I need some data on gas milage for a Ford F-150 v8 5.4 liter gas 4x4 supercab with the big tires this data could possibly change my mind from buying an F-150 this month or getting a Z-71 Chevy 5.7 Please inform and be as acurate as possible after all its alot of money for any new truck and I need to spend it wisley I plan on driving the truck untill the wheels fall off so any reliability advice I would also appreciate thanks guys
when you put big tires on, you change engine performance quickly. i went to only 1 inch larger tires on my truck, and noticed a little difference. depends on how big the tires are. with factory tires, ford will probably give you 12-13, chevy will give 14-15, combined driving. better low end torque on chevy could make it more driveable with big tires. don't know as much on the 5.4, don't know anyone with that set up.
Which fuel you use can also make a difference. I have a 98 Chevy 1/2 ton Z71 4x4 ext cab with the 5.7. I got 15.1 highway with 87 octane and 15.9 highway with 92 octane with my first tank going 70-75 mph empty with 44 psi in the tires which they are rated for.
My next tank I drove like a mad man with quick starts and stops and pulled a 5,000 boat to the lake and back. Trying to get the worst mileage I could I got 10 mpg on 92 octane. I was pulling the boat 65 mph in 3rd gear, no overdrive.
I have two friends with the 5.4 Ford motor. One has a 4x4 pickup and the other has an Expedition 4x4. Both are disapointed with their gas mileage and wish they had the Chevy 5.7. The 5.4 seems to be getting 13-14 at best and under 8 at worst compared to 15.9 and 10 mpg I have been getting so far. I only have 1,000 miles on my truck so far. The people I know have owned Chevy pickups from 1989 to 1998 and they all are pleased with the 5.7. No major engine problems. I decided to get the 1998 instead of waiting for the new 1999 Silverado because the current Chevy is a proven product with an excellant reputation. If the 1999 Silverado's prove to be as good as they sound, I might buy one in a couple of years. But for now, I'm very happy with my purchase.
Made the first fuel up with the 99 F250 regular cab PSD, 3.73 rear and 235/85R16 A/T tires....15.1 mpg over 375 miles....I've really been taking advantage of the power and this is about 75% local, stop & go hard driving....taking a trip to Maine next weekend (approx 400 miles) with a boat in tow and expect the mileage to improve as I ease up on the pedal....will post again after the trip. --MikeF150
my '97 V-6, 5-speed, shortbed, standard cab F-150 returns 18 mpg without fail, highway or city. I'd expected better. Then again, Seattle *is* hilly ...
Which F250 do you have? The light duty or the superduty? 4x4 or 2x4? Which engine, I assume it is the 5.4? Which transmission? Whatever your setup, it sounds like you are getting great mileage.
In California we have to use oxyginated gas. Do you have to use the same stuff in your area?
Jetn: The 1996-1998 Chevy/GMC Vortec 5.7 motors have more power than the previous 5.7's but the pre 1996 5.7's get better mileage. My truck also has the electronic shift option and locking diff. My tires are Goodyear Wrangler 265/75/R16 and are inbetween aggressive offroad and highway tires. Skinnier highway only tires may yield better mileage. All these things seem to affect mileage.
Mikef150 has a SuperDuty (note the '99 year) and the powerstroke diesel motor (PSD). I'd say that the mileage is a bit low, but that depends on just how much he's been "taking advantage of the power" -- my '93 with 100K miles (non-turbo even) gets better than that (16mpg w/ the 4.10s city/hwy).
Putting in my order for a new F350 this week -- I was really hoping for more like 20 mpg though.
Your not alone. I was hoping to hear back numbers in the high teens for mileage but most everything I've read so far puts the numbers for these new Super Duty PS Diesels in the low teens. Sure hope that is not the case in the long haul. I could pick up a '97 PS Diesel for a third less than what the new ones are going for.
From what I have heard, the 4x4 Superduty height issue for fifth wheel towing has been addressed. There is some kind of package available that will lower the rear end of the truck. I don't know many details about the package. I think Ford developed the package. If that's the case, I wouldn't be surprised to see it offered as a "fifth wheel camper" option in the next model year. Unfortunately, it sounds like Ford was reactive in addressing this issue, rather than proactive.
They have a similar problem with truck campers. The cabs on the Superduty are too tall for slide-in truck campers. From what I understand, they may clear the cab, but there is very little room, so you will be hitting the cab on bumps. The RV manufaturers are developing platforms to put in the beds. I know Bigfoot has one in the works. I believe Lance has one already. However, I have heard mixed reviews on the Lance platform. The best cure so far also seems to be the easiest and least expensive: a couple of 2x6's and a piece of plywood. Once again, though, you have to question why Ford didn't figure this out before releasing the truck. They could have offered a "slide-in truck camper platform" option.
Since a lot of 3/4 and 1 ton pickup owners pull RVs or use truck campers, you sure would have thought that Ford would have made sure to work closely with RV manufacturers to ensure they were addressing those needs with the new design. I have, unfortunately, read of several people with fifth wheel trailers saying they are going to opt to buy the Dodge because of the 4x4 height issue. These are people who had every intention of buying a Ford. Personally, I never gave a second thought to buying anything other than the new Ford. I'll just make sure to have some plywood in the bed when I make the road trip to pick up my truck camper. Of course, I am boldly assuming that my truck will arrive some day.
You can already see the 5th wheel / gooseneck folk coming up with (and announcing) new models that will fit the larger Fords. Considering how many of the SDs Ford is selling (last I heard was ~175k so far THIS YEAR) I wouldn't be surprised if the camper folk joined in with new taller campers.
Info for a 1999 F-250 Super-Duty 2WD SuperCab Long bed with the V-10 and 4.30 rear... City = 13.2 mpg Highway = 16.3 mpg note: almost all the miles were driven without carrying a load.
Mr. Wonderful
P.S. After 9,000 miles still no problems or complaints.
Mrwonderful: Thats great mileage for a V10 with 4.30 gears. Do you have limited slip, manual or automatic, and how fast do you drive on the freeway to get 16.3 MPG? What grade gas do you use and what part of the country are you in? Thanks.
People with 5.4s have typically been reporting the same mileage (or slightly less) as the folks with the 6.8s. For an extra $200, I say go for the V10.
I'd certainly recommend the V-10 if you are going to be pulling your fifth wheel regularly. The V-10 will probably give you better gas mileage when towing a load that size than the 5.4 because the V-8 is going to have to work harder to pull the weight. As mentioned previously, it's been reported that the 5.4 and 6.8 are getting similar mpg when the trucks are not pulling or hauling anything.
The advantage of the bigger engines and lower axle ratios starts to show in improved mpg as you increase the load. Normally, the decision about what size engine and what axle ratio is based on how much you tend to tow or haul loads. The bigger engine and lower axle ratios may not be a good idea for you if much of your use is running empty with occasional towing. However, when it comes to gas engines in the Superduty, the V-10 appears to be a winner, whether empty or loaded.
A long time ago Kirkpama said it would take 80,000 miles for the cost difference to be made up for the diesel. Does anyone know the calculation? I'd like to use it to determine if the diesel is better or not for my area (fuel price, etc).
From Vegas to LA, about 285 miles mostly 80-85 MPH. The lead foot kid put about 75 miles moving a friend. (It never fails. "Oh I wouldn't buy a truck. Oh, I wouldn't ride in a truck. Dad, can I borrow your truck we're moving ......") The rest of the miles were a mix of LA traffic and LA Freeway at 65-70.
Just about every tank has been running in the 17 range. I think that the second tank dropped to about 15 MPG when I was having fun playing in traffic.
If you are worried about gas mileage, don't get a truck. A true truck lover wouldn't worry about a petty thing like gas mileage. I would be more concerned with performance and durability.
Oh, I don't know. When I'm spending $2,000 - $2,500 a year on anything, I like to know I'm not just throwing it away. If I can spend a little time and money now to save some later I'll do so.
Has anyone found better gas mileage from a certain brand of gas?
I have been using Chevron 87 in my 89 chevy (4.3 5speed 3.08) and average around 17 mpg. Recently I switched to arco 87 and now averaging 19 mpg. Any thoughts?
Everyone's talking about V-8s and V-10s, while here's me looking into the compact S-10/Sonoma truck class. (I do NOT haul big loads.) I'm looking forward to getting the *4.3 l Vortec V-6*, which I consider to be a big, powerful engine, which it IS, compared to the 2.2 l I-4 in my Sunfire. Truly, I am not worthy. A few things: any anecdotes on mileage in this size truck class? I'm thinking of getting 4WD in addition to the V-6; I'm leaning toward extended-cab also. True, I can read the figures on the Monroney sticker, but stories by real owners have more weight. Also, anyone know how much I COULD haul in such a truck? Or at least, how do I find out? Finally, just how many classes of truck size are there? I see the "compact" class: Sonoma, S-10, Ranger, Dakota, and the like. Then comes "full-size", right? Like the Chevy/GMC 1500 series and the Ford F-150. Then I've seen 2500- and even 3500-series -- is this what people refer to as "1/2-ton" and "3/4-ton" sizes, respectively? And what do the designations "C" and "K" mean? Sorry for all the questions; I'm just beginning to learn about pickups, and I have a LOT to learn. -- Best wishes for happy trucking to all!
Capacities may be found under 'specifications' on manufacturers websites or in the back of the glossy brochures available from your dealer.
Dakota and T100 really fall into a 'bridge' category between compact and fullsize, IMO. Toyota compares theirs to fullsize, and Dodge compares the Dakota to compact, but they're not really the same.
C and K are the GM designations for 2WD and 4WD, respectively, on their fullsize trucks.
Welcome to truck life -- you won't go back (really).
The Dakota is actually called a midsize, whereas the Ranger, for example is called a compact.
When you're looking in the specs area of the manufacturer's website, there are four terms that you will probably be most concerned with:
GVWR - The Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) is the weight of your truck, all your gear and all of your occupants including yourself. The GVWR is the weight that you should not exceed. GVWR has nothing to do with the amount you can tow. It has to do with how much weight you can load into the bed and the cab.
Payload - Basically, the payload is you, your passengers, and your gear. However, make sure to read the fine print. Sometimes, the manufacturer has already factored in your weight and possibly the weight of some passengers, so the indicated payload may reflect how much gear you can haul in addition to you and your passengers. Once again, this figure has nothing to do with towing.
Trailer/tow limit - This is the maximum weight trailer you can tow.
GCWR - The Gross Combined Weight (GCW) is the weight of your whole rig: truck and trailer. The GCWR is the weight that should not be exceeded. If you, your truck, your gear,and your passengers weigh 7,000 pounds and you are towing a 5,000 pound trailer, your GCW is 12,000 pounds. If this exceeds your GCWR, then you are over your limit. This can happen even if you are under your GVWR and your trailer/tow weight, which is why they provide this figure in addition to those two figures.
One other thing to keep in mind. Although I said that the GVWR does not have anything to do with the max weight of the trailer you can tow, the weight of the trailer does need to be considered when figuring what your GVW is. Since the trailer does hitch to the bumper, it does add weight to the bed. This is called the tongue weight and it needs to be added to your GVW when trying to figure out how close you are to your GVWR. People on this site have indicated that 10% of the trailer weight is a good figure to use to calculate the tongue weight. So, if you are towing a 5,000 pound trailer, your tongue weight would be 500 pounds. This amount should be added to your GVW to see if you are exceeding your GVWR.
adding to Brutus's well-stated Truck Terms 101, here's one that has a lot less meaning than those he stated, but is the source of incredible confusion:
GAWR - Gross Axle Weight Rating - extremely deceptive. It refers to the maximum amount of weight that the axle can safely support on its own, taking into account axle/spring/suspension strength and tire load rating. They will almost always add up to more than the GVWR. It's usd more as a safety margin than anything else.
For example, my Ram 3500 Club 4x4 has a GVWR of 11,000 pounds. The front GAWR is 4850, the rear GAWR is 7500, which equals 12,350. Where did the 1350 pounds go, you may ask. It never was there. With me and a full load of diesel, my truck weighs approx 4100 up front and 2900 in back. I can add 4600 pounds of junk out back, right? Nope - the truck itself (including the most important load carrying factor - the frame) can only handle 11,000 pounds regardless of where that weight is. My payload is roughly only 4000 more pounds. The extra weight rating of the axles is just to insure that I don't collapse the suspension in a max load situation.
Clarification, i think. . . The tongue weight is recommended to be 10% on a tow behind. You can stack things in there is such a way to grossly be "unbalanced" which is not a good thing.
Weight transfer hitches (e-z-lift) make things a lot more interesting to figure.
These designations of 1/2, 3/4 and 1 ton ... what exactly do they to stand for other than corresponding to the model numbers of Ford, Chevy and Dodge? For example in a 3/4 ton truck what is the 1,500 lbs? Would both a F-250 LD and a F-250 SD be 3/4 ton trucks or do the ton numbers simply not mean what they once did with all of the available models these days?
mikec13, The tonnage rating, originally, way back when... was supposed to be the weight of water that could be placed in the bed of the truck safely. (Assuming that the box was water tight.) I think that that definition lasted about 15 minutes and has been corrupted ever since. Once I had a Toyota sales man tell me that their compact truck at a full ton rating could cary more than a big three full size half ton. I did some investigation after that conversation.
BTW and IMHO It appears that the big three have different rating philosophies when it comes to load capacity. Dodge appears to tell it like it is. Carry a full load but don't bounce off curbs at 50 MPH. GM seems to subtract out a fudge factor. Ford appears to be the most conservative of all. The frame in a Dodge DRW was about the same as my '92 F-250 HD and my neighbor's C1500 appeared to be lighter. I know that the frame of my '99 SD appears to be more robust than the '92.
Maybe what we should do is to look at the space between the cab and box. If we see one that is narrower at the top of the bed than the bottom report it here as to make model and year. It is a VERY unscientific survey but it may give a feel for real GVWR and manufacturer speak. ??????? Rich
Good point about the weight restrictions being determined by the manufacturers. There is no independent rating agency that determines these figures. The manufacturers obvoiusly take potential warranty issues into consideration when they determine their weight restrictions.
With this mind, I have a question. From what I've heard, the Dodge 1 ton SRW has a GVWR of 11,000 pounds. The Ford 1 ton Superduty SRW has a GVWR of 9,900. If you go with the Ford 1 ton Superduty DRW, the GVWR increases to 11,200. Is the Dodge SRW really capable of handling 1,100 pounds more gross vehicle weight than the Ford?
Mikec13,
The suspension is beefed up on the F-250 SD (formerly called the F-250 Heavy Duty) compared to the F-250LD, so the weight restrictions are different. I know that Ford has their 98/99 trailer/tow guidelines on the web for all of their trucks, even the minivans. If you are shopping for a truck and have an intended use for the vehicle or expect to have an intended use for the vehicle, I'd spend some time studying the weight restrictions to ensure that you get a truck that will do the job.
There is no 1-ton Dodge SRW. All 3500s are DRW. And only the 4x4 Quad is 11,000 - the rest are 10,500. Ford has a nice little niche truck with the 9900 F350 SRW. But of course, Ford should renumber all their trucks to this anyway to show true weight rating:
Current name Accurate name F150 F150 F250 LD F200 F250 SD F250 F350 SRW F300 F350 DRW F350
I think I'm catching on, if slowly. For instance, my S-10 will weigh 3740 lb (according to Chevy web site), with a GVWR of 5150 lb. This leaves a difference of 1410 lb, which is enough for me, one passenger, and about 1000 lb of gear. As long as I bear this in mind, and don't exceed the towing capacity of 5500 lb, I should be all right. How am I doing? (These numbers must be laughable to all you 1-ton drivers. )
It sounds like you have it down. As I mentioned, make sure that the 3,740 pounds is clearly identified as the truck weight. I know that Ford actually provides an available payload amount for each vehicle. However, if you subtract the available payload from the GVWR, you do not get the weight of the truck because Ford has already accounted for a 150 pound individual to be in each seat.
No need to be concerned about the reaction of the full size truck crowd. I think you will find a general consensus that there is no need to buy more truck than you need or expect to need during the period you plan to own the truck, unless you just prefer having a larger truck. Besides, you'll get the last laugh as you're passing by us at the gas station.
Where do you see that Ford is making a 150 lb adjustment? I've looked at the fine print in a brochure for my Ranger as well as the Ford web site and see nothing about this. If there is something to getting curb weight other than just subtracting payload from the GVWR on the door sticker, Ford is giving no indication that I can see.
I THINK THIS CONFERENCE IS THE BEST PLACE FOR ME TO JUMP IN. I'VE GOT A 99 F350,CC,LWB,4X2,SRW,3.73 L/S,6 SPD MAN. I'VE GOT 4000 MILIES ON IT AND GETTING 23 MPG, HWY MILES AVG 60-65 MPH. ALSO PULLED 5600LB TRAILER AROUND ATLANTA AND WAS ABLE TO START OFF IN 2ND GEAR AND COULD HARDLY TELL IT WAS BACK THERE. THE AVG MPG DISPLAY IS AT 21.8 AND HAS BEEN INCREASING 1/10 EVERY 100 MILES. WE'RE PAYING .82 A GAL FOR DIESEL IN ATLANTA. THE ONLY DRAWBACK I'VE FOUND WITH THIS TRUCK IS THE DESIGN OF THE GAS TANK NECK. IT KEEPS KICKING OFF FOR THE LAST 2 GALS BECAUSE OF THE FOAM FROM THE DIESEL. OTHER THAN THAT , I LOVE THE TRUCK AND GET A LOT OF COMPLIMENTS FROM STRANGERS.
Sorry for the confusion. I just went to the Ford site and couldn't find any trailer tow info on the Ranger. The only detailed tow info. I found was on the Superduty. I know I've read trailering info on the Ranger before. I just don't know where. The website where I found the 1998/99 Ford Trailer/Tow limits was at:
Even at this site, I could not find any info on the Ranger. They had a little info on the Windstar towing limits, but not the Ranger. They had detailed info on the F-Series. The place I found the reference to the 150 pound allotment was in the Slide-in camper area. It says:
"Cargo weight rating shown in the chart is the maximum allowable, assuming the weight of a base vehicle with the required camper option and a passenger (150 lbs per) at each available seating position".
If the payload figures you are looking at don't have this notation, then it likely doesn't apply. It sounds like you can subtract the payload from the GVWR on the website you are looking at and get the vehicle weight. Sorry for any confusion.
One thing that I found to be interesting was that the numbers on the 1998/99 trailer guide at the Meadowlands website didn't all match the ones at the Ford website for the Superduty. For example, with the F-350 DRW 4x4 4.30, both listed the GCWR as 20,000 pounds, but the Meadowland site showed the max trailer weight to be 10,000, while the Ford site indicated it was 13,600. Maybe I just read it wrong.
That makes sense. I was looking at the conventional towing limits on the Meadowland Ford site. I bet if I would have gone into the fifth wheel section, I would find the same numbers I found at the Ford site. I think the towing guide on the Meadowland Ford site is an official Ford towing guide. That's why I was confused when I saw the different numbers.
I see now that we were looking at tables designed for different purposes. You were looking at one designed to home in on the weight of a slide-in camper. I was looking at the sales brochure and Ford web site at one made to show the impact of a payload package option.
Is it just my impression, or is this the most mature well educated discussion group of all? After reading the last few posts in this thread (and most others in "Pickups"), it seems that rarely is there any bickering. When someone says something, they usually have some basis for saying it, not just opinion. Yet, if they are countered with facts, everyone accepts the facts and seems happy and continues on. There doesn't seem to be any attitude involving pride in being wrong. I follow a lot of discussions in "Pickups", "Coupes", "Sedans", "Convertibles", and "SUVs" but have never seen the maturity/professionalism like that that I see in "Pickups". Sorry for getting off subject, but I just came from a "Coupes" bickering discussion and reading the posts here was a breath of fresh air.
You may now return to your regularly scheduled postings.
After I got home, I actually found the printout of the web page you referenced. I had printed it out a while back when someone on another website asked a question about Ranger towing. I knew I had seen it before. I don't know why I couldn't find it this morning when I was in the Ford website.
You'll notice that the weight of the options decreases your towing capacity. The 4wd has a tow limit that is less than the 2wd. The Supercab has a tow limit that is less than the regular cab. These options add weight to the truck, which takes away an equal amount of our towing capacity.
At first glance, it will look like the 4.0L Ranger with the 3.55 can tow more than the 4.0L Ranger with the 3.73. However, a closer look shows that the 3.73 is a 4wd and the 3.55 is a 2wd. It's the 2wd vs 4wd that reduces the towing capacity, not the axle ratio.
Cobra98,
If you really want to see some bickering, take a look in the Smart Shoppers conference under a topic called "Salesmen are people too". I got caught up in it for a while, but finally quit participating over a month ago. Those salesmen live in their own world, although I will admit that some of the anti-salesmen were pretty rude too.
You are SO right, Brutus. And I was just thinking the VERY same thing as you, Cobra98, as I came here from the Smart Shoppers' conference. If the Pickups conference is indicative of what truck owners are like, then I'll be proud to be one as soon as possible! -- As for the "Salesmen are People Too" topic, can you believe I was stupid enough yesterday to suggest that holdback is MY money rather than the dealer's? Salesmen whining, "Are YOU going to pay our electric bill?" Why bother responding? By the way, I test-drove a Sonoma today, the leftover '97 I mentioned somewhere. Drives very nicely; in fact, I didn't notice any significant difference between driving the pickup and driving a Jimmy. If it were a '98 and any other color, I'd consider it!
Several. Check the 'show all resposes' link here and in the F SuperDuty groups for more information than you probably want :-) Seems to be running around 12.5 mpg combined city and highway.
cobra98 -- thanks for the kind words. I have to agree, the people here in the Pickups conference are among the best-behaved, and also most knowledgeable, of any forum, either here at Edmunuds or just about anywhere.
Of course, I like to take all the credit for that ;-)
Comments
If I remember right, I got about 12 mpg with my inline 6 in an '86 F250, and my '90 F250 with a 302 V-8 got 10 mpg.
My next tank I drove like a mad man with quick starts and stops and pulled a 5,000 boat to the lake and back. Trying to get the worst mileage I could I got 10 mpg on 92 octane. I was pulling the boat 65 mph in 3rd gear, no overdrive.
I have two friends with the 5.4 Ford motor. One has a 4x4 pickup and the other has an Expedition 4x4. Both are disapointed with their gas mileage and wish they had the Chevy 5.7. The 5.4 seems to be getting 13-14 at best and under 8 at worst compared to 15.9 and 10 mpg I have been getting so far. I only have 1,000 miles on my truck so far. The people I know have owned Chevy pickups from 1989 to 1998 and they all are pleased with the 5.7. No major engine problems. I decided to get the 1998 instead of waiting for the new 1999 Silverado because the current Chevy is a proven product with an excellant reputation. If the 1999 Silverado's prove to be as good as they sound, I might buy one in a couple of years. But for now, I'm very happy with my purchase.
--MikeF150
Which F250 do you have? The light duty or the superduty? 4x4 or 2x4? Which engine, I assume it is the 5.4? Which transmission? Whatever your setup, it sounds like you are getting great mileage.
In California we have to use oxyginated gas. Do you have to use the same stuff in your area?
Jetn: The 1996-1998 Chevy/GMC Vortec 5.7 motors have more power than the previous 5.7's but the pre 1996 5.7's get better mileage. My truck also has the electronic shift option and locking diff. My tires are Goodyear Wrangler 265/75/R16 and are inbetween aggressive offroad and highway tires. Skinnier highway only tires may yield better mileage. All these things seem to affect mileage.
Putting in my order for a new F350 this week -- I was really hoping for more like 20 mpg though.
Your not alone. I was hoping to hear back numbers in the high teens for mileage but most everything I've read so far puts the numbers for these new Super Duty PS Diesels in the low teens. Sure hope that is not the case in the long haul. I could pick up a '97 PS Diesel for a third less than what the new ones are going for.
They have a similar problem with truck campers. The cabs on the Superduty are too tall for slide-in truck campers. From what I understand, they may clear the cab, but there is very little room, so you will be hitting the cab on bumps. The RV manufaturers are developing platforms to put in the beds. I know Bigfoot has one in the works. I believe Lance has one already. However, I have heard mixed reviews on the Lance platform. The best cure so far also seems to be the easiest and least expensive: a couple of 2x6's and a piece of plywood. Once again, though, you have to question why Ford didn't figure this out before releasing the truck. They could have offered a "slide-in truck camper platform" option.
Since a lot of 3/4 and 1 ton pickup owners pull RVs or use truck campers, you sure would have thought that Ford would have made sure to work closely with RV manufacturers to ensure they were addressing those needs with the new design. I have, unfortunately, read of several people with fifth wheel trailers saying they are going to opt to buy the Dodge because of the 4x4 height issue. These are people who had every intention of buying a Ford. Personally, I never gave a second thought to buying anything other than the new Ford. I'll just make sure to have some plywood in the bed when I make the road trip to pick up my truck camper. Of course, I am boldly assuming that my truck will arrive some day.
City = 13.2 mpg Highway = 16.3 mpg
note: almost all the miles were driven without carrying a load.
Mr. Wonderful
P.S. After 9,000 miles still no problems or complaints.
The advantage of the bigger engines and lower axle ratios starts to show in improved mpg as you increase the load. Normally, the decision about what size engine and what axle ratio is based on how much you tend to tow or haul loads. The bigger engine and lower axle ratios may not be a good idea for you if much of your use is running empty with occasional towing. However, when it comes to gas engines in the Superduty, the V-10 appears to be a winner, whether empty or loaded.
Thanks,
Ryan
17.2 MPG on the PSD '99 F-250 4x2 SD SC.
From Vegas to LA, about 285 miles mostly 80-85 MPH. The lead foot kid put about 75 miles moving a friend. (It never fails. "Oh I wouldn't buy a truck. Oh, I wouldn't ride in a truck. Dad, can I borrow your truck we're moving ......") The rest of the miles were a mix of LA traffic and LA Freeway at 65-70.
Just about every tank has been running in the 17 range. I think that the second tank dropped to about 15 MPG when I was having fun playing in traffic.
Rich
If you are worried about gas mileage, don't get a truck. A true truck lover wouldn't worry about a petty thing like gas mileage. I would be more concerned with performance and durability.
Sorry for the delay in responding to your information request (#120). Data as follows:
Limited slip / auto transmission / 60 to 65 mph on these flat Florida turnpike roads.
Fuel is regular grade unleaded, usually EXXON.
Hope this helps you out.
I have been using Chevron 87 in my 89 chevy (4.3 5speed 3.08) and average around 17 mpg. Recently I switched to arco 87 and now averaging 19 mpg. Any thoughts?
A few things: any anecdotes on mileage in this size truck class? I'm thinking of getting 4WD in addition to the V-6; I'm leaning toward extended-cab also. True, I can read the figures on the Monroney sticker, but stories by real owners have more weight.
Also, anyone know how much I COULD haul in such a truck? Or at least, how do I find out?
Finally, just how many classes of truck size are there? I see the "compact" class: Sonoma, S-10, Ranger, Dakota, and the like. Then comes "full-size", right? Like the Chevy/GMC 1500 series and the Ford F-150. Then I've seen 2500- and even 3500-series -- is this what people refer to as "1/2-ton" and "3/4-ton" sizes, respectively? And what do the designations "C" and "K" mean? Sorry for all the questions; I'm just beginning to learn about pickups, and I have a LOT to learn. -- Best wishes for happy trucking to all!
Half ton: F-150 Dodge/Chevy/GMC 1500
3/4 ton: F-250 (etc)
1 ton: F-350
Capacities may be found under 'specifications' on manufacturers websites or in the back of the glossy brochures available from your dealer.
Dakota and T100 really fall into a 'bridge' category between compact and fullsize, IMO. Toyota compares theirs to fullsize, and Dodge compares the Dakota to compact, but they're not really the same.
C and K are the GM designations for 2WD and 4WD, respectively, on their fullsize trucks.
Welcome to truck life -- you won't go back (really).
When you're looking in the specs area of the manufacturer's website, there are four terms that you will probably be most concerned with:
GVWR - The Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) is the weight of your truck, all your gear and all of your occupants including yourself. The GVWR is the weight that you should not exceed. GVWR has nothing to do with the amount you can tow. It has to do with how much weight you can load into the bed and the cab.
Payload - Basically, the payload is you, your passengers, and your gear. However, make sure to read the fine print. Sometimes, the manufacturer has already factored in your weight and possibly the weight of some passengers, so the indicated payload may reflect how much gear you can haul in addition to you and your passengers. Once again, this figure has nothing to do with towing.
Trailer/tow limit - This is the maximum weight trailer you can tow.
GCWR - The Gross Combined Weight (GCW) is the weight of your whole rig: truck and trailer. The GCWR is the weight that should not be exceeded. If you, your truck, your gear,and your passengers weigh 7,000 pounds and you are towing a 5,000 pound trailer, your GCW is 12,000 pounds. If this exceeds your GCWR, then you are over your limit. This can happen even if you are under your GVWR and your trailer/tow weight, which is why they provide this figure in addition to those two figures.
One other thing to keep in mind. Although I said that the GVWR does not have anything to do with the max weight of the trailer you can tow, the weight of the trailer does need to be considered when figuring what your GVW is. Since the trailer does hitch to the bumper, it does add weight to the bed. This is called the tongue weight and it needs to be added to your GVW when trying to figure out how close you are to your GVWR. People on this site have indicated that 10% of the trailer weight is a good figure to use to calculate the tongue weight. So, if you are towing a 5,000 pound trailer, your tongue weight would be 500 pounds. This amount should be added to your GVW to see if you are exceeding your GVWR.
GAWR - Gross Axle Weight Rating - extremely deceptive. It refers to the maximum amount of weight that the axle can safely support on its own, taking into account axle/spring/suspension strength and tire load rating. They will almost always add up to more than the GVWR. It's usd more as a safety margin than anything else.
For example, my Ram 3500 Club 4x4 has a GVWR of 11,000 pounds. The front GAWR is 4850, the rear GAWR is 7500, which equals 12,350. Where did the 1350 pounds go, you may ask. It never was there.
With me and a full load of diesel, my truck weighs approx 4100 up front and 2900 in back. I can add 4600 pounds of junk out back, right? Nope - the truck itself (including the most important load carrying factor - the frame) can only handle 11,000 pounds regardless of where that weight is. My payload is roughly only 4000 more pounds. The extra weight rating of the axles is just to insure that I don't collapse the suspension in a max load situation.
The tongue weight is recommended to be 10% on a tow behind. You can stack things in there is such a way to grossly be "unbalanced" which is not a good thing.
Weight transfer hitches (e-z-lift) make things a lot more interesting to figure.
The tonnage rating, originally, way back when...
was supposed to be the weight of water that could be placed in the bed of the truck safely. (Assuming that the box was water tight.)
I think that that definition lasted about 15 minutes and has been corrupted ever since. Once I had a Toyota sales man tell me that their compact truck at a full ton rating could cary more than a big three full size half ton. I did some investigation after that conversation.
BTW and IMHO
It appears that the big three have different rating philosophies when it comes to load capacity. Dodge appears to tell it like it is. Carry a full load but don't bounce off curbs at 50 MPH. GM seems to subtract out a fudge factor. Ford appears to be the most conservative of all. The frame in a Dodge DRW was about the same as my '92 F-250 HD and my neighbor's C1500 appeared to be lighter. I know that the frame of my '99 SD appears to be more robust than the '92.
Maybe what we should do is to look at the space between the cab and box. If we see one that is narrower at the top of the bed than the bottom report it here as to make model and year. It is a VERY unscientific survey but it may give a feel for real GVWR and manufacturer speak.
???????
Rich
With this mind, I have a question. From what I've heard, the Dodge 1 ton SRW has a GVWR of 11,000 pounds. The Ford 1 ton Superduty SRW has a GVWR of 9,900. If you go with the Ford 1 ton Superduty DRW, the GVWR increases to 11,200. Is the Dodge SRW really capable of handling 1,100 pounds more gross vehicle weight than the Ford?
Mikec13,
The suspension is beefed up on the F-250 SD (formerly called the F-250 Heavy Duty) compared to the F-250LD, so the weight restrictions are different. I know that Ford has their 98/99 trailer/tow guidelines on the web for all of their trucks, even the minivans. If you are shopping for a truck and have an intended use for the vehicle or expect to have an intended use for the vehicle, I'd spend some time studying the weight restrictions to ensure that you get a truck that will do the job.
There is no 1-ton Dodge SRW. All 3500s are DRW. And only the 4x4 Quad is 11,000 - the rest are 10,500. Ford has a nice little niche truck with the 9900 F350 SRW. But of course, Ford should renumber all their trucks to this anyway to show true weight rating:
Current name Accurate name
F150 F150
F250 LD F200
F250 SD F250
F350 SRW F300
F350 DRW F350
Wouldn't that make a hell of a lot more sense?
It sounds like you have it down. As I mentioned, make sure that the 3,740 pounds is clearly identified as the truck weight. I know that Ford actually provides an available payload amount for each vehicle. However, if you subtract the available payload from the GVWR, you do not get the weight of the truck because Ford has already accounted for a 150 pound individual to be in each seat.
No need to be concerned about the reaction of the full size truck crowd. I think you will find a general consensus that there is no need to buy more truck than you need or expect to need during the period you plan to own the truck, unless you just prefer having a larger truck. Besides, you'll get the last laugh as you're passing by us at the gas station.
Dont go logical on us now.
Where do you see that Ford is making a 150 lb adjustment? I've looked at the fine print in a brochure for my Ranger as well as the Ford web site and see nothing about this. If there is something to getting curb weight other than just subtracting payload from the GVWR on the door sticker, Ford is giving no indication that I can see.
Sorry for the confusion. I just went to the Ford site and couldn't find any trailer tow info on the Ranger. The only detailed tow info. I found was on the Superduty. I know I've read trailering info on the Ranger before. I just don't know where. The website where I found the 1998/99 Ford Trailer/Tow limits was at:
www.meadowlandford.com/traileri.htm
Even at this site, I could not find any info on the Ranger. They had a little info on the Windstar towing limits, but not the Ranger. They had detailed info on the F-Series. The place I found the reference to the 150 pound allotment was in the Slide-in camper area. It says:
"Cargo weight rating shown in the chart is the maximum allowable, assuming the weight of a base vehicle with the required camper option and a passenger (150 lbs per) at each available seating position".
If the payload figures you are looking at don't have this notation, then it likely doesn't apply. It sounds like you can subtract the payload from the GVWR on the website you are looking at and get the vehicle weight. Sorry for any confusion.
One thing that I found to be interesting was that the numbers on the 1998/99 trailer guide at the Meadowlands website didn't all match the ones at the Ford website for the Superduty. For example, with the F-350 DRW 4x4 4.30, both listed the GCWR as 20,000 pounds, but the Meadowland site showed the max trailer weight to be 10,000, while the Ford site indicated it was 13,600. Maybe I just read it wrong.
I see now that we were looking at tables designed for different purposes. You were looking at one designed to home in on the weight of a slide-in camper. I was looking at the sales brochure and Ford web site at one made to show the impact of a payload package option.
http://www.fordvehicles.com/ranger/dimensions.html
As you say, the key is to read the fine print.
You may now return to your regularly scheduled postings.
After I got home, I actually found the printout of the web page you referenced. I had printed it out a while back when someone on another website asked a question about Ranger towing. I knew I had seen it before. I don't know why I couldn't find it this morning when I was in the Ford website.
You'll notice that the weight of the options decreases your towing capacity. The 4wd has a tow limit that is less than the 2wd. The Supercab has a tow limit that is less than the regular cab. These options add weight to the truck, which takes away an equal amount of our towing capacity.
At first glance, it will look like the 4.0L Ranger with the 3.55 can tow more than the 4.0L Ranger with the 3.73. However, a closer look shows that the 3.73 is a 4wd and the 3.55 is a 2wd. It's the 2wd vs 4wd that reduces the towing capacity, not the axle ratio.
Cobra98,
If you really want to see some bickering, take a look in the Smart Shoppers conference under a topic called "Salesmen are people too". I got caught up in it for a while, but finally quit participating over a month ago. Those salesmen live in their own world, although I will admit that some of the anti-salesmen were pretty rude too.
Of course, I like to take all the credit for that ;-)