Quote:
Originally Posted by herektir
Even 8% off on 30 mpg puts it over 27mpg. I cant do hand calculation of mpg because i get the use of the vehicle for the trip only, be it 50 miles or 300. The other drivers mpg on the read out averages about 16 for the v8, and 18 to 20 for the v6 ecoboosts that i have gotten into. They cant keep thier foot off the gas.
|
I can't live w/o cruise. I mean I can, I just won't. I'm no hypermiler, but what I do is try to do reasonable driving behaviors that I know I can manage day after day with no problem and it has to be behaviors that are considerate to other drivers.
Cruise control in this truck is by far the best I've ever used (and I mean this from a control aspect; not fuel economy). It is just a standard cruise (not adaptive). The reason it's so good is two fold: Number one, it's the first vehicle with cruise I've owned that will actually downshift on down hill grades; not just uphill to maintain set speed, but also, it doesn't over do it trying to keep it within one or two mph like most designs; but instead tries to keep it within about 3-4 mph and this greatly reduces the shifting up and down like one gets with many cruise controls and automatic transmissions. So when I'm traveling down a 6% grade with a slight tailwind with the cruise set on 59, it will downshift when I hit somewhere around 62-63, again, and then once again, if the hill is long enough, and by the time I get near the bottom of the grade, it'll be down to 3rd gear. If I prefer not to get down to 3rd, I'll manually shift down using the gear lockout function to 4th as soon as I first start the down grade, thereby starting the braking function a little sooner. Using this active method, it'll not need to shift down to third unless the down grade is for a really long stretch. The active method, however, requires that I remember to lock back in the higher gears as I near the base of the grade. The power train is so smooth and quiet, that there is no noise or vibration to remind me that I'm turning 3000 RPM instead of 1500, and if I'm not looking at the tach., I won't notice it.
The second thing that makes cruise so good in the new F150 has to do with the EB engine. Since it's got over 90% of it's 375 peak pound-foot torque at only 1900 RPM, it will really pull a hill in 6th gear, even with a 3.31 rear axle, and so it trudges along on hilly highways and roads in 6th where most automatics with cruise will do that downshifting-racing-up-the-hill phenomenon that we've all experienced who drive automatics with cruise. On this same 6% grade, going up the hill, with a slight headwind, it'll downshift to 5th only about 50% of the time. The other 50%, it'll go right up the hill, with an empty bed, in 6th gear. This is almost certainly based on how windy it is outside. Since I believe in maintaining steady speeds in consideration of other drivers, this is exactly what I want my vehicle to do. It's almost like having my preferred manual transmission when it comes to cruise control operation in this truck.
I figured that you had to use the vehicle trip info as your only real option, and my feedback about the inaccuracy of the trip meter was more oriented to others reading that were maybe comparing different brands and wanting "real mpg" as close as possible. I think that an error of magnitude with respect to "gallons used" that this truck calculates is worth noting. As you stated, it could be as much as 3 mpg difference and that is significant. From my experience, on my own personal truck, getting rid of both errors, one in each direction, will normally result in around a 1.5 mpg reduction hand calculated versus the trip meter; but the "gallons used" error is so inconsistent, that 1.5 is just an average; and that's why I can't really use it and feel like I'm reporting honest, accurate-as-possible information using the trip meter. In contrast, my wife's Saturn will report a pretty consistent .5 mpg optimistic reading. So I'll use it for reporting, but not in the truck.
It is also possible that a crew cab or another configuration that makes for a longer truck than mine could possible exceed my highway mpg theoretically, since a longer vehicle could achieve lower drag in spite of extra weight or lower gearing that could be engineered in another configuration versus my regular cab, 2wd, short bed with the highest available gearing @ 3.31 rear axle ratio and a curb weight of only 4168.