I think the day will come, with improved engine technology, when we actually will see that type of MPG even towing large, heavy boxes on wheels.
I think one of the few things we can all agree on is that we wish that day was here already
If the RV community get right down to it, we don't care about weight capacity as much as space.
Want a certain box that is big enough to live in comfortably that we can haul around.
A combination of weight reduction, form factor reduction, aerodynamic improvements, etc. is long overdue.
I thumb nailed some ideas and concluded that a thirty percent improvement in fuel consumed to move a given form factor (living space measured in cubic area) is feasible technically.
Economically and practically, another matter.
Start a new thread on RV fuel economy improvements and we can toss these ideas around.
NewsW wrote: As for the posters that jump to conclusions, I have this to say.
Once upon a time, I came across a case where a machine operator was getting several times the life out of a set of dies than everyone else.
No matter what machine the operator was put on, the same person just simply did better than anyone else.
Everyone of his peers and managers dismissed the numbers as fake --- displaying the same type of stupidity, ignorance, and closed mindedness evident by the above posts.
Detailed investigation of this case revealed that this particular machine operator had this little habit:
Person came in about 30 minutes BEFORE his shift, unpaid for the extra time, and turned on the heaters that pre-heated the dies before he started the runs.
The dies lasted a lot longer because of that --- work on his own dime.
A lot can be learned from anomalies, if people are prepared to listen and investigate before jumping to conclusions.
When such closed mindedness and refusal to do homework before concluding is displayed by professionals who claim to be in the scientific and engineering community --- no matter how peripherally --- that is a major problem.
Now back to my 1/4 million mile engine...
PS
Not a single post on any forum have ever asked how I got so many miles out of my engine.
If you really believe that this guy is getting over 17 mpg's pulling a 33' TT, then you may be the one who needs to get his IQ tested. Either that or you are the most gullible person on this forum. That being said, I've got some really nice ocean front property in Nebraska I'd like to sell you.
Hello I have a 2011 ford super crew love it .we have a 32 ft Fleetwood prowler.looking at new what do you have for a trailer. What is the weight I'm getting 10-13 mpg towing haven't come to a hill it pull.i have to watch the speed because it runs so efferentless happy camping
When Pickuptrucks.com did a test with two F150s, both EcoBoost (auto, 2wd, equipped with a 3.55 axle); one towing a 9000# enclosed cargo trailer, and one not towing, over ~2100 miles they averaged:
- 8.5 mpg towing (best 9.6 mpg)
- 21 mpg empty (best 23.2 mpg)
The enclosed cargo trailer would have aero drag similar to a normal sized RV. They did climb some pretty good grades while towing, so if you were towing on flat terrain, you could maybe eek out a slight mpg improvement over the 8.5 they averaged while towing. But anyone who says they get much more than that when towing a full sized RV would cause me to question their honesty, or their math.
2010 Cougar 322QBS 5er
2007 Dodge 3500 SRW Megacab, 4x4, 5.9L Cummins, 3.73, 48RE auto HYPERTECH MAX ENERGY or DIABLO PREDATOR tuning MBRP 4" Turbo back Scangauge2 for Boost, Coolant temp, Rail press & Trans Temp
Torklift Stable Loads
I was out last weekend and saw a new 150 HD pulling a 30' TT. He was towing at 50mph and was all over the lane. The entire rig was unstable. I was pulling the same basic size trailer without any drama. The conditions were poor, gusty winds. I would not recommend a 150 HDfor anything over a 24' light weight. The truck is not living up to its hype.
MM49
Offline
