View Single Post
Old 08-18-2019, 05:19 PM   #40 (permalink)
slowmover
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 2,442

2004 CTD - '04 DODGE RAM 2500 SLT
Team Cummins
90 day: 19.36 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,422
Thanked 731 Times in 553 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hersbird View Post
Except the baby diesel can crack 43 mpg at 60 mph, it will certainly beat the 33 mpg EPA rating. Also currently even in Montana where diesel prices are usually well over unleaded (one big reason I sold the Cummins) now gas and Diesel are within 3 cents of each other.
So say 35 mpg vs 20 and 10c more for diesel. That is a $860/yr savings for the same initial price based on average miles driven.
They both make the same 460ft-lbs of torque as well.
To me if buying a new GM pickup the choice would be a no brainer.
An empty little diesel might hit 40.

30 & 20 as I cited is solo. But not empty. The high cylinder pressure makes a diesel less sensitive to added weight (to a point). I can add almost 1k in weight and not change a baseline MPG figure.

Besides, if the trucklet can’t carry half the payload, it’ll make two trips. Size or weight.

30 & 20 is fair because it’s already beneath potential. Like everyone else, I’ll be interested if we ever have a number set to work with (scaled weight tickets to isolate true payload — and a pic to show aero — plus constant use of cruise control over a described course).

For this and other private ventures, it’s like pulling teeth. I doubt very much we will ever see it. No scale tickets? Invalid MPG. CC use not constant? Invalid MPG. Failure to describe course & conditions plus a pic? Invalid MPG

Conditions MUST be such that the fuel burn really doesn’t change from driver to driver. The absolute number isn’t important.

.

Last edited by slowmover; 08-18-2019 at 05:26 PM..
  Reply With Quote