and 13 back.

Last year, my buddy had a tuner put in the same truck. We didn't even use the highest setting possible due to worrying about getting too hot. The trip average was 16.5 this time.

After installing a tuner . The mileage calculation to believe is a dash mounted GPS and the volume stated by the fuel pump.
As previously stated . The retarded injection event, EGR and particulate filter regeneration have played havoc with diesel efficiency.

 

[sd455dan]

If it's a box trailer it's the wind it catches, not the weight. The got 12 mpg some of the time or the total average? It just doesn't seem quite right.

Wonder what an eco boost F150 would have gotten on the same trip with the same load??? :stirthepot: my money for mileage is still the eco diesel

Also- depending on the part of the Rockies driven, could severely impact the mileage of any brand truck...
And if the truck came from a rental place- what are the odds it was Actually completely full...

Heard of several people filling them till the gauge just touches the full mark and turning them back in-

Once when I rented a large U haul I re filled it to take it back the gauge was well beyond the full mark... not where it read when i picked it up.

 

[handirifle]

A box trailer or even many travel trailers, will regularly get worse mileage than pulling a 5th wheel, of similar size/weight, due to wind drag. One only has to look at the wind farings on top of 99% of the 18 wheelers to see what they think of a box trailers drag.

I hear much more positive about the Eco Diesel than negative. Personally (If I had a say in the matter) I would have gone with a 4.0-4.5L diesel in the 1/2 tons and a 3.0 in the smaller trucks. Jeepers are drooling hoping Chrysler will put the 3.0 in Jeeps Wranglers.

I compared my mileage by miles driven, vs gallons used, and it matches my truck's info center. A hand held GPS is not necessarily accurate either. I have several (for hunting) and they seldom match.

 

[Monster5601]

What they didn't like was the power. They averaged 12 mpg.

The Eco-Diesel is low on horsepower but nearly equal in torque to the 5.7L Hemi so I could see the power issue but the MPG is surprising. I get about the same MPG on my RAM 3500 Cummins pulling a 15K fiver.

I showed my son your post and he was surprised at the MPG numbers. Before he left Chrysler, he was on the Eco-diesel program as a calibration engineer and spent a great deal of time in the Colorado mountains, Utah deserts, upper Michigan's snow storms working on the engine's calibrations and DEF usage. His experiences showed pulling something that light (as in mini-van territory), the truck should have been north of 23 MPG average.

 

[RAS323]

12 mpg seems about right with a headwind and ah enclosed trailer. What was the mileage on the way back? What is the mileage with the same load with a gm 5.3 and a ford 5.0?

In general how is the mileage on the ecodiesel? Fuelly has an average of around 24mpg (91 vehicles between 23 and 25mpg).

I'm sure I said this before but my 93 cummins with 160hp and 400#/ft never seemed to lack power.

 

[Egon]

I'm sure I said this before but my 93 cummins with 160hp and 400#/ft never seemed to lack power.

Golly, my anemic 96 dodge with camper even passed a few F150 Eco boost's pulling smaller holiday trailers on the hills of Cape Breton!

 

[rd_macgregor]

When my wife was truck shopping last spring, I watched all the tfltruck Ike Gauntlet videos (among others). Their experience with the EcoDiesel was illuminating. It has lots of torque and was substantially easier on fuel, but just didn't have the horsepower to keep up with traffic under those, admitedly extreme, test conditions. TFLtruck - Hall of Ike Gauntlet - Truck News, Views and Real World Reviews
I was leaning toward the EcoBoost, but my wife didn't get that far; when she drove the Ram, she was satisfied.
The EcoDiesel is quiet, but a bit sluggish. When used as a passenger car it will average a bit over 12 l/100km on daily driving and just under 12 on a road trip. When hauling one horse in a two-horse trailer, mostly on the highway, it comes in about 13.2 l/100km. So this means we are getting (roughly) between 17 and 20 mpg for our typical uses. Note, however, that NONE of the highways here have a speed limit over 110 kph (in-province the max is 90 kph!), so we aren't facing that extra increment of wind resistance some of you would see at 70 or 75 mph.
We don't use the truck a lot, mostly for (infrequently) moving the horses, so, it still only has about 6000km on it.
I wonder how this truck's performance would have compared to the smaller EcoBoost?

Bob