Sounds like you've got a keeper. That kind of gas mileage is very impressive. And a Ford even.RZehr wrote: ↑Tue Jun 27, 2023 11:06 amI think you are right, but it would only make my range and fuel economy better. Because I think it is off in the other direction.
I tested the trip odometer against a GPS and road mile markers on 5 different highways. The trip odometer consistently reported less miles traveled than the GPS and the road mile markers.
Interstate 84:
Mile markers 104.0 miles, GPS 104.0 miles, trip odometer 102.2 miles
Highway 97:
Mile markers 90 miles, GPS 88.2 miles, trip odometer 86.9 miles
Highway 20:
Mile markers 40 miles, GPS 39.76 miles, trip odometer 39.2 miles
Highway 11:
Mile markers 16 miles, GPS 16.4 miles, trip odometer 15.7 miles
Highway 228:
Mile markers 15 miles, GPS 15.0 miles, trip odometer 14.7 miles
This mileage discrepancy may explain the difference between my own fuel mileage calculations, and the computer fuel mileage. If I figure that the GPS & road mile markers are correct, then I actually am getting more miles per gallon of fuel, and would put my mileage real close to the computer MPG.
Fuel economy and range
Re: Fuel economy and range
0 x
Pursuing a Kingdom life in the Spirit
-
- Posts: 9120
- Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 9:09 pm
- Location: Former full time RVers
- Affiliation: PlainRomanCatholic
- Contact:
Re: Fuel economy and range
Can you size down your truck needs? Get a smaller one?Josh wrote: ↑Tue Jun 27, 2023 12:11 pmGiven that I get 10-16 mpg and you folks are well past 20mpg, it seems I am more in need of the extended tank than either of you, including with the RV.
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"...
0 x
Max (Plain Catholic)
Mt 24:35
Proverbs 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding but only in revealing his own mind.
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God
Mt 24:35
Proverbs 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding but only in revealing his own mind.
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God
-
- Posts: 16239
- Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:02 am
- Location: Washington State
- Affiliation: former MCUSA
Re: Fuel economy and range
Sunk costs are one of the biggest obstacles to changing anything.
All we can really do when making NEW Investments is try to look forward and ask: "is this vehicle, home, job, appliance, neighborhood, etc. going to be a sustainable and economic choice in the long run? Or not? And because we lack crystal balls, it is easy to get it wrong.
A big part of the problem with the American light truck market is that there are so many regulatory interventions that distort and limit the choices we do have available. For example, these two trucks have the same size cargo bed. Why is one so much easier to buy in the US compared to the other? It isn't just consumer choice. Regulations drive the outcome as well.
And the reasons why you can't *easily* buy small economical utility trucks like the Toyota Pixis at your local dealer are largely regulatory rather than economic.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
- Josh
- Posts: 24202
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
- Location: 1000' ASL
- Affiliation: The church of God
Re: Fuel economy and range
Because the latter trucks don't meet U.S. crash safety and emissions standards. No politician is going to win by arguing "We need American vehicles to be less safe and to pollute more".
I use my pickup for very short trips, generally 5 miles max, and sometimes a lot shorter. Therefore, I have other priorities than raw fuel economy.
I use my pickup for very short trips, generally 5 miles max, and sometimes a lot shorter. Therefore, I have other priorities than raw fuel economy.
1 x
-
- Posts: 16239
- Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:02 am
- Location: Washington State
- Affiliation: former MCUSA
Re: Fuel economy and range
That is actually not true. Europe, Japan, and the US have different crash safety and emissions standards but they are arguably NOT lower. Far more people die on American highways than in Europe or Japan and crashes that do happen tend to be more deadly. Especially crashes involving pedestrians.
This is due, in part, to the excessive height and weight of many American vehicles. And the fact that the US lacks things like bumper height standards. And as for emissions standards? Both Europe and Japan have HIGHER emissions standards compared to the US, ESPECIALLY for light trucks.
The two main reasons why the American truck market is dominated by large American trucks are:
1. The "Chicken Tax" first imposed by the Johnson Administration that imposes a 25% import duty on light trucks but not cars: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax
2. CAFE fuel efficiency standards adopted in 1975 and updated many times since have always subjected pickups to lower fuel efficiency standards despite the fact that the vast majority of them are used for nothing more than ordinary commuting and not work. In addition, pickups were exempted from the gas guzzler taxes that were imposed on large sedans that were fuel inefficient. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_truck
These two REGULATORY measures basically incentivized American car manufacturers to double-down on large trucks and SUVs for the past 40 years and have insulated them from competition from most small foreign-made trucks. The existing truck market is the way it is due to government intervention not consumer choice.
The reason you can buy a small Japanese-made Toyota Prius or Corolla but not a Japanese-made Toyota Pixis are mostly regulatory. And not consumer choice, safety standards, or emissions standards.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
- Josh
- Posts: 24202
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
- Location: 1000' ASL
- Affiliation: The church of God
Re: Fuel economy and range
Edit: replied to this in the politics subforum as I believe Ken's post drifts into the area of politics.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5865&p=196500#p196500
Back on topic, none of those vehicles listed are useful to me, as here are some of my requirements:
- Pull a 4,000 lb trailer loaded down with another 4,000 lbs of cargo, safely
- Be able to hold 6 people (driver + 5 passengers)
- Haul a 1500-2000 lb load in the bed
- Cost $5,000 or less to buy
- Be relatively simple to repair with plentiful parts availability
- Able to tow over 10,000 lbs in a pinch subject to common sense restrictions (eg no mountain roads)
- Engine can handle frequent very short trips (5 miles or less)
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5865&p=196500#p196500
Back on topic, none of those vehicles listed are useful to me, as here are some of my requirements:
- Pull a 4,000 lb trailer loaded down with another 4,000 lbs of cargo, safely
- Be able to hold 6 people (driver + 5 passengers)
- Haul a 1500-2000 lb load in the bed
- Cost $5,000 or less to buy
- Be relatively simple to repair with plentiful parts availability
- Able to tow over 10,000 lbs in a pinch subject to common sense restrictions (eg no mountain roads)
- Engine can handle frequent very short trips (5 miles or less)
1 x
-
- Posts: 16239
- Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:02 am
- Location: Washington State
- Affiliation: former MCUSA
Re: Fuel economy and range
Well yes. If your criteria include being able to carry 6 people and tow 10,000 lbs then you are going to be looking at full size trucks and the biggest SUVs. But I expect only maybe 10% of truck drivers I see on the highway have those criteria.Josh wrote: ↑Tue Jun 27, 2023 3:30 pm Edit: replied to this in the politics subforum as I believe Ken's post drifts into the area of politics.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5865&p=196500#p196500
Back on topic, none of those vehicles listed are useful to me, as here are some of my requirements:
- Pull a 4,000 lb trailer loaded down with another 4,000 lbs of cargo, safely
- Be able to hold 6 people (driver + 5 passengers)
- Haul a 1500-2000 lb load in the bed
- Cost $5,000 or less to buy
- Be relatively simple to repair with plentiful parts availability
- Able to tow over 10,000 lbs in a pinch subject to common sense restrictions (eg no mountain roads)
- Engine can handle frequent very short trips (5 miles or less)
And if your further criteria is spending less than $5,000 then you are automatically talking about old vehicles that will be FAR less fuel efficient than RZehr’s new truck.
I dont want to ban large trucks. Just see more alternatives. And I’m very much not alone in that.
Last edited by Ken on Tue Jun 27, 2023 4:17 pm, edited 2 times in total.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
Re: Fuel economy and range
Obviously you need to join the Amish with less vehicle requirements. A one horse power buggy and a different job.Josh wrote: ↑Tue Jun 27, 2023 3:30 pm Edit: replied to this in the politics subforum as I believe Ken's post drifts into the area of politics.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5865&p=196500#p196500
Back on topic, none of those vehicles listed are useful to me, as here are some of my requirements:
- Pull a 4,000 lb trailer loaded down with another 4,000 lbs of cargo, safely
- Be able to hold 6 people (driver + 5 passengers)
- Haul a 1500-2000 lb load in the bed
- Cost $5,000 or less to buy
- Be relatively simple to repair with plentiful parts availability
- Able to tow over 10,000 lbs in a pinch subject to common sense restrictions (eg no mountain roads)
- Engine can handle frequent very short trips (5 miles or less)
1 x
Pursuing a Kingdom life in the Spirit
- Josh
- Posts: 24202
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
- Location: 1000' ASL
- Affiliation: The church of God
Re: Fuel economy and range
In that case, I would give me neighbour a gift of $5,000, he would buy an F-150 and then I would pay him to drive me around.
1 x