Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-23-2013, 05:08 AM   #253
CLOUDSPLITTER "Tahawas"
 
ROBERT CROSS's Avatar

 
2003 25' Classic
Zanadude Nebula , WNY
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,153
Images: 1
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by JFScheck View Post
Adding my Weather Tech mudflaps this weekend after I get my ARE topper installed. Sure is a pretty truck, even when dirty...
GREAT looking rig John....enjoy.

White looks rite!!

Bob
__________________

__________________
PFC.....

“After all these years the reason I continue to love Thanksgiving.....I still sit at the kids table.”
RLC

Sandra wanted to go to Cleveland on vacation,
but I’m the Husband, so we went to Cleveland.
RLC
ROBERT CROSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2013, 12:41 PM   #254
Rivet Master
 
Gene's Avatar
 
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Grand Junction , Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by graysailor View Post
Some are getting outstanding fuel milage and others are not.
I've noticed that too. The big differences in mileage are when not towing—they seem to range from 17 to 25 mpg. When towing they are all in the 11-13 area depending on trailer weight and about the same as other, normally aspirated, 1/2 ton trucks. I haven't re-read all the posts and I'm sure there are outliers, but I think that is pretty much true.

Are they driving different versions of the EB that have a lot of gas eating options, weigh more or less or have different rear axle ratios? Is there a trick to driving these that changes gas mileage substantially? I don't understand how some people are getting around 40% better mileage than others. Do they need adjustments that some dealers don't know how to do? Are there problems with some of the computers in the trucks?

A good thing is that I haven't seen anything in this thread about direct injection problems. Some vehicles with direct injection have had valve problems.

Gene
__________________

__________________
Gene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2013, 01:18 PM   #255
Lost in America
 
mojo's Avatar
 
2015 27' FB International
2006 25' Safari FB SE
2004 19' International CCD
Oak Creek , Arizona
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,506
The difference in mileage varies with the drive train gearing and 4WD and 2WD. The problem the Ecoboost first experienced is with the charge air cooler and excessive moisture. I experienced this after driving from NO to El Paso in rain for two days. This problem has been random and has been corrected by installing a deflector plate to redirect moisture. Also reflashing the PCM. Had this done and all has been fine.

Have not heard anyting about valve problems on the Ford forums.

You won't find much information about it on the Airforums or the Toyota forums.
__________________
This is the strangest life I've ever known - J. Morrison

The Nest Egg - 2015 Airstream International Serenity 27FB
Silverado 2500HD Chevy Duramax Diesel

mojo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2013, 01:59 PM   #256
4 Rivet Member
 
2013 28' International
Bozeman , Montana
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 346
Images: 3
I'm on about my fourth tank of gas. First 3 tanks were all in the mid 13 MPG range. Mostly in town but seeing similar with highway driving. Not too impressive with no load and not towing. Part of the problem seems to be that I tend to drive it a touch fast on the highway. Yesterday, I went to pick up my Propride hitch and set the cruise around 71-72 mph. At that rate I was getting in the mid 16 range. I'm sure it will suck the gas with the Airstream in tow. BTW, the F150 is a crew cab with max tow.
__________________
HeadWest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2013, 02:10 PM   #257
3 Rivet Member
 
Ramble On's Avatar
 
2004 28' International CCD
rockwall , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 124
Images: 2
I've had my 2012 f 150 EB 4x4 supercrew w/ max tow package, 3.73 gears since September 2012, gas mileage is 23mpg highway, 12mpg towing 28'.
Drive any gas pickup over 65mph and the gas mileage will suffer significantly.
__________________
Ramble On is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2013, 04:50 PM   #258
Rivet Master
 
Gene's Avatar
 
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Grand Junction , Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,840
Thanks for the explanation mojo. Still seems like a big difference between versions. Glad to hear there are no reported valve problems anywhere. I think someone wrote a while ago the advertised mileage is for the most basic, stripped down version.

Ramble, I get the best gas mileage (aside from leaving it at home) at 45 with a Tundra, but other than driving winding and hilly roads, I can't drive that slowly. Those are pretty impressive mileage numbers for highway driving with all the options. What also intrigues me is the big difference between towing and not towing. Towing mileage is a little over 50% of not towing, but with our truck it is 65-70%.

Gene
__________________
Gene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2013, 05:51 PM   #259
Vintage Kin
 
slowmover's Avatar
 
Fort Worth , Texas
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,586
Images: 1
Pickup trucks are rollover prone. Made to carry a payload, so that is the trade-off. And geared to run the highway from 55-65/mph.

Over 60 is speeding when it comes to fuel efficiency and there is no realistic time savings on a trip of under 300-miles; if one is keep the vehicle 150k and establish habits to keep it new as long as possible then 60-62 works fine from all standpoints.

(I run my truck at 1,725-rpm @ 58-mph solo or towing, for example, this is how the CPM figures in my sig were deduced.)

The order for comparisons in re MPG, is:

1] Vehicle spec
2] Climate
3] Terrain
4] Driver skill

If one can sort these, then MPG comparisons might be made. Travel speeds in excess of 65-mph are just thrown out as meaningless.

.
__________________
1990 35' Silver Streak Sterling; 9k GVWR.
2004 DODGE Cummins 305/555; 6-manual; 9k GVWR.
Hensley Arrow. 9-cpm solo, 15-cpm towing
Sold: Silver Streak Model 3411
slowmover is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2013, 06:02 PM   #260
TinCan
 
graysailor's Avatar

 
2016 30' Classic
Apache Junction , Arizona
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 798
Good info here. I agree that not much to be gained by driving over 65. Little time is saved but a lot of fuel is consumed.
__________________
graysailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2013, 08:05 PM   #261
Rivet Master
 
1988 32' Excella
Robbinsville , New Jersey
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowmover View Post
Pickup trucks are rollover prone. Made to carry a payload, so that is the trade-off. And geared to run the highway from 55-65/mph.

Over 60 is speeding when it comes to fuel efficiency and there is no realistic time savings on a trip of under 300-miles; if one is keep the vehicle 150k and establish habits to keep it new as long as possible then 60-62 works fine from all standpoints.

(I run my truck at 1,725-rpm @ 58-mph solo or towing, for example, this is how the CPM figures in my sig were deduced.)

The order for comparisons in re MPG, is:

1] Vehicle spec
2] Climate
3] Terrain
4] Driver skill

If one can sort these, then MPG comparisons might be made. Travel speeds in excess of 65-mph are just thrown out as meaningless.

.
Sorry I have to disagree with #4)Driver skill, it should be Driving style.

Example: Nascar Spint Cup drivers are highly skilled but don't normally get as high as 5 MPG in a car while working.
__________________
Wazbro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2013, 09:01 PM   #262
3 Rivet Member
 
Dallas Center , Iowa
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 127
I wonder if the computer with the variety of settings of 5 minutes, 10 minutes, 15& 30 minutes to reset has anything to do with the different readings. Of course the rear axle, load, 4x4 and size of truck matters but my Ford Dealer told me that the only way and best way to identify mileage is by writing down the miles, record it at fill up and divide the gallons into the miles on refill. Old school? Yes! Most accurate. Yes. Do this for about 3 fill ups and you will know exactly what the mileage is.
__________________
Earthcreeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2013, 09:23 PM   #263
3 Rivet Member
 
Ramble On's Avatar
 
2004 28' International CCD
rockwall , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 124
Images: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene View Post
Thanks for the explanation mojo. Still seems like a big difference between versions. Glad to hear there are no reported valve problems anywhere. I think someone wrote a while ago the advertised mileage is for the most basic, stripped down version.

Ramble, I get the best gas mileage (aside from leaving it at home) at 45 with a Tundra, but other than driving winding and hilly roads, I can't drive that slowly. Those are pretty impressive mileage numbers for highway driving with all the options. What also intrigues me is the big difference between towing and not towing. Towing mileage is a little over 50% of not towing, but with our truck it is 65-70%.

Gene
I get the best mpg driving at 55-60 mph. The speed limit is 60 mph on my daily commute. I think 12-13 mpg is acceptable for a gas engine towing 7300 lbs. What does the Tundra get towing, and how much are you towing?
__________________
Ramble On is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2013, 09:50 AM   #264
Rivet Master
 
mefly2's Avatar
 
2015 25' FB Eddie Bauer
Western , ** Big Sky Country ** Montana
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,283
Quote:
Originally Posted by graysailor View Post
Lots of reviewing going on about the Eco Boost. I guess the jury is still out. Some are getting outstanding fuel milage and others are not. Still undecided myself. I just would hate to have to get a big diesel for everyday use.
Ahhhh, perhaps you should try it first... to each his/her own ... our diesel truck interior rivals that of our Corvette! There is a premium cost for fuel & lower city fuel economy, however (until warranty expires and it is re-piped). Where we live, the "big" (marginally larger/heavier than 1/2 ton) diesel makes good sense even as a daily driver.

Towing, we calculate better fuel economy than RambleOn and we really appreciate the tow/haul mode, torque, and compression braking when it comes to mountain passes ... which are negotiated driving any direction from where we live. We pulled with gas Fords for nearly 40 years and wouldn't go back at this point - fuel economy is only one consideration. We looked seriously at the EcoB, but then decided on another option. Locals around here are not getting EcoBoost fuel consumption figures any where close to those advertised or spouted on the internet... perhaps it is the altitude. YMMV
__________________
mefly2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2013, 11:15 AM   #265
Rivet Master
 
Gene's Avatar
 
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Grand Junction , Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,840
Ramble, we have towed a 25' FB (maximum wt. 7,300 lbs, but I don't think we load it that much) around 45,000 miles with the Tundra. Mileage ranges from 9.5 to 14—This reflects a variety of altitudes, wind, and speed. A 40 mph tailwind on a flat interstate is the best of all worlds, even at 65. The usual numbers are 10.5 to 12. This is slightly less than the reported numbers for the EB. We, like mefly2's diesel, have tow haul mode, lots of torque and engine breaking going downhill (but not exhaust braking which is maybe what he means).

The EB's mileage advantage appears to be without towing, though as has been noted, it varies a lot. Since most people use pickups like cars, this makes some sense. I don't know if the EB has the torque the 5+ liter gas engines with higher rear axle ratios have.

To gain the small towing advantage and the apparently small non-towing advantage with comparable trucks by buying a new truck is a money losing choice. By comparable I mean a Tundra with either the double or crew cab and 5.7 L. engine, 4 wd and tow package. I do not mean the regular cab with a small engine and 2 wd. Same for the EB which comes in a wide variety of versions.

Whether it is a car or truck, buying a new one for gas mileage alone, even with very significant differences, does not pay off until you are done* with the gas hog. Of all the expenses of motor vehicle ownership (maintenance and depreciation for this comparison), gas expenses are not too significant unless you drive scores and scores of thousands of miles a year.

Turbo and direct injection are one way to go and Ford has chosen that. More transmission gears are being worked on by Ford and GM (and others). Toyota has long had a dealer installed supercharger that can be installed on the smaller V8 and may get mileage like the EB, but Toyota doesn't promote this add on and it costs a lot. They don't seem to want to go this way. I don't follow the Tundra websites generally, but when I look around, it seems there's a lot of speculation that has been wrong in the past.

Every truck, at least those of less than 8,000 lbs., has to make significant improvements in mileage pretty fast. I hope Ford succeeds and everyone else does too. Trying different things is how you find out the best one or ones.

Gene

*Done doesn't mean: "I wanna a new truck now! I can't wait until this one has some miles on it".
__________________
Gene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2013, 12:52 PM   #266
Vintage Kin
 
slowmover's Avatar
 
Fort Worth , Texas
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,586
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wazbro View Post
Sorry I have to disagree with #4)Driver skill, it should be Driving style.

Example: Nascar Spint Cup drivers are highly skilled but don't normally get as high as 5 MPG in a car while working.
Skill really is the operative word when we speak of a given use of a vehicle, solo or combined. There are those who can do the exact same work with the exact same vehicle, but using less fuel. Same relative speed. This is from studies by big truck and engine manufacturers. The skill spread is a one-third lower amount of fuel burn from the worst professional driver to the best. Skill acquisition benefits any driver, new or old.

More on FE from this post I made a few days ago, and I've made others on the same subject. Having real-time feedback with a simple device and keeping a fuel log are big aids. Slowing down is the first step, the beginner step.

And, to get closer to the subject of EcoBoost fuel economy, the only real number is the average mpg (after one has sorted through the categories above). As it is difficult (how many keep records of all gallons over all miles? Almost none), sticking with EPA numbers is still the best gauge of comparison (as the SAE testing is the same).

Take the EPA highway number and deduct 30-40% for flatland Interstate at speeds of 60-mph for towing.

No matter the vehicle, this is a reliable rule-of-thumb. And has been since the RV magazines started reviewing rigs about 50-years ago.

.
__________________

__________________
1990 35' Silver Streak Sterling; 9k GVWR.
2004 DODGE Cummins 305/555; 6-manual; 9k GVWR.
Hensley Arrow. 9-cpm solo, 15-cpm towing
Sold: Silver Streak Model 3411
slowmover is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ford F150 3.5L Eco Boost tlcbuilder Tow Vehicles 601 05-19-2014 09:05 PM
Can a Ford Flex tow an Airstream Nigel Tow Vehicles 204 12-01-2013 07:47 PM
Questions - Ordering 2011 F150 Ecoboost KerryFO Tow Vehicles 46 11-03-2011 06:32 PM
ordering our next TV - 2011 F150 EcoBoost jm2 Tow Vehicles 20 03-31-2011 06:29 PM
Ford hitch 2.5" to 2" adapter hhendrix Hitches, Couplers & Balls 15 03-28-2011 09:32 PM


Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.