2011 Ford Super Duty goes head to head with a 10 Ram and 10 Silverado

[xcel]

In a grille to bumper fuel economy run on just two gallons of diesel, the Ram and Silverado get spanked “Big Time”!

Wayne Gerdes - CleanMPG - April 19, 2010

As the head to heads continue, the truck we will lay early bets on as "Truck of the Year", that being the 2011 Ford Super Duty, does just what we expected. That is dominating the field in fuel economy.

With the ability to haul 20,000 + pounds, best in class or nearly best in class payload depending on configuration, the highest safety attributes of any truck in the field including the new 2011 Silverado/Sierra HD, easiest tower by far and an engine/transmissions combination to die for, what more is needed?

How about a fuel economy run off as any CleanMPG’er would love to have seen in person.

2-gallons supplied to the low pressure fuel system. First and second one down 2-gallons loses. Simple as that.

And the winner is… Watch the YouTube for the answer but really, was there really any doubt?

In our own fuel economy testing of the Ford Super Duty, it proved to be one spectacular 4x4 P/U with fuel economy and range that is almost unbelievable for a vehicle weighing in at close to 8,000 pounds and able to literally pull not just tree stumps out of the ground but pull down your house at the same time.

Maybe its time for you to decide for yourself?


A Max Fuel Economy, Round Trip drive while behind the wheel of the 2011 Ford Super Duty 4x4 in Chicago last month took me by surprise and it should you too.

2011 Ford Super Duty – Maximum Fuel Economy Round Trip Segment


A 35.0 mpg RT segment over 96.4 miles… The 48.2 mile return trip averaged 37.25 mpg!!!

The 2011 Ford Super Duty is easily a CleanMPG “Best Buy” for those that really do need the capability of a Heavy Duty Full-Sized Heavy Duty Truck.

Not just “Built Ford Tough” but “Built Ford Efficient and Tough”!

[npauli]

come on, that's not really a fair fight. I don't doubt that the Ram would bring up the rear, and will continue to do so for a while. But the 2011 GM should do considerably better than the 2010. I know, Ford can't really test a GM that hasn't come out yet, but they sure didn't go out of their way to admit that the gap will be much closer in a few months.

Whining aside, it looks like FE is now firmly and forever in that elite set of data that pickup manufacturers and buyers care about - such as HP, torque, payload, towing, etc. I applaud Ford for not only vastly improving the FE of their own trucks, but also calling out the others to do the same.

Can't wait for GM's response. If I had to guess, I'd guess the Ford will still beat the new GM, but not by much. It'll probably be close enough that some applications would do better with the GM, and some would do better w/ the Ford.

[xcel]

Hi Nathan:

___The 2011 Super Duty improved upon the 2010 Silverado HD by 23% in this mixed city/highway runoff and with a slightly higher average speed than both the Silverado and Ram HD's. While Chevrolet has surely made some improvements in the 2011 with the new Duramax design, talle tired and taller geared 6-speed, even in their early pronouncements, they have never claimed anything like a 23% improvement in fuel economy!

___I am sure the GM HD engineers are going to be concocting a number of fuel economy experiments when they finally get their hands on the 2011 given they are going to have to find some road, some load, some driving environment or scenario where their product can at least match the 2011 Super Duty in something? I can see it now… A very tall and skinny, LRR tired XFE variant with active grille louvers, skirts, deep chin spoiler, flat alloys, tonneu cover and an Insight/Prius like ECO TPS/vehicle output programming solution! It won’t work out on the Tundra very well but it “might” catch the 11 Super Duty?

___Color me impressed but the 11 Super Duty 4x4 is within a hairs breadth as efficient as my wife’s 03 MDX AWD FSP yet weighs almost twice as much, has almost 3X’s the torque and the MDX’s interior is actually larger by just 9 cu. ft. including the third row. Add the Super Duty’s massive rear bed and 30 + capability without breathing hard is something special. The drive back from Chicago in high 40 degree temps yielded 37.25 mpg which literally should not be possible from something as ungainly as the Super Duty truck platform but there it is.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

[Taliesin]

I don't really need a full Heavy Duty, but is there a 1/2 ton PU truck that can do better than this FE-wise?

I anxiously await the newest F150 to find out.

[xcel]

Hi Taliesin:

___I have not driven the new F-150 but I highly doubt the 17 mpgUS combined rated 4.6L V-8 can even touch the Super Duty’s 6.7L Turbo-diesel. In any measure! Than again, I suspect the Super Duty with the Power Stroke would be rated about 20 mpg highway or thereabouts and the std. F-150 hauls in a 21 rating. Without the tall final and 5th/6th AT and super efficient ultra lean burning diesel, the F-150 is probably toast…

___That said, Ford will be equipping the F-150 with the EcoBoosted, 3.5L V-6 later this year/early next which should bring its FE up to around 21 combined in a 2WD configuration “possibly” vs. the 17 mpg it is currently rated at.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

[Taliesin]

In other words, to get better FE, I have to buy a vehicle that has much more than my other requirements. Kinda typical. GM is worse about it. To go from the Silverado that meets my requirements to the hybrid you have to add 4X4, dual cab, etc. etc. etc.

[xcel]

Hi Taliesin:

___I do not think that will be the case with the new 3.5L EcoBoost in the F-150 but I could be wrong. With CAFE standards looming large over this vehicle, Ford needs to sell as many EcoBoosted V6's as they can vs. the current 4.8L V-8's. I would expect it to be the base engine within a year or two in fact.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by xcel

Hi Taliesin:

___I do not think that will be the case with the new 3.5L EcoBoost in the F-150 but I could be wrong. With CAFE standards looming large over this vehicle, Ford needs to sell as many EcoBoosted V6's as they can vs. the current 4.8L V-8's. I would expect it to be the base engine within a year or two in fact.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

I'll have to wait and see, but I can't be sure yet if the V6 will tow the 4K# boat/trailer. It's the only reason I have the full-size truck, and the only time I use it. I just don't need Heavy Duty towing capability.

Either way, it's quite possible that changing trucks would cost me a fair bit of change. And while saving oil is extremely important, being able to afford to do so is a yes/no proposition (especially with military retirement staring me in the face soon).

And if I am sticking to gas (or ethanol) there is the hope that we can get our heads on straight regarding E85. With some of the advances coming our way sticking with the FFV Ram may be the better move in the long run.

hehe... Any chance someone here can see into the future?
Didn't think so. life is such a gamble sometimes.

[xcel]

Hi Nathan:

___To give GM its due, I did offer to help GM prove its Silverado/Sierra HD’s fuel economy in a challenge so it is in their court to allow a rag tag band of CleanMPG members to prove it or not Did you receive my E-Mail with the basic proposal layout early this morning?

___Good Luck

___Wayne

[ILAveo]

Originally Posted by Taliesin

I'll have to wait and see, but I can't be sure yet if the V6 will tow the 4K# boat/trailer. It's the only reason I have the full-size truck, and the only time I use it. I just don't need Heavy Duty towing capability.

......

The question for the V6 F150 will be what transmissions will be coupled with it. Back in the day I pulled plenty of trailers in that ballpark with no problem with an old straight 6 F-150, manual transmission, but IIRC that transmission was geared low to tow.

It sounds like the new 3.5 will have enough power to tow without being geared too far down, but it wouldn't surprise me if Ford made you buy an engine "upgrade" to get decent towing options.