Quote:
Originally Posted by JSH
The naturally asperated truck was more fuel efficient in one very specific use case - towing up a 8 mile long grade at a set speed. That doesn't mean the NA engine will beat a turbo in all cases or even an average use case.
There is also a lot more to this test than just the engine. Were both tow rigs running the same gearing? It is entirely possible that the speed limit on that stretch of highway puts the Ecoboost hybrid at a particularly inefficient RPM and slowing down or speeding up 5 mpg could have completely different results. Also the hybrid battery would deplete very quickly on a long steady uphill. Hybrids do better in rolling hills or stop and go.
EDIT: Found the article. Completely different gearing - 3.21 vs 3.73 rear ends. One geared to tow 7,800 lbs and the other 11,000 lbs.
|
I agree to some extent, but energy required is energy required. Physics is physics. That Ford Ecoboost is not a thermally efficient engine. The final gearing should have not really come into play as they weren't running in the highest overdrive, nor were they accelerating for more than a few seconds of the overall mountain at the very bottom, the least steep part. So the rest of the way the Ford's 10 speed should have been able to find the right gear for the right RPM even better than the Rams's 8 speed.