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

Lets hear about those 3.7L's

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-08-2014, 10:44 PM
  #471  
Real Trucks Have 2 Doors
 
RaceReadyRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: S/E Michigan
Posts: 35
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Tuffbot
What about with uphill climbing, passing, and other factors?
Ok, so I just returned from a trip to help a friend move from Milan Mi to Nashville Tn.
Trailer was loaded with His Yanmar 1300d loader tractor, tiller, back blade, finish mower, 3 engine stands, 4 jack stands, 2 shop fans, 6 ballast weights, Trail 70 type mini bike, box of chains, shop vice, bandsaw, 3 five gallon buckets full of nuts and bolts, 5th wheel hitch set-up, 2 small tool boxes, Wheel horse snowplow, weedeater, plastic Barbie car, and other misc. items.
The truck did a good job. I used the tow-haul mode for the trip. Average MPG came in at 14.8 for the loaded trip down there. It stayed in 6th gear for most of the trip except for steep hills south of Cincinnati where it would down shift to 5th and a couple times down to 4th.
I really liked the way the truck would down shift to hold the speed when going down the 5% grade so I did not have to use the brakes at all.

All in all it was a good trip, but a lot of work.
Total miles 1258
Total hours behind wheel driving 23.5
Total hours sleeping in truck (Not Recommended) 5.5

At least I got to go to Antique Archaeology and see where the Marathon Motor Car was built!
Attached Thumbnails Lets hear about those 3.7L's-img_20140405_142528.jpg   Lets hear about those 3.7L's-2011-f150-trip-tn..jpg  
The following users liked this post:
kd7irm (04-08-2014)
Old 04-08-2014, 10:49 PM
  #472  
Senior Member
 
shazam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 194
Received 20 Likes on 16 Posts
Default

For what its worth, I consistently get 18 mpg city, 22 mpg highway. Loads of power for a regular configuration 4X2 pickup.

Too bad its being discontinued. Its the end of an era. A very short era.

P.S. mpg figures are hand-measured, and consistently higher than the read out. I have a light foot.
Old 04-08-2014, 11:04 PM
  #473  
LONE STAR
 
KILOFINAL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,005
Received 629 Likes on 432 Posts

Default

Thats a good review of your trip. Antique Archaeology sounds like a cool place to visit.



Originally Posted by RaceReadyRed
Ok, so I just returned from a trip to help a friend move from Milan Mi to Nashville Tn.
Trailer was loaded with His Yanmar 1300d loader tractor, tiller, back blade, finish mower, 3 engine stands, 4 jack stands, 2 shop fans, 6 ballast weights, Trail 70 type mini bike, box of chains, shop vice, bandsaw, 3 five gallon buckets full of nuts and bolts, 5th wheel hitch set-up, 2 small tool boxes, Wheel horse snowplow, weedeater, plastic Barbie car, and other misc. items.
The truck did a good job. I used the tow-haul mode for the trip. Average MPG came in at 14.8 for the loaded trip down there. It stayed in 6th gear for most of the trip except for steep hills south of Cincinnati where it would down shift to 5th and a couple times down to 4th.
I really liked the way the truck would down shift to hold the speed when going down the 5% grade so I did not have to use the brakes at all.

All in all it was a good trip, but a lot of work.
Total miles 1258
Total hours behind wheel driving 23.5
Total hours sleeping in truck (Not Recommended) 5.5

At least I got to go to Antique Archaeology and see where the Marathon Motor Car was built!
Old 04-10-2014, 09:48 PM
  #474  
Member
 
papa tiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 32,108
Received 239 Likes on 223 Posts

Default

3.7L has been the most excellent work horse. LOL.
Old 04-11-2014, 07:46 PM
  #475  
Senior Member
 
nihilus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 644
Received 86 Likes on 66 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by roconnor2012
After hearing all of this comparison between the 5.0 and the 3.7, it makes me wish I would have bought the 5.0. Granted, at the time when I purchased my truck, I did not have the money for a 5.0 if I wanted a brand new truck. My other justification was that the 3.7 would get better mpg for my uses (mainly highway driving and no towing).

It will be a few more years before I sell my truck but when the time comes I'll shell out the extra cash to get a v8.
Yeah, not trying to troll but I really can't see any advantages to the 3.7L over the 5.0L other than upfront cost. It money is tight it might be better to get a slightly used 5.0L to offset the cost. In regards to 2wd, the 5.0 with taller gears (20-22 mpg) easily does as good as a 3.7L with shorter gears. The 5.0 will still have more pulling power. As far as the 4x4 goes, it seems the 3.7L does a bit WORSE even with all things equal.
Originally Posted by lawnguy
my 2011 3.7 just turned 13g, you think its still in break-in mode?
My 5.0 still had a good bit of iron when I checked the oil analysis at 17k. With a light foot and tune, I have been getting 21 MPG mixed with 89 octane mpt tune. Use good synthetic oil.
Old 04-11-2014, 09:19 PM
  #476  
Senior Member
 
Snowflake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 995
Received 130 Likes on 104 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by nihilus
Yeah, not trying to troll but I really can't see any advantages to the 3.7L over the 5.0L other than upfront cost. It money is tight it might be better to get a slightly used 5.0L to offset the cost. In regards to 2wd, the 5.0 with taller gears (20-22 mpg) easily does as good as a 3.7L with shorter gears. The 5.0 will still have more pulling power. As far as the 4x4 goes, it seems the 3.7L does a bit WORSE even with all things equal. My 5.0 still had a good bit of iron when I checked the oil analysis at 17k. With a light foot and tune, I have been getting 21 MPG mixed with 89 octane mpt tune. Use good synthetic oil.
If you look at the overall problems people are having with the 3.7 over the Eco or 5.0 I would say its a very good chose for anyone not towing much. Buddy of mine is buying a RCSB 4x4 on Tuesday he is coming from a 4.8 gmc couldn't believe how much power that motor has. For his driving style it will be all he will ever need. I told him to try it out he was leaning towards the 5.0 but after he drove it he liked it. If the 5.0 is superior to the 3.7 why does it need to be tuned? I have an Eco by the way but for all my customers I help pick the engine that will suit there needs and the 3.7 for this guy is the perfect fit.
The following 2 users liked this post by Snowflake:
nihilus (04-12-2014), RaceReadyRed (04-11-2014)
Old 04-11-2014, 10:15 PM
  #477  
Real Trucks Have 2 Doors
 
RaceReadyRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: S/E Michigan
Posts: 35
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by nihilus
Yeah, not trying to troll but I really can't see any advantages to the 3.7L over the 5.0L other than upfront cost. It money is tight it might be better to get a slightly used 5.0L to offset the cost. In regards to 2wd, the 5.0 with taller gears (20-22 mpg) easily does as good as a 3.7L with shorter gears. The 5.0 will still have more pulling power. As far as the 4x4 goes, it seems the 3.7L does a bit WORSE even with all things equal.

My 5.0 still had a good bit of iron when I checked the oil analysis at 17k. With a light foot and tune, I have been getting 21 MPG mixed with 89 octane mpt tune. Use good synthetic oil.
One advantage I found out after talking with my neighbor is short distance MPG's. We both have a 4 mile drive to work with 5 stop signs. After a week of just driving to work and home this winter we compared our fuel useage. His 5.0 came in at 14.5 MPG and my 3.7 at 17.5 MPG. We both let our trucks warm up for 10 minutes before we take off. Now I will say that His truck is a 4x4 super cab short box and I have a 2x4 regular cab short box. I have 3.73LS and do not know what his is.
Old 04-11-2014, 10:18 PM
  #478  
Senior Member
 
gregsf150stx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: TN
Posts: 4,809
Received 531 Likes on 407 Posts

Default

Seems unnecessary. What's the reason behind this?


Originally Posted by RaceReadyRed
One advantage I found out after talking with my neighbor is short distance MPG's. We both have a 4 mile drive to work with 5 stop signs. After a week of just driving to work and home this winter we compared our fuel useage. His 5.0 came in at 14.5 MPG and my 3.7 at 17.5 MPG. We both let our trucks warm up for 10 minutes before we take off. Now I will say that His truck is a 4x4 super cab short box and I have a 2x4 regular cab short box. I have 3.73LS and do not know what his is.
Old 04-11-2014, 10:35 PM
  #479  
Senior Member
 
Snowflake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 995
Received 130 Likes on 104 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by gregsf150stx
Seems unnecessary. What's the reason behind this?
I would say the 3.7 burns less fuel warming up for ten minutes than the the 5.0. MPG come from all parts of truck usage.
Old 04-12-2014, 07:18 AM
  #480  
Senior Member
 
gregsf150stx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: TN
Posts: 4,809
Received 531 Likes on 407 Posts

Default

My question WAS . . . WHY does a 3.7L engine need to warm up 10 minutes???


Originally Posted by Snowflake
I would say the 3.7 burns less fuel warming up for ten minutes than the the 5.0. MPG come from all parts of truck usage.


Quick Reply: Lets hear about those 3.7L's



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:58 PM.