InfoGraphic: Actual Fuel Economy of Diesel vs Gas Towing

[ROBERTSUNRUS]

[QUOTE=rp709;1507491] Try to build a piston powered airplane with a max takeoff weight of a million pounds (Airbus A 380). It can't be done. QUOTE]

Hi, "Spruce Goose."

[TavnAsh]

[QUOTE=ROBERTSUNRUS;1507602]

Originally Posted by rp709

Try to build a piston powered airplane with a max takeoff weight of a million pounds (Airbus A 380). It can't be done. QUOTE]

Hi, "Spruce Goose."

The Spruce Goose actually had a gross weight of 400,000 lbs . Still damn heavy!!!

[J. Morgan]

The spruce goose has diesel engines..

Trivia.....

[dmccoach]

Friend who is over-the-road trucker bought the hype from Ford on the towing fuel efficiency of new Ecoboost over his previous 5.4V8. He averages 8.5mpg with his quad cab 2013 F150 pulling a 4800lb trailer.... Extremely disappointed.
Take all the graphs above with grain of salt.

[ROBERTSUNRUS]

Originally Posted by dmccoach

Friend who is over-the-road trucker bought the hype from Ford on the towing fuel efficiency of new Ecoboost over his previous 5.4V8. He averages 8.5mpg with his quad cab 2013 F150 pulling a 4800lb trailer.... Extremely disappointed.
Take all the graphs above with grain of salt.

Hi, does your friend tow an Airstream or a white box trailer? If the same trailer, what mileage was he getting with his 5.4L? My 5.4L used to get 11.5 MPG, but now only gets 10.5 MPG while towing my Airstream. I'm still on the fence as to whether I should buy a Eco-Boost or an 5.0L F-150. Most reports that I have read show the Eco-Boost getting the same tow mileage, but much better going solo.

[J. Morgan]

If a person tows their trailer 10,000 miles a year, and gas costs $3.50 a gallon, the difference between 15 MPG and 10 MPG is $1,167.

Is it worth paying lots more initially for a couple of MPG?

[BoldAdventure]

Originally Posted by J. Morgan

If a person tows their trailer 10,000 miles a year, and gas costs $3.50 a gallon, the difference between 15 MPG and 10 MPG is $1,167.

Is it worth paying lots more initially for a couple of MPG?

Nope, and that's the same math I used to determine I wasn't buying a new diesel. The costs just don't compute unless you want to own it for at least 5 years before you start breaking even. And I knew buying used I'd probably buy another in 2yrs.

[Jim Flower]

Originally Posted by BAB

As Oscar Wilde said, "cynics know the price of everything, and the value of nothing." If you believe that....and I do to some extent, a "value proposition" comes down to some personal decisions that we make, and then deal with the consequences. I just returned from an 8,200 mile trip with my '14 Ram 2500 (6.7L Cummins), pulling my '12 28' Airstream Intl. I can tell you that the "Value" of the truck was demonstrated over and over -- not just climbing the Rockies, but also descending -- where the exhaust brake was so effective that there were a number of fairly steep grades where I didn't need to touch the brakes. Prior to the Ram, I towed with a 2012 Infinity QX56...a terrific tow vehicle (440 pounds of torque). What I didn't have with the Infinity was hauling space, or the safety margin afforded by the "grunt" of the Ram and the awesome braking capability. I know I am probably spending more $ with the diesel -- it was an $8,000 option -- but I feel the "VALUE" is there...and my recent month on the road seemed to validate that. Just speaking for myself, of course.

BAB,
And many others I would guess. Sometimes I buy stuff that makes no sense economically, like a Diesel or an Airstream, but it sure makes me happy and that's good enough I reckon. Jim


Sent from my iPad using Airstream Forums

[907airstream]

oh, the infamous F-150 ecoboost. I traded my 2006 f-350 with the dreaded 6.0 in on a 2012 f-150. It had the 5.0. I could only tow 7700 pounds based on the configuration I had with my truck. I went to the dealer in July of this year to get a f-150 ecoboost. I was in Alaska mind you, so I don't know the price in the lower 48, but the lowest model package for the ecoboost was 52,000 dollars. there is no way I am paying that much for a 1/2 ton pickup. I wound up getting a 2014 f-350 with the 6.7 for 46,000 out the door. I am incredibly happy with my decision. With that being said the interior of those f-150s is super nice.

[RVDreamer]

Originally Posted by BoldAdventure

Nope, and that's the same math I used to determine I wasn't buying a new diesel. The costs just don't compute unless you want to own it for at least 5 years before you start breaking even. And I knew buying used I'd probably buy another in 2yrs.

I don't understand this logic. Initial cost may be more but resale cost is also higher.

Assuming the Gas engine truck and the Diesel engine truck depreciate at the same rate. Then initial cost is really mute. Even if you hold on until both vehicles are of zero value the Diesel will outlive the Gas engine.

All that needs to be considered is increased maintenance cost and higher fuel cost vs. mileage savings.

[J. Morgan]

It is presumed that the diesel outlives the gas engine... And it is forgotten how much "routine" wear and tear costs to fix in a diesel.

[BoldAdventure]

Originally Posted by RVDreamer

I don't understand this logic. Initial cost may be more but resale cost is also higher.

Assuming the Gas engine truck and the Diesel engine truck depreciate at the same rate. Then initial cost is really mute. Even if you hold on until both vehicles are of zero value the Diesel will outlive the Gas engine.

All that needs to be considered is increased maintenance cost and higher fuel cost vs. mileage savings.

LOL, money spent is money spent. Just because one has greater resale doesn't mean I've saved money.

Think about your statement. If they both loose 10% value, then you've lost more money by spending more.

I pay 25,000 for gas, and I pay 35,000 for diesel.

So I lose $2500 on the gas and I lose $3500 on the diesel.

It's not mute.

Originally Posted by J. Morgan

It is presumed that the diesel outlives the gas engine... And it is forgotten how much "routine" wear and tear costs to fix in a diesel.

Yeah, $70 oil filters.

And to the value statement, I get that, 100%. But everyone's idea of value is different. Along with everyone's use of their vehicle.

For example, I switched to Mac because I find tremendous value in them. Even though the initial cost is greater than a PC.

I buy Redwing boats because they last 10yrs even though I could pay $30 and buy new boots every year.

We have a growing family. I might need a diesel in another 2yrs when baby #3 arrives. Right now, I don't, so the value in a diesel is not there for me yet.

See I look at both the value proposition and the economics. Has nothing to do with cynicism. I believe diesel is a good choice in it's place.

But please don't beat me over the head when mentioning when it's not a good value.

I'm glad my thread has stirred such debate.

[DKB_SATX]

Originally Posted by rp709

~~
A gas engine has to be wound out to make significant power at high elevations. Even if running a engine this hard doesn't wear it out faster than a diesel, it is not a very mechanically satisfying situation compared with the easy pulling of a turbo diesel.
~~

A naturally aspirated spark-ignition engine is definitely at a disadvantage at elevation, and even at sea level makes its power fairly high in the RPM range. Turbocharging and direct injection make a huge difference. I'm not saying that there aren't distinct performance benefits to a modern turbodiesel, just that such blanket statements are not always applicable.

[DKB_SATX]

Originally Posted by 907airstream

oh, the infamous F-150 ecoboost. I traded my 2006 f-350 with the dreaded 6.0 in on a 2012 f-150. It had the 5.0. I could only tow 7700 pounds based on the configuration I had with my truck. I went to the dealer in July of this year to get a f-150 ecoboost. I was in Alaska mind you, so I don't know the price in the lower 48, but the lowest model package for the ecoboost was 52,000 dollars. there is no way I am paying that much for a 1/2 ton pickup. I wound up getting a 2014 f-350 with the 6.7 for 46,000 out the door. I am incredibly happy with my decision. With that being said the interior of those f-150s is super nice.

Unless there's a tremendous Alaska premium, I have to think all the dealer had in stock were Platinums and Limiteds, trucks that are intended more as luxury transportation and their towing ability is secondary. $52k is about list for a Platinum 4x4 Ecoboost. You can chop $10k off that by choosing a Lariat instead, which is still quite a fancy truck.

[DKB_SATX]

Originally Posted by dmccoach

Friend who is over-the-road trucker bought the hype from Ford on the towing fuel efficiency of new Ecoboost over his previous 5.4V8. He averages 8.5mpg with his quad cab 2013 F150 pulling a 4800lb trailer.... Extremely disappointed.
Take all the graphs above with grain of salt.

How fast is he towing this trailer? And what was he getting from the 5.4L? Most of the Ecoboost owners in my unit are getting similar MPG to my 5.4L 3V with 3.55 gears when towing, but significantly better when deadheading. Oh, and their towing performance is VASTLY better, especially on grades and/or at altitude. I've never seen a Ford claim about mpg WHILE towing, on a new or old truck. They only want to talk about unladen MPG, because towing numbers are always so much lower. There's a point at which the laws of physics catch up.

[J. Morgan]

Bold, I am on your side, I own a couple of diesels right now, they are NOT more economical than their gas counterparts. Period.

[907airstream]

DKB that price-52,000- was for an XLT package ecoboost. Maybe they are much cheaper here in the lower 48. But not in Alaska. However the prevalence of diesel pickups in Alaska is astounding. I would say that it is easily 1-1 if not 2-1 diesel to gasser.

[RVDreamer]

Originally Posted by BoldAdventure

LOL, money spent is money spent. Just because one has greater resale doesn't mean I've saved money.

Well yes and no.

You have to think about the entire life of the investment, not just the initial cost.

Eventually you will cash out. At the end of your cash out the Diesel will return more money than the Gas, this is a fact. All you have to do is check KBB values on similarly equipped Gas and Diesel trucks. The Diesel is always higher. Also Diesels depreciate slower than Gas. I was only trying to simplify the math in my earlier comment.

On average Diesels have much more longevity than Gas. Diesels turn at a much lower RPM which means less wear over the same distance.

The main consideration is Maintenance costs vs Mileage costs.

I have owned many Diesels over the last 30 years and I have never had any work done other than oil changes,filters, batteries, and tires. I average about 40,000 miles a year. I come out way ahead with a Diesel vs Gas because I trade about every 4 - 5 years.

Of course my choice for diesel is more than just improved economy. I live at 8000 feet and routinely drive steep elevation changes. The improved power performance, towing performance, and braking performance over a similarly equipped gas truck is my primary concern.

[J. Morgan]

Here is my opinion as a current owner of gas and diesel tow vehicles

There are no doubt good reasons to own a diesel pickup, good economics ain't one of these reasons for the majority of folks who pull Airstreams.

And that is ok, not everything is about economics.

[Kingsmen 33]

Just drove 650 miles from North Carolina to FL towing a 25'Flying Cloud with a 2014 GMC, 5.3L gas engine. MIleage was 11.9 going average of 70mph.
My older Silverado got 11.0mpg. Big improvement with new engine.