Half-ton vs One-ton MPG (F-150 vs Superduty MPG)
 

Its a question I would expect there to be more information on: What is the efficiency difference between a one ton and half ton truck? Myself, along with many others I am sure, are considering whether they make do pushing the max weight rating of say an F-150, or to take the loss of efficiency and go with a F-250 or F-350. The EPA doesn't require Ford to publish MPG ratings for their Superduty trucks- and I have scoured the web looking for an answer. I am leaning toward an F-350 for our next expedition vehicle due to the strength and articulation of a straight axle in the front, and that I would be pushing the payload of a half ton. However, if say the one ton got 13 MPG vs the half ton getting 20 mpg, it would definitely affect my decision. To keep it apples to apples I think an appropriate comparison would be the 5.0 Coyote gas V8 F-150 vs 6.2 Boss gas V8 F-350. To my knowledge there is absolutely no even remotely scientific comparison between these two vehicles as far as I have found. Or for any other manufacturer's half ton vs one ton trucks. Does anyone know of any data available?
(Btw I already have a car and trailers, I need a truck)
https://photos.app.goo.gl/pDiH5KXkqc6vHLtz9

Not sure what the 350 gets as a gasser for fuel mileage, not hauling stuff. Hauling stuff, I think is like 13, which by defination has to reduce fuel economy because you're accelerating mass...

They make 150's that legally do a ton? I have seen a ton in a 150 and it's a ticket appearance if I ever saw one

half-ton vs one-ton
 

I did a search for ' Ford f-350 real fuel economy.'
I looked at fuelly.com's website, and for the 2023 Ford, the gasoline-powered 350 was averaging 12.3-mpg, and the diesel-powered variants were getting from the 17s, to a high of 18.1-mpg, depending on engine.

Yes the max cargo weight of a new F-150 can be up to 2856 lb. The problem I have is the max cargo weight of the supercab 4x4 version I want tops out at 1848 lb, which a slide in camper will be bumping up very close to if not exceeding with gear and liquids. The same configuration(supercab 4x4 non dually) F-350 has a max cargo weight of 3861 lb.

The heavier truck is definitely going to get worse city mileage due to weight, and I can accept that loss because I feel that the extra weight is useful in my case because I am utilizing that extra beef they put in the frame and axles by hauling and offroading with a huge slide in camper. However I would like to see where the hwy mpg differs from the F-150 because imo thats less weight and more how the two trucks differ in aero and focus on efficiency in the design. I have a feeling that because the Superduty arent advertised with MPG consequentially not as much focus has been put on efficiency in the design.

You buy the size of truck needed to do the work required. The MPG falls where it may.

What happened to 1/4-ton trucks???
:
https://cdn.arcimoto.com/wp/20230525...-1536x1025.jpg
cdn.arcimoto.com/wp/20230525095230/muv_studio_driver_side-1536x1025.jpg

What? You want doors? Fine...
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/56/b6...a6b0e57677.jpg
i.pinimg.com/originals/56/b6/09/56b60999673d01401d8bc3a6b0e57677.jpg

It's easier to compare a F-150 to a Ranger, as they have a more similar payload. But as you have an actual need for the F-350, trying to downsize may not be so worth at all.

I don't know what relevance the ton class has anymore, if it ever had relevance.

I've easily put over a ton in my "3/4 ton" truck. Put a yard of rock in the bed, and then had a 1 ton trailer with 3 yards of bark dust attached. I easily had 1.5 tons or more added weight on the rear axle.

That reminds me, I still want to create a swimming pool in the bed this summer. By my estimate, assuming 1ft depth, that's around 1 ton of water, plus humans.

My 1961 panel van had '3/4-ton' rear axles, and weighed about as much as a Beetle, or 1 ton or less.

The most weight it had in it was [at least I'd paid for] 2/3 of a cord of wood. According to USFS:
That certainly gave it a nice stance! The 1100lb FUV has a 500lb payload (plus the driver).

In this case the load depends on the vehicle, not the other way around. I have enough tools/toys I would always like to bring, if I had the space, to more than fill a 6x6 deuce and a half and get 4 MPG but I won't accept that mileage. I would rather pack light and get as far as I can in my FWD Chevy Volt with a moto trailer and get triple digit MPG.

So as you can see there's more to it than that. The MPG number fall where I choose them to fall. Then I fill the GVWR with what I can. As I mentioned above some of the variables I am considering are articulation, axle strength, weight, payload, max tire size, and of course perhaps the most important for me personally- efficiency.

The Maverick can get 40MPG, has a 1,500 payload, and is rated to tow 2,000. Whatever didn't fit in the bed, I'd put in a trailer.

Dodge/Cummins 3/4 ton can get 20MPG or better.

Back when bed liners were brand new, we sealed up the gate and filled it with hot water, 4 beefy guys and drove all over Inglewood Ca all in a 1971 datsun pickup until we got a ticket. Not for overload, but for dumping water and causing a hazard. Figure 3000 lbs back there.

I got the idea while eating brunch on a Portland sidewalk, and a truck parked on the street right behind me, with some of the water sloshing out. A couple babes in bikinis were back there.

It's legal to be in the bed of a pickup if all seat belts in the cab are in use in Oregon.

You just put a tarp (without holes) in the bed, and it holds the water.

Had my truck serving as a foot pool where about 8 people gathered during the solar eclipse.

Who are the moderators of this site? Can anyone give them a shout? I have posted twice on this thread and it said a mod needed to approve. There were no links or anything. It was days ago, they still arent visible.

At the bottom of the page is a Contact Us button.

https://ecomodder.com/forum/sendmessage.php

Once in a while I still see Rangers and other trucks within its size class with some camper module, most often with a pop-up roof instead of fully rigid. But I guess it's worth to remind overseas versions often have a higher payload than US-spec models for this size class.

When it comes to F-150 vs. F-350, about 4 and half years ago I spotted an F-350 with plates from British Columbia in Florianópolis, Brazil, with a camper module. Most likely an F-150 would be exceeding the GVWR with a similar setup, not to mention the overload would also decrease reliability while riding through tough terrain.
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-u-MVbcFLo...e%2Bfrente.jpg
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GnvSQXR9h...25C3%25A1s.jpg


That would be quite a good base for an expedition rig, yet it would have some limitations regarding payload... Sometimes I still lurk about picking either a Kombi or a more modern mid-size van and set it up for stealth-camping, but I'm sure a full-size truck and a camper module would be quite tempting, plus the ability to carry one or two 125cc dual-purpose motorcycles.

There was one summer in the late 1970s when I was an itinerant carpenter. I drove up through the Willamete Valley with a table saw in the back, rolled it out to have a place to sleep at night, and in the morning I'd drive into town and load the roof rack with lumber.

So you had the van as a mobile tool shed, also serving as a tiny-house, before all that "tiny house movement" became a thing. Might've been a good case for an efficient use of the vehicle's footprint on the streets.

It also served as a spare bedroom parked alongside the house. No side windows so good for urban stealth camping. It had a small hole in the center of the roof, with an hemispherical boat deck lens in it. Dim light spread all over.

Ford E350-based motor home, 15.97-mpg...................
 

Just for a comparison, I revisited member orbywan's 1995 Ford E350-based, Class-C motorhome aero-mod thread.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the 7.3-liter, turbo-diesel, A40D transmission, and aero mods, between Tucson and Phoenix, he was seeing between 13.1 and 17.26 mpg, with 10-20-mph, intermittent crosswind, for an average 15.97-mpg.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With modern engines and the 10-speed transmission, a 2023 F-350 could be made to exceed orbywan's performance, depending on mods.

Talking to a Bolivian who was on vacations in Florianópolis around 4 years and a half ago, he told me the 10-speed transmission can really do wonders regarding fuel-efficiency :thumbup:

' 10-speed '
 

yeah, according to Ricardo Engineering, a 12-speed renders the same mpg benefit of a CVT, and is not torque-limited, so these GM/Ford 10-speeds are sneaking up on the theoretical optimum for engine transient operation thermal efficiency.:)

My guess is most vehicles will be hybrid in a decade, and most will eliminate the gearbox by using planetary gears and motors.

Well when not towing or hauling anything the F150 will do much better than a 350. Now put a giant full height slide in camper in the bed and the economy is going to be dictated by the horsepower required to overcome that aerodynamic penality. I bet both gas motors make enough horsepower to do it and probably have equal thermal efficiency so they will get similar mpg. Compare the f150 diesel to a f350 diesel and again the thermal efficiency and power required will be similar so they will get similar mpg when working. When not working the f150 is just more efficient by a good margin. It's carefully tuned and sculpted to get the best possible mpg as it is epa rated. The f350 they don't really care as it doesn't get rated or effect CAFE average.

So you have to ask yourself how many miles will be working and how many not working. If it's mostly working get the f350 and you really won't be spending much more on gas, if 80% of the time you drive it back and forth to work without anything in it get the f150. Save gas and plus it's 5 times more comfortable.

Owning one 250 I need to add: lots of stop and go get the 150 because the 350 weighs more * and mass is expensive to accelerate. Stop and go to work, I used to get 19, freeway I got 25.

Scaled @ 7886 lbs for mine. 5,000 of that on the front tires. However: crew cab

2023 RAM 3500 Cummins TD mpg
 

MOTORTREND Magazine has had an arrangement with a company called Emission Analytics ( EM ), to conduct EPA-esque REAL MPG testing.
And though heavy duty trucks are not required to publish fuel economy ratings, on many MOTORTREND long-term tests, they'll have EM go ahead and conduct their REAL MPG tests on both 2500 and 3500 series pickups.
The current F-350 TD gets an actual 18-mpg HWY, 'naked.'
So does the RAM 3500 TD.
I believe the all-aluminum F-150, EcoBoost, 4WD, short-bed 'averages' about 19-mpg, 'naked.'

It's been at least 5 years since I placed a similar bet...


Now that some hybrids actually feature automatic transmissions with a small amount of gears, such as a 2-speed one fitted to some GWM Haval SUVs, I'd take a total elimination of the gearbox on hybrids with a grain of salt. Not to mention medium-duty and heavy-duty trucks with dual-range differentials...

When I first experienced SSD as a replacement for hard drives, I predicted it would dominate the market in 2 years. I was off by more than a decade. What's funnier are those on EV forums convinced you won't be able to give your ICE vehicle away in the second half of next year due to the utter domination of EVs.

I don't make predictions because I'm great at making them, but for the fun exercise of stating something and seeing how close it comes.

Not sure how well Toyota's planetary gearbox and motors scales, but I imagine it would scale well in heavier duty applications. The thing about all of it is that it can be programmed to protect itself. A good design protects itself from the idiot operating it.

Hauled this up to the Santiam Pass for camping and got 21 MPG overall.

Truck is a 2017 Chevy Colorado 4x4.

Each quad is 500+ pounds. Trailer is probably 350lbs. Who knows the weight of all the camping gear that's stuffed under the quads and in the wheel wells. My guess is somewhere around 1-ton of stuff being hauled.

https://ecomodder.com/forum/attachme...1&d=1687892620

Truck pulled super smooth and had plenty of power.

That's a cool truck!

I got a new truck too. I was looking and looking and really wanted a new 2024 Colorado but they are in high demand and pushing 50k for the ZR2 now. Was thinking about a Mavrick but it too is impossible to find a deal on a used one and they don't have a good tow rating. Was close to getting a loaded up Santa Cruz for almost $40k but then found a really loaded 2020 Ram (originally $64k and packing another $10k in aftermarket) with a new dealer installed motor for $31k. It has a 3" lift and 34" tires so it sucks the gas. I still have the Sonata Hybrid and have about given up on an ev at this point. I traded in the teardrop for a 20' Jayco too so I needed at least 5000 pounds of tow rating.

Oh, and I'm getting married in August. Tired of just doing what I want, when I want all the time LOL.

Life is good!
https://ecomodder.com/forum/member-h...609-183601.jpg

I have since put air bags on the back and a WDH on the hitch to get rid of thar sag when towing. It gets about 11.5 at 65 MPG towing so not terrible but not as good as the teardrop obviously.

Congrats on getting hitched, and the new hitch.

I own none of the stuff pictured other than the trailer and the camping gear. If I get another truck, it will probably be a CyberTruck. I basically never have a need to travel more than 200 miles with a truck.

In some Toyota and Hino hybrid trucks, the planetary gearset is coupled to an automated-manual transmission.

This is great info. Considering a similarly equipped gas 2.7 ecoboost f-150 vs 3.0 TD f-150 is 24 mpg vs 28 mpg, according to EPA test results, we could probably expect a gas F-350 to get 15 mpg in the motortrend test. I just did 24/28*18=15.4 to account for diesel's better MPG than gasoline. If we scale up the MPG to match what the EPA measured on the F-150 for hwy, assuming its the 3.5 ecoboost, which gets 23 mpg hwy, then 23/19*15.4=18.7 mpg hwy for a gasoline F-350.

Anyone have any thoughts?

' 18.7 on gas'
 

I think your arithmetic is good.
You're the only one who has a clue to what you may encounter while out 'expeditioning'.
MOTORTREND 'broke' the RAM 1500 TRX 'tender', back-up vehicle they took along on their 'expedition' with the RIVIAN pickup.
If you break an F-350 I'll want to buy you dinner just so I can hear about it!:D

No wonder I never saw any F-150 registered in Canada reaching Brazil with a camper, while I saw an early Super Duty F-350 registered in Canada with a fairly large camper a few years ago in Florianópolis. Considering even some highways in Latin America are pretty much worn out and in a state of disrepair, better safe than sorry, or stranded in a strange place without access to proper maintenance facilities or an easy replacement parts supply...

As a thought experiment, I contemplated what could fail on my truck on such a trip. Front end is possibly the weak point even greased really often. You would have to carry ball joints, full set of tie rod and steering components, u joints . Haven't had a wheel bearing failure, I don't have chineseium parts there but I have destroyed the differential twice: once for a lube failure, the other because it wasn't put back together correctly.
Does eat front rotors pretty regularly. They don't fail but the rotors warp really often. My Achilles heel.

So what kind of repair facilities could I expect? Probably need as a minimum a bearing press to get old ones off

Some places in Latin America are not that easy...

Funny you guys should bring up south america because that is why I started this thread- to gather info for our next expedition down there. We just finished a 12,000 mile road trip through Peru, Chile, and Argentina. We chose a 1997 toyota land cruiser prado with a 3 liter TD, due to that being a very common vehicle with possibly the most spare parts availability. Even then we had to import many parts from the united states due to the huge delays to get parts down there. For example, a large toyota dealershiop in the capital, Lima, of Peru did not carry a single heater core- for ANY make or model of toyota. We carried as spares: front unit bearing, front axle shaft,CV boots, starter, glow plugs, brake booster, air filter, fuel filter, all fluids the list goes on. Before the trip we had newish ball joints, and had to replace them mid trip because the previous vehicle owner replaced them with chinese parts on a quality level even lower than what one is accustomed to in the states.
I was trying to break a high altitude record on a moto so we had a ton of gear on the vehicle, it was way too small for all the gear, tools, parts. The volcano we used at for the record attempt, Ojos del Salado, was 160 miles one way from the nearest gas station or drinking water source. The logistics were pretty insane to be there- just food, fuel, waterwise. This is why I am going back in a gas engine. I want one fuel for everything- the motorcycle, the car, the heaters. Base camp that any car can get to is at 14000 ft. There are progressively higher camps all the way up to 20k. Our diesel would not start above 15k, and would barely run/idle above that, clogging injectors and smoking us out badly. New diesel are even worse- their emissions systems clog quickly. Gas engines run fine up there. Even carbureted without touching the jets run, and better than diesels.

All this to say that next time I'm not bringing a diesel. Another issue-the ford super duty basically doesn't exist down there- they have them in Argentina and Brazil but they are Fummins- fords with cummins. If one were to bring down a 7.3 powerstroke you have basically zero parts availability. If you bring a ford 6.2 gas super duty you would have to source parts from the raptor, which are not all interchangeable.

My next truck for south america therfore is probably going to be a F-150 3.5 ecoboost or 5.0 v8. That truck and those engines are what's most common in all countries, behind the Hilux, which is not available in the united states so it rules it out for me personally.

Speaking of breaking an F-350- my current truck is a 99 F-350 with the 7.3 powerstroke. Mine rattled apart and blew up in Death Valley on racetrack road- its some nasty washboards, I think about 40 miles or so. In south america out of 12,000 miles we did somewhere between 1500-2000 miles of dirt roads, lots of it bad washboards. I would not bring an older truck down there. I want an engine that has been proven in baja and the desert, that is why I think I will go for the 3.5 ecoboost. Its been abused by thousands in the F-150 Raptor, it exists everywhere around the world, and its got boost so that should help at 20,000 ft.

Hmmm cool info to know should i loose my mind totally

Interesting...


Actually those seem to be more popular in Paraguay than elsewhere, yet in Peru, Colombia and Venezuela the gassers used to be quite popular. Uruguay and Argentina used to be the strongest markets for Diesel-engined anything, but it's no longer the case in Uruguay because of overtaxation of Diesel cars (only trucks and commercial vans are easily available with Diesel engines in Uruguay now, yet gassers are not so uncommon as they used to be in the '90s and early 2000s), and in Argentina due to the cost of modern Diesels compared to a port-injection gasser with natural aspiration (and the ease to adapt a carburettor if the EFI fails in the middle of nowhere).


Makes sense.


Makes me wonder if resorting to kerosene would make it easier to run a Diesel in such an extreme altitude, just like truckers used to add kerosene to Diesel fuel during winter until some years ago.


Even on the beach a clogged DPF can already be annoying to deal with :turtle:


Sure they might run, yet adjusting the carburettor is worth the effort when you go through a much extreme altitude. I still remember when a tune-up prior to a road trip used to be mainstream, before EFI became widespread and better accepted by the average Joe.


Actually the previous generation of the Super Duty was a good seller here, not only in Brazil and Argentina. Brazilian versions were mostly fitted with Cummins 4-cyls, and a high-speed MWM straight-6 which was also fitted to some RHD versions exported mostly to Australia and South Africa. Gassers in Brazil were mostly grey imports, and a local version with the 4.2L Essex V6 which is extremely rare. In other countries such as Colombia, Venezuela and Bolivia, V8 gassers were more common than Diesels for the Super Duty.


Odd enough, the 7.3 Power Stroke was actually made near my hometown, as it was also fitted to the RHD F-250 and F-350 for export to Australia, even though the local F-250 never had it. Another application for this engine here was the International 4700 medium-duty truck which used to be assembled at the Agrale factory in Caxias do Sul, but parts are too expensive anyway. The HEUI fuel system was quite unpopular...


Maybe a Tacoma would be a safe choice, as it's also available both through official dealers in countries such as Bolivia or as a grey import elsewhere, not to mention the 2.7L 4-cyl and the 4.0L V6 were also fitted to the Hilux in South America. Even though now in Brazil the Hilux is only available with a Diesel engine, once in a while I still see some with the 2TR-FE engine. Not to mention I saw grey-imports and some models not available officially in Brazil brought by tourists from neighboring countries being serviced normally at Brazilian Toyota dealers. Sure some very specific parts may require a longer waiting, or sourcing through "unofficial" channels, but it's not impossible to overcome this issue.