Finally.... over 24 MPG on a 3.7 ! - Page 3 - Ford F150 Forum - Community of Ford Truck Fans



2011+ Engine Related Questions Sub-Forum to the new engines that debuted in 2011.

Finally.... over 24 MPG on a 3.7 !

Reply
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-29-2011, 02:26 AM   #21
COME TO BUTTHEAD
 
Brad92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 896
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zap

A two wheel drive Common Rail 5.9 will if it's been taken care of. Example, my father's 06, which has a 35 gallon tank which I have driven from Austin, TX to Pueblo, CO on one tank with about an 1/8 of a tank to spare. The only thing it has that is different from the factory is LT285/70-17's instead of the OE LT275/65-17's which lowers engine speed by 150 rpm at 70 mph. LSD doesn't clog the cat like standard diesel does. The truck was bought new in September of 2006, LSD became standard in Texas in October 2006.

The LB7 was considered the most efficient of the 6.6's...from the factory. When you delete the emissions on an LBZ, you have an engine with better heads, injectors, tune, and a variable vane turbo. It also got a 6 speed allison where the LLY had a 5 speed, and the LB7 had a 4 speed. The 500 horse LBZ I speak of has a fully rebuilt Allison by Sun Coast with a lock up TC (which is who Dodge went to in order to get transmissions for the 2012 HO 6.7 which puts out 415 hp and 850 lb-ft).

I understand your reasoning about the larger engine part, but that really only holds true to American built engine. Take for instance the BMW M1. Has a 320 hp 3.0L flat 6, which you haven't seen here in the states in 50 years. M1 makes 37 mpg, which is better than most the 3.7 V6's running around (not just the Fords).
I'm sorry, but once again, your information isn't flawed.

The 5.9 is a great engine but will not get those mpg numbers in a HD truck. Your dad's speedometer is off from the larger tires making the odometer read slower. I would not rely on the fuel economy readout, especially since the truck is no longer stock. Hand calculate and figure out the percentage that the odometer is off. Also, the truck has a 48RFE transmission which is a 4 speed which is not great for efficiency at highway speeds.
As for the '11.5+ CTD trucks, they have 350 hp and 800 lb ft of torque. Suncoast was not contracted for the transmissions. As a matter of fact, they are having issues holding power in the aftermarket world with the 68RFE.

The LBZ is considered the best Duramax as far as reliability, but an LB7 will typically get better fuel economy since there is no EGR or cat (except for Federal fleet, Cali models and some from the northeast). The up pipes don't have the EGR cooler section on the passenger side and the heads don't have the EGR port. Also, the 01-05 Allison is a 5 speed transmission. The LB7 and LLY transmission is exactly the same (except for the 06 LLY which is actually a detuned LBZ and has the 6 speed). In 06 they changed the first 2 clutches and added a 6th gear which is actually just a different valvebody.

As for other cars, alot depends on the transmission and other factors. For example, a 430 hp Corvette is rated for 26 highway MPG because of its really tall 6th gear. I am not a car expert and I definitely know less about European vehicles, but they should still be under the same constraints as any other vehicle.
Brad92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 03:29 AM   #22
zap
Senior Member
 
zap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Raiderland, TX
Posts: 2,446
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad92 View Post
I'm sorry, but once again, your information isn't flawed.

The 5.9 is a great engine but will not get those mpg numbers in a HD truck. Your dad's speedometer is off from the larger tires making the odometer read slower. I would not rely on the fuel economy readout, especially since the truck is no longer stock. Hand calculate and figure out the percentage that the odometer is off. Also, the truck has a 48RFE transmission which is a 4 speed which is not great for efficiency at highway speeds.
As for the '11.5+ CTD trucks, they have 350 hp and 800 lb ft of torque. Suncoast was not contracted for the transmissions. As a matter of fact, they are having issues holding power in the aftermarket world with the 68RFE.

The LBZ is considered the best Duramax as far as reliability, but an LB7 will typically get better fuel economy since there is no EGR or cat (except for Federal fleet, Cali models and some from the northeast). The up pipes don't have the EGR cooler section on the passenger side and the heads don't have the EGR port. Also, the 01-05 Allison is a 5 speed transmission. The LB7 and LLY transmission is exactly the same (except for the 06 LLY which is actually a detuned LBZ and has the 6 speed). In 06 they changed the first 2 clutches and added a 6th gear which is actually just a different valvebody.

As for other cars, alot depends on the transmission and other factors. For example, a 430 hp Corvette is rated for 26 highway MPG because of its really tall 6th gear. I am not a car expert and I definitely know less about European vehicles, but they should still be under the same constraints as any other vehicle.
The speedo has been reset. The mileage is hand calculated using GPS tracks and amount of fuel consumed. If I remember correctly, something may have been up with the EGR valve a few years ago but that's really been the only thing done to the engine. However its not my truck, I take care of maintaining mine and my XJ, my dad takes care of his and my moms so he'd know more about the emissions issue he had than I would.

A friend of mine just bought a pre release 2012 LH MegaCab which is a fancy way of Dodge saying it will probably only be a limited edition truck. Saw the brochure on it, 415 hp and 850 lb-ft with a Sun Coast kit in it. He put it on a dyno the other day and it came out at 340 rwhp and 848 ft-lbs, which is right for a 415 horse engine with a slightly modified transmission.

My bad on the transmission, I was thinking of the autos behind the Detroits. I will agree that LB7's are the most efficient from the factory. Compare a LB7 to a LBZ without emissions controls on it and the LBZ will be more efficient.
zap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 08:41 AM   #23
Senior Member
 
MadocHandyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Madoc, Ontario
Posts: 2,361
Thanked 277 Times in 193 Posts
Default

^And all this related to the 3.7 mpg, how?
Man these threads take strange turns.
MadocHandyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 09:47 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
BLU4TJW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ontario
Posts: 504
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2000xl_toronto View Post
The only time my 5.0 sees less than 20mpg is when i drive pretty much the whole tank in-town with red lights at every intersection. I have done 10 fillups since I got it and only one was less than 20mpg. I've had as high as 22.1 in 50/50 driving and up to 24.5 on a 50mph 300 mile road-trip.
Are you sure you're doing your litres/100km to U.S. gallon conversion correctly? I'd love my 5.0 to get those lofty numbers. I think 3.7 and Eco owners would like them too.
BLU4TJW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 01:24 PM   #25
Member
 
I sell 'em's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oakwood Ga
Posts: 42
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xoliex View Post
i know its not fair but, i got the same set up and i can get 23-24MPG going 65-70MPH on a drive. however,,,,,,,,,,,, i got a tuner from 5star.

What tune is that running? I know they offer an economy tune but I feel like the performance tune would help the mpg's.

I feel like I lose a lot of mileage do to the low torque of the v6 starting and maintaining speed on a hilly road.
I sell 'em is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 01:25 PM   #26
Member
 
I sell 'em's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oakwood Ga
Posts: 42
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MadocHandyman View Post
^And all this related to the 3.7 mpg, how?
Man these threads take strange turns.

lol, x2 on that.
I sell 'em is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2011, 07:54 PM   #27
Member
 
I sell 'em's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oakwood Ga
Posts: 42
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I sell 'em View Post
What tune is that running? I know they offer an economy tune but I feel like the performance tune would help the mpg's.

I feel like I lose a lot of mileage do to the low torque of the v6 starting and maintaining speed on a hilly road.

Still wondering if you get a second to post up, thanks
I sell 'em is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2011, 12:10 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
smd5231's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Cambridge, ON, CANADA
Posts: 228
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad92 View Post
A smaller engine will have to work harder and use more fuel than a larger engine given the same speed and acceleration. Again, its just my opinion, so take it as it is.
Well, I can tell you based on my heavy/transport truck experience hauling up to 48,000 lbs: smaller engines do get better economy! You'll have to downshift (manual stick) like crazy on hills and the driver satisfaction will be ZERO (no torque!) but a 13 L V6 turbo diesel will beat my 15 L V6 turbo diesel. Proper gearing (matching the optimum engine speed with your preferred road speed through axle ratios) is essential. I love my powerful CAT and I offset its big L by driving slow when I'm under load.
smd5231 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2011, 01:53 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 740
Thanked 26 Times in 21 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by smd5231

Well, I can tell you based on my heavy/transport truck experience hauling up to 48,000 lbs: smaller engines do get better economy! You'll have to downshift (manual stick) like crazy on hills and the driver satisfaction will be ZERO (no torque!) but a 13 L V6 turbo diesel will beat my 15 L V6 turbo diesel. Proper gearing (matching the optimum engine speed with your preferred road speed through axle ratios) is essential. I love my powerful CAT and I offset its big L by driving slow when I'm under load.
There's more to it than that, if you paced a C13 in your C15 the fuel economy difference would be very very minimal if any. PS- they are still not V6's. Gas engines are different cause they have vacuum. While a 6.2 barely has the throttle plate cracked, creating say 15 inches of vacuum a smaller engine will have less vacuum to fight. That's where the EB comes in, cruising it isn't fighting any vacuum. Like the CAT's you speak of, if an EB paced a 5.0 or 3.7 towing, the fuel economy would be very similar. I feel 90% of why it may be worse is people using the power it has.
borjeb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2011, 03:13 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gonzales, La
Posts: 4,395
Thanked 1,152 Times in 685 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by borjeb View Post
...While a 6.2 barely has the throttle plate cracked, creating say 15 inches of vacuum a smaller engine will have less vacuum to fight. That's where the EB comes in, cruising it isn't fighting any vacuum. Like the CAT's you speak of, if an EB paced a 5.0 or 3.7 towing, the fuel economy would be very similar. I feel 90% of why it may be worse is people using the power it has.
Very few people really understand this. The EB and 3.7 run very close to 0 vacuum at interstate speeds, leading to good economy. The bigger the engine, the more you restrict flow with the throttle, the more vacuum the engine has to work against on the intake strokes. THIS is why smaller motors get better fuel economy - not because they make less power.
engineermike is online now   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
This gives you an idea on which motor for your new F 150!! hewittsawesome 2015 - Present Ford F150 130 03-12-2016 07:06 PM
Gears, Engine, Cab, & MPG Nighthawk87 2015 - Present Ford F150 27 10-21-2015 01:55 PM
Fuel Totalizer Error? todd92 2015 - Present Ford F150 11 10-02-2015 04:55 PM
Going from 35"s AT to 32"s Touring redcelica Wheels & Tires 3 10-01-2015 02:32 PM
Gas mileage? FrdTuff 2009 - 2014 Ford F150 25 09-27-2015 03:07 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:18 PM.


Copyright 2006 - 2017 F150Forum.com We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: