Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-14-2020, 10:40 AM   #41
Member
 
Big Sky KLX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 41
While this is looking to be a great engine, and will last forever, and be the standard in many chassis for a long time. Just be forwarned that the 7.3 gasser gets HORRENDOUS gas mileage.

I mean it gets really really bad mileage. Every online review of this truck has reported about 12-13 mpg unloaded and for some reason they are all testing it at 55-65 mph.

I work with a larger construction contractor and he just bought 2 new trucks with the 7.3 for his fleet. Same thing, great pulling motor, tons of power, but cruising to jobs on the interstate at 80 mph = 10 mpg.

The GM and the RAM might not be as powerful, but they have a lot more tech on them (besides the transmission) and empty can achieve 16-18 mpg empty cruising on the highway.

So again, if you can handle low teen mileage empty, then this is a great choice. And I know everyone will be "I didn't buy it for mileage.........blah blah blah" but if you buy a $60k truck this day and age, 12 mpg is hard to swallow.
__________________
2019 Coachmen Clipper 21bh
2006 Chevy Silverado 1500 4x4 5.3
Big Sky KLX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2020, 01:14 PM   #42
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by goduc View Post
What I don't get is what do these tests prove. If all 3 brands reach the speed limit (60) and they have to back off then how is a race to the top?
The only way one truck sets it's self apart from another is at the start. The truck thats fastest to 60 wins the whole enchilada.
Traffic up the Ike interferes too many times to make these tests viable as well.

Very few of the trucks maintain 60 mph. The only one consistently that does is the Ford 3.5 EcoBoost The flaw in their testing is they never manually downshift and lock out higher gears. They leave their foot on the floor and lett the transmission shift up and down.

Most of the GM trucks lug down to a crawl before shifting.
Rick J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2020, 01:18 PM   #43
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdbunch1630 View Post
The 2020 gas 6.6 GMC could not hold the speed limit pulling the same trailer, dropped to 40 mph during the climb. Almost a 3 minute difference pulling same trailer. I really like the new tailgate on the GMC and was seriously thinking about one, but might have to re-think the Ford.

There's more to a truck than a gimmicky tailgate. That 7.3 is one awesome engine. We've got 3 now in our hot shot fleet. 2 F350 and one 550. Super smooth power and transmission set up.
Rick J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2020, 01:27 PM   #44
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfsgm View Post
I'm a Ford guy. I've owned about 20+ of them in my lifetime and currently own a Ford Fusion and an F-350. I tend to disregard any of these brand-sponsored tests as they aren't objective. Just like the one with a Ford pulling a train. Any of the top three brands could do that as the co-efficient of friction on steel rails is much different than asphalt.
TFL does not do brand sponsored tests. They invite ALL manufacturers to enter a loaner for their tests. For their long term reviews, they purchase their vehicles. All brands. They try as much as possible to standardize every test. In this one the Ford walked up the hill easily while the GM was either screaming at 5800 rpm or barely getting 40 mph.
Rick J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2020, 01:39 PM   #45
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by linedriver View Post
If you watched both videos will see that they filled the chevy with 85 octane when it rated for 87, the chevy had a 373 rear end, they ordered the ford with a 430. The ford was $64,000 and the chevy was $48,000. At $64,000 you are getting up in the diesel price range. The chevy also had a thousand pound heavier cargo rating. Just some food for thought. I bought the chevy and love it, but I am not pulling a fourteen thousand pound trailer.
They used the same fuel. And they don't order the trucks. They tell the manufacturer what they are testing and invite each manufacturer to send an appropriate truck.

In fairness to the GM, they should downshift manually and lock out the higher gears to avoid all the shifting and lugging down. GM programs their transmission to stay in higher gears longer to meet their EPA mileage claims
Rick J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2020, 01:49 PM   #46
Grammar Pedant
 
67L48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Frederick, CO
Posts: 1,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by linedriver View Post
If you watched both videos will see that they filled the chevy with 85 octane when it rated for 87, [...]
The Ike Gauntlet is in Colorado.
__________________
Every time you use an apostrophe to make a word plural, a puppy dies.

TV: 2019 F-350 Lariat 4WD CCSB 6.7 PSD 3.55, 3,591 lb payload
Former RV: 2018 Rockwood Mini Lite 2504S
Former RV: 2007 Fleetwood/Coleman Utah
Former TV: 2005 F-150 King Ranch 4WD SCrew 5.4L Tow Package
67L48 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2020, 02:36 PM   #47
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by linedriver View Post
If you watched both videos will see that they filled the chevy with 85 octane when it rated for 87, the chevy had a 373 rear end, they ordered the ford with a 430. The ford was $64,000 and the chevy was $48,000. At $64,000 you are getting up in the diesel price range. The chevy also had a thousand pound heavier cargo rating. Just some food for thought. I bought the chevy and love it, but I am not pulling a fourteen thousand pound trailer.
The Chev had more cargo rating because it had bare bones options. In fact the Ford was a heavier truck.

As for gas, at higher elevations, 85 is better than 87. They explained that due to the high elevations of Colorado, 85 is regular grade. All grades of gasoline have the same energy. Octane in different grades merely controls knock .
Rick J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2020, 02:51 PM   #48
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Sky KLX View Post
While this is looking to be a great engine, and will last forever, and be the standard in many chassis for a long time. Just be forwarned that the 7.3 gasser gets HORRENDOUS gas mileage.

I mean it gets really really bad mileage. Every online review of this truck has reported about 12-13 mpg unloaded and for some reason they are all testing it at 55-65 mph.

I work with a larger construction contractor and he just bought 2 new trucks with the 7.3 for his fleet. Same thing, great pulling motor, tons of power, but cruising to jobs on the interstate at 80 mph = 10 mpg.

The GM and the RAM might not be as powerful, but they have a lot more tech on them (besides the transmission) and empty can achieve 16-18 mpg empty cruising on the highway.

So again, if you can handle low teen mileage empty, then this is a great choice. And I know everyone will be "I didn't buy it for mileage.........blah blah blah" but if you buy a $60k truck this day and age, 12 mpg is hard to swallow.

Sorry but you're wrong. The same TFL mileage tests on brand new engines was over 15 for the 4,30 and over 17 on the 3.73. We also have 3 in our fleet in Calgary. Converting from metric, our two F350s are running average 15.5 empty. Even the 550 is getting better than the 10 you quoted .
And I doubt very much my drivers are granny driving.
Rick J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2020, 03:12 PM   #49
Senior Member
 
BigH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Saint Paul, MN
Posts: 893
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick J View Post
The Chev had more cargo rating because it had bare bones options. In fact the Ford was a heavier truck.

...
The Chevy has a higher gvwr in 2500 hd trucks.

The Ford has a max of 10,000lbs gvwr for any configuration in 3/4 ton trim.
The Chevy has up to 10,850 gvwr in 3/4 ton trim.
__________________
17 Chevy 2500 DC Long box Gasser Z71 4.10
18 Vengeance 28V
BigH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2020, 07:40 PM   #50
Member
 
Big Sky KLX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick J View Post
Sorry but you're wrong. The same TFL mileage tests on brand new engines was over 15 for the 4,30 and over 17 on the 3.73. We also have 3 in our fleet in Calgary. Converting from metric, our two F350s are running average 15.5 empty. Even the 550 is getting better than the 10 you quoted .
And I doubt very much my drivers are granny driving.
Okay, you keep thinking that.

Not one truck has even been close to those numbers. The diesels barely get 17 empty. But you are right, your trucks are magically beating 100 reviews and real world numbers.
Big Sky KLX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2020, 07:41 PM   #51
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 119
FWIW, there is a version that is unedited and shows the tach as it shifts. Truck still pulled 5k rpm most of the way. Torque is how much, horsepower is how fast.

Still an impressive vehicle.
JeffandLori is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2020, 11:07 AM   #52
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 790
Fuel economy will always come down to they usage of the vehicle. Two identical trucks but for the motor say one a 6.4 and one a 7.3, are going to get the same MPG if they followed each other around doing the same stuff. Where the 7.2 will use more gas is when it's using it's higher available horsepower. Some turbocharged motors also will do better because they have better thermal efficiency as they are using that waste exhaust to add back power, direct injection helps because they don't require a throttle so they don't make wasted vacuum, and diesel is better because there is more energy in each gallon. You can see why a diesel really excels because modern ones have all of the above, although more an more gas motors are direct injected and turbocharged as well. Bottom line, save the extra power for when you need it, and day to day the 7.3 will do as well as any other 2500 gas Ford. I doubt 17 real world tank to tank is possible unless it is a 65 mph steady state 500 mile highway run unloaded in the summer without stopping. Stop and go winter city in my 4.0 Cherokee dropped to 12 MPG, so I'd say I'd be happy to get 10 doing the same in a F250.
Hersbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2020, 01:10 PM   #53
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Greensboro NC
Posts: 1,126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hersbird View Post
Fuel economy will always come down to they usage of the vehicle. Two identical trucks but for the motor say one a 6.4 and one a 7.3, are going to get the same MPG if they followed each other around doing the same stuff.
I dont get that at all..one is a 7.3 one is a 6.4, assuming both are available in the same truck, with the same transmission, and the same rear end ratio, meaning identical, except for the difference in power/tq output there will be differences.
For one assume that one engine makes more torque, so cruising at 65 MPH on a hilly interstate it wouldnt kick down as often and keep the rpms lower. Also assume one engine has more rotating mass, is heavier in general.
Both towing 5K pounds at 60 mph wil produce a different result as well.
You are feeding a bigger heavier engine with the 7.3 vs a smaller bore motor that will struggle more, so there would definitley be differences. So they are both doing 60 MPH with 5K but achieving the 60 MPH speed would be achieved differently with 1 vs the other.
__________________
Ron and Kathy
2019 Cougar 369BHS 5'VR
2018 Cherokee Limited 304 BH (Traded)
Joyfully Towed with a 2018 RAM 3500 6.7 CTD
ronheater70 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2020, 02:28 PM   #54
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 790
Physics says it takes X amount of HP to accelerate or maintain a certain speed based on weight, rolling resistance and aerodynamics. Getting similar thermal efficiency which all pushrod gas naturally aspirated motors are similar, it takes X amount of fuel per minute to make X amount of horsepower. So when operating under the limits, the gallons per minute used in the motor with the rest of the truck and load being the same, is going to be the same.

Technically "working it harder" will up to a point result in better thermal efficiency on a normal fuel injected motor because you reduce pumping losses. Why an EGR system can help fuel economy because it in effect limits the power (because you don't need 400 hp only 100 hp) and lets the throttle open more eliminating some of the pumping losses. When you get at very high throttle positions that all goes out the window as the programing will richen it up and you will be making all the horsepower which more horsepower requires more fuel.
Hersbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
7.3 gas, ford

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


» Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Disclaimer:

This website is not affiliated with or endorsed by Forest River, Inc. or any of its affiliates. This is an independent, unofficial site.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:00 AM.