2020 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel: You Won't Believe the MPG We Got Towing & Empty
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 ก.ย. 2024
- ( www.TFLtruck.com ) New 2020 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel V6 Gets Shockingly Good MPG Towing a trailer & Empty.
( / tflcar ) Please visit to support TFLcar & TFLtruck.
Check us out on:
Facebook: ( / tfltruck )
Twitter: ( / tfltruck )
The Fast Lane Car: ( / tflcar )
and classic cars as well at:
TFLClassics: ( / classicsunleashed )
#ecodiesel #ram1500 #mpg
Hands down you guys are the best channel out there👍🏻
Thanks
👍🏻
Without a doubt you make the best comments on TH-cam!
Why haven’t you done the same mpg tests with the HD trucks this year? I keep seeing claims of 21+mpg out of the 1000lbft Cummins with single wheel And no tests at all between 2500’s? Dump your Tesla already and get back to what you do best! You did the duallies, let’s see SWR or 2500’s.
Compared to what?
If it hits 40 again I'm buying an EcoDiesel Rebel
Jonathan Mcclellan then your gonna get 30
The Rebel gets way worse fuel economy than a non-rebel.
@@Stuka87 How much worse? my non-Rebel 2wd RT only gets 11.5. .
@@davidking3311 I assume you mean when towing, no way you should get 11.5 in mixed driving unless you are WOT all the time. TFL did a test with their Rebel when it was stock, compared to "EPA" numbers. The EPA rates a base 4wd, not the Rebel trim. And I would have to give up the video, but I think it was around 4mpg worse.
Heck, I have a 2019 Rebel with eTorque and I average 17.5 mpg, if it gets 30 mpg then it would warrant upgrading
"Too be continued "? Get out there and do it again NOW! The suspense is killing us! 😁
Fill until the fuel is visible in the filler.
@@LooseGravel14 the new diesel trucks have two flaps for the tank so you can't see the fuel.
did they ever do it again?
A Ram did this? Scotty Kilmer is crying in his Toyota.
But Scotty will tell you this truck will fall apart in front of your very eyes!
Haha. True!
He is very annoying
Rams are moneypits
@@jpulley It has had that habit, it seems--including the engine. The headline for the video should have included "until the Fiat power breaks," c.f. class-action lawsuit and owner forums.
The issue could be as simple as a small air bubble in the fill neck. I mean 2.5 gallon and 3 gallon isn't much but that would go from 40 mpg down to 33mpg. Which could be more realistic. Either way. Run it again. And then do a really long trip say 200-300 miles so that you use more fuel from the tank and a small variation of .5 gallons from a possible air bubble wont skew the result as much.
Ram said it will get up to a 1000 miles a tank a fuel
@@843MudMafia. so that's 1000 miles divide by 33 gallon. Is roughly 30mpg. So their results are way off and the trip computer is more accurate. Granted 30+ mpg is pretty damn good
Craig Quann: exactly 👍
Them waiting 30 seconds and then pumping again should get rid of any air bubble issues. I am wondering if the trucks fuel gauge read "full" afterwards.
Positive pressure on the nozzle causes the pump to shut off. Those nozzles go bad. Tanks can have a defective vent valve or canister loop causing excessive pressure when filling up.
Repeat test on a different pump and nozzle
Run it again. Thanks for the video.
My 2018 ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 Ed. Gets about 15 mpg towing my 4,000 boat at 75mpg. Really impressed by it when jt tows. If I bump down to about 55 I'll get 18mpg. And I got a 2inch leveling kit on my truck.
I have a 2016 Mercedes Sprinter van (over 9-feet tall with a full RV conversion inside) that gets 28 MPG (4 cyl diesel), so I believe high-30 MPGs (touching 40MPG) in an unloaded pickup is reasonable.
12.4 mpg towing 7k lbs, in case anyone wants to save time.
40 mpg @ 70mph, but the actual fuel meter was measuring around 31.9 mpg.
They're averaging fuel economy based on how much fuel the pump wishes to put in the tank before the filler fills it up...not a good method.
I snuck around back and dumped in 2 gallons of diesel when you guys were inside buying snacks.
I remember when my 2015 ecodiesel was getting high 20s. Even hit 30.2 on a road before. Now I'm lucky to get 23 out if it. Thanks EPA and the emissions update.
uscgwagner you should be mad at Ram not the EPA, they’re the ones that cheated/lied about it to both the EPA and you.
@@johnmoore1495 But it makes no sense that after the update, the trucks now use more fuel ! More fuel burned = more emissions.
Am I wrong ? Did they change the laws of thermodynamics recently ?
@@johnmoore1495 The EPA can eat shit with their stupid DEF requirements
Melmacian Dissenter it’s to reduce NOx emissions. Diesels already produce less CO2 than gas but they make *WAY* more NOx. NOx is the stuff that screws with our lungs and gives us diseases. CO2 is natural for us to breath. Obviously CO2 affects the environment but hypothetically we can capture CO2, we can’t unbreath NOx.
@@johnmoore1495 And in what Universe burning MORE diesel (after the update) produces LESS NOx ? Not ours, that's for sure ...
watching this and my wife heard the 40mpg, and said "That's insane!" a second before Andre said "That's insane!". JINX.
Really? You couldn't just run it again and put it in the same video?
Ad revenue is my guess.
The idea is to check with Ram before they test it again. Yes, a second video is more views. However, now they can answer more questions with the information they get back from Ram.
Why? Double the money is what any good business would go for. I'm ok waiting for the next video.
😂
Cliffhanger.........
ANDRE SUBLIMINALLY REFERENCED OLD TOWN!! Day made, thank you so much!!! Wait then he goes on to sing it!!!! Thank you Andre!!!!
This is really exiting to see. I watched it twice because I thought I missed something.
I’ll be trading my 2019 Laramie 1500 in as soon as they arrive.
No offense but why would you do that? You buy a diesel in a half ton for saving money at the pump, and if you’re trading in a brand new truck for another brand new truck, the extra money you’re gonna save from the extra mpg you’re gonna get is in no way going to outweigh the depreciation value of selling the 2019...
Philip Alani
I got it new with $14k off MSRP If I can double my fuel economy and get a 12” screen and split tailgate I’m in. I usually keep vehicles long term. Right now I get 13 mpg loaded with tools in town, for long term use is not going to work for my family. On the highway loaded I get 18-20 mph. My girlfriend would drive it more if it was more fuel efficient. Originally wanted a diesel but I did not like the old body style in the 1500. I still may jump to a 2019 or 2020 3500 to be able to tow anything I would need. Anytime there’s a choice of diesel or gas I go diesel for the long term. They are so much more rugged and efficient.
This is why Diesels need to stick around, not just trucks. Super efficient and fun to drive!
Always fuel up at that same pump is all I got to say!!! We have a 2015 Quad Cab with the V-6 gasser and have gotten 32MPG with us and about 350 lbs of gear @65MPH and thought we were doing good BUT YOUR MILEAGE IS MUCH MUCH BETTER!! Thanks for video!
If this is true numbers RAM will be selling a bunch of ecodiesels. Very impressive! Waiting for the follow up video.
Those numbers might be right, because they are the same numbers as for cargovans in europe which are all 2.0 liter diesel or 2.5 liter diesel. Be carefull though. Once everybody bought these nice dieselengines, our government decided to forbid all diesels from entering cities. Just on’ŧ get surpriced, if same happens to you. It gives you an excellnt chance though. You can now buy diesel from europe for nearly free, because we all live in cities, and everybody has to sell his diesel.
Bro I hope it’s real that’s a crazy number
No way it's right.
Janos Merges our government doesn’t really work that way man. 😉 except maybe California state level 🤪
@@bielmelichartes2167 Are you stupid? Don’t talk Mexican to me. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND YOU!
Please, please, tow a 30 foot 8000lb travel trailer... There are roughly 500,000 RV's sold just within the last year and most are entry level travel trailers.. There is definitely less livestock haulers out there..... The extra length and height of the "boxy" TT would really make fuel numbers and "tow feel" stand apart between truck models.... we all understand how difficult it would be using weight distribution hitches for all of the half ton trucks that you test and some of the 3/4 ton trucks even. But I would have to think that the audience sample would be able to relate much more. Keep up the good work. Plus, you could weigh in like most others have, on the whole"half ton towable" Market hype that the RV manufacturers and dealers are pushing.
Foxboss9 I’ve got a 19 rebel and use it to tow my 6800 lb travel trailer so couldn’t agree more with relatability
Foxboss9 I have a 2018 ram 1500 eco diesel 6,800 pound dry weight. Then loaded the truck and trailer we were probably about 9,000 pounds including 2 people and stuff in the back big ice coolers we get 11.4 mpg from Colorado to Washington state
I have a trailer just like you described, my f150 3.5 ecoboost doesn't even feel it back there
I have a 29'4" 5080 lb Bullet 247BHSWE with a Ram 1500 Hemi and Equalizer hitch. My only concern when towing is that I might accidentally go through a drive-thru because I might forget it was back there :) I get about 11-12 mpg when towing all over So Cal
This. 100%
I once got 39mpg with my 2017 Ecodiesel. About 55-60 mph over a mountain pass. 300 miles. Very good truck.
To get true actual mileage figures, you have to run a few full tanks of gas. If you go short distances, .2-.5 of a gallon variances can happen, and isn't an accurate way to test.
Even if it’s 35 mpg not towing that kind of fuel economy is well worth the $5000 extra for the motor
Exactly what a great deal of people are thinking. This is yuge!
Only if they fixed the reliability issues
It's will take you 15 years to make up the difference in fuel costs.
@@michaelrayharris lol yeah, I would say at 15,000 miles a year...maybe in 15 years!
If it’s a $5000 upgrade over the current standard v6, then it’s only really a $3500 upgrade over the hemi, which most people opt for. It would take 72k miles give or take, to be in the money. I’d like to get the ecoD, but I’m already at the top of my price range without the upgrade cost.
I think the problem is with the 30-seconds method you guys use before and after. In my own experiments, it had an error of up to +-1 gallon; some fuel fillers just tick-off sooner or later. This is less of an issue when 10+ gallons of fuel is used. However, in case of a test where little fuel is used, that +-1 gallon error becomes significant, in this case in the tune of (probably) 30%.
In my experience, the most accurate/consistent way is to not do that 30-second refill, but rather fill it slowly, reducing frothing for false-triggers. I recommend using this as an opportunity to update the procedure to this or any other more accurate way.
You are 100% correct. There is a lot of variability, even when using the same pump, especially when the tank isn’t down that much. It doesn’t give the fuel enough time to settle.
Exactly. The correct way is to take the time and fill it right to the brim. My Ram will take 1-3 extra gallons after the nozzle clicks off.
The anticipation is going to be overwhelmingly satisfying to see part 2 of the continuation on the Eco Ram 1500!! Love this channel. You guys rock!!
😮 40 MPG.
Were talking Volkswagen level tune.
And, Volkswagen was cheating.
I remember the 2001 Audi tdi 1,9l from my friend and we got 66 miles a little over a gallon mpg. And we drove 110 mph over the highway. Since then I am hocked to Diesel engines.
Pierre Landry vw didn’t cheat on the mpg .
@@pierrelandry4742 Yes and no. The early models with the ALH didn't have any cheating software and they got up to 50mpg. With some mods/tune they could get better.
@@pierrelandry4742 it's only cheating if you get caught lol
I LOVE my 2014 ecodiesel.
I am truly amazed at what that little 3.0 will do. 26-28 mpg on a road trip ( 70-75 mph)
That’s either the longest downhill run, or stiffest tail wind every!
You can't get an accurate number driving 100 miles. Some times my Ram clicks off while filling and I can put an extra 3 gallons in the tank while at a different station I'm lucky to squeeze another gallon in after it clicks off. Wind speed and direction makes a big difference on mileage too.
That is a serious watch Mr. Truck
Mr Truck is awesome...
Seriously! What model of watch is that? My friend is a watch collector and wants one!
@@jedironin380 It looks like an Invicta watch
Not as impressive as that custom Kevlar reinforced vest.
My old truck (2000 F150 ext cab 4x4 w/5.4 and toneau cover) would consistently get 17 mpg on the highway while I was averaging 80 mph, but several times with a 15-25 mph tailwind it would do 21-23 mpg so if the weather changed and you had a decent tailwind on the way back most but not all the way 40 mpg is possible.
Best thing would be to repeat the test to see if you get the same results.
I think it may be true but what you have to consider is Regen mode when it starts pouring fuel to clean the system might bring it in line with 32-35ish mpg
Good point! Seems the truck did a regen while towing (hense the lower numbers compared to the 2016) and no regen on the back to back trip. I wonder if the new low pressure egr system is improving things?
Not necessarily true. There is Active Regen and Passive Regen. In Active Regen fuel is injected to raise the EGT’s because there is not enough heat in the exhaust to convert all of the carbon in the DPF. This is typical if you are normal driving and unladened (not towing). Passive Regen, works when there IS sufficient heat because you are ladened (towing) or full payload in the bed or driving hard. In this case, fuel will not be introduced in the exhaust stroke as the temps are already sufficiently high enough to regen.
DEF does away with dumping fuel in the exhaust to burn out the DPF. That's why all the auto maker's started using it. It boosts MPG because of no Regen needed. The DEF injects straight into the filter to burn everything out of the DPF.
No re gen it uses def fluid
Passive Regen is a bullshit myth. DEF most DEFINITELY does NOT Regen the DPF. Stupid people are always passing on misinformation.
Regen/EGR control/soot ABSOLUTELY MURDERS fuel economy. 30-60% depending on the vehicle. If the truck was driven 30 more miles and those miles were all Regen the MPG would have been literally half or worse.
NONE of what I said is speculation or conjecture.
Wow thats nuts we just got back in my 2015 just got back yesterday from Ky to here in Ft Collins at 80 21.5 mpg at 70 it was 27 mpg with the recall. I definitely think you all should do it again to be sure.
The way you can be dead nuts accurate on MPG is to fill to the brim, like fuel at the actual brim. I've been doing this for years. Takes pump calibration out of the mix.
All my gm pickups could hold an extra 1 or 2 gallons in the fuel neck, I agree with the guy above, top the fuel completely off instead of doing the 30 seconds wait time.
The suspense!!! It's killing me! Regardless, my Power Wagon doesn't care. She likes that nozzle going in her, and nothing is going to change that urge.
Don Leamon lmfao!
If the pump is accurate, then this truck is running real lean which means the NOX is high and it probably doesn't meet emisions. I suspect there will be more emission calibrations before launch, which means the mileage will be reduced. This is how VW was getting high mileage numbers!
Diesel always runs lean. It's how the engines work. There is no throttle in the intake air stream.
IceBerggeo NOx are an inevitable consequence of high temperature combustion; once temperatures exceed 2000°C, nitrogen and oxygen will react to form these oxides. Diesel ignites when compressed in an engine, so it runs ‘lean’, meaning there’s a high air to fuel ratio. This allows the diesel to burn more completely, but makes it more difficult to deal with NOx. Gas engines run stoichiometrically, matching oxygen to fuel, and deal well with emissions using catalytic converters.
@@db3837 I understand how diesels work, and it sounds like you do to, but I understand that this engine also has two EGR valves. One before the turbo and one after to be able to combat high nox emissions. That is most likely why they are able to achieve emissions ratings and power ratings. They take the exhaust and pump it back in without stealing power from the turbo.
Excuse me while I push my eyeballs back into place...
I'll be watching these 3rd gen ED's closely over the next year or so. I'll be in the market for a crew cab/4x4 tradesman 2021. I could live with DEF and regen for those kind of numbers.
Real world figures for my 2015 eco (no recall reflash yet) is around 17.4 mpg hauling a 5200 lb trailer in Western Oregon. I also drive highways at 60 mph and freeways at 65 mph. I've seen mileage as high as 18+ but that was with a slight tailwind.
Holy Crap...I am now dreaming of a 40 mpg Jeep Rubicon. If these numbers are legit..... 2020 JLU Rubicon here I come.
I would not expect that though, due to gearing.
If that actually happens I’d have to reconsider the RAV4 adventure
I'm not sure 40 for a JLUR is likely, mid to upper 30s are very likely. We have a JLU with the V6 and if I want to I can get it in the 27-28.5 MPG. It requires being in the 60ish MPH range and using the cruise control on the flats. Just to do it in no rush I pulled just north of 500 miles on nearly 20 gallons. It was only worth bragging rights because the drive was hours longer than normal and I was slow lane the whole way. Glad I left at midnight so there was zero traffic.
12 towing and 30 regular MPG is impressive enough, if it really is 40MPG then these are going to be super popular.
Joseph Whiskey Beale is the maintenance the same as a heavy duty ?
@@n1n0z24 u problemly could js
Most likely
I have wondered about the filling procedure. Probably would entail a lot of work but I feel they should be using a remote tank with a direct fill.
In this case very possible they got an airlock or something that caused a kickback. I am sure we have all had a vehicle at one time that gave problems when filling.
It would be great though if the figure is correct.
I'm a truck guy and that's why I'm a Fan! Love what you guys do!
Whenever your filling up that little amount of fuel being off just a little bit on the top off will make a huge difference in the mpg number.
The real number will be @ 33 I expect.
The 4th gen eco-diesel was highly underrated. That truck was reliable, had decent gas mileage, and was pretty powerful. Hopefully people catch up with the 5th gen.
It should be done two more times to verify.
Yes, and over a longer drive also. Would give a more accurate average.
Definitely agree...200 or 250 mile loop would be better as well.
@@gransport4246 Yes for sure. A good mixed real world rest and a 200 mile highway test(flat road with hills mixed in there).
Even if this truck gets 35mpg instead of this 40, that's still impressive. Ford definitely has its work cut out for sure. They need a clean sheet diesel to compete or heavily rework the current one?
Gran Sport That’s a lot of miles to need to drive the same in every vehicle. 100 is fine for a highway MPG test. What are you really going to learn with another 100-150 miles?
Nope. They've done this test for years this same way. This is the only time I remember it being questioned so severely. They account for so many parameters and they have standardized it as much as possible. I believe it. I think if it is so unbelievable they run the exact same test again. I've never understood why all the half ton diesels don't get 40mpg...in '91 a 2wd Dodge 12v could get 26mpg and in '95 a 6.5 chev could see as almost 25mpg consistently. I think the new Trucks should have a manual Eco switch that cuts the engine to 200hp and 300ftlbs.
That's pretty dam good.
Time to upgrade from my 09
My 09 gets 20mpg without trailer , about 11 to 13mpg pulling a 5,000 pound trailer
Just make sure they come with a trim of Longhorn or limited
When the music stopped with andre’s shock I died laughing 😂 hahaha
First let me say I love you guys and your channel...I tell all kinds of people about y'all! :-)
Second, let me preface...I've personally owned 10 Trucks/SUVs in my 50 years, where we pulled a 4,000 lb. Malibu Echelon or Malibu Response LX on a Tandem sold tube Ryan Trailer. I have always hand calculated the MPGs after every fill-up of every vehicle we've ever owned (car, truck, SUV), and if they were pulling or not. Below are the vehicles we've owned that have pulled that 4,000 lb. setup...and they are listed sequentially in the order we'd purchased them. Plus, I listed the Average MPG's we'd get going down the highway, or pulling.
My point is this...when we had our '97 Cummins Turbo Diesel...Diesel Fuel cost WAY less than Gas. So I had it all figured out on a spreadsheet...so with the extra cost of the Cummins Diesel Engine...its break even point would be 77,000 miles. However, what my spreadsheet could NOT tell me...was how "cheap" the Cummins felt to operate with its 36 Gallon Tank that would go 800+ miles without fail with an empty truck. Soooo compared to our 454 Suburban that averaged 9.4 MPG (just carrying itself around with a 42 Gallon tank) where a person could literally watch the fuel gauge go down. The Cummins "felt cheap" to operate (well it did until the transmission gave out at 37,000 miles which made me afraid about how the rest of the truck was built in comparison to the awesome Cummins). ;-)
Plus, I will also note that at the time we bought our 1997 Dodge Cummins Turbo Diesel, my good friend was the Cummins Mechanic at the Dodge Dealership, so he had done the "110%" Tune that was possible back before all the computers. AND, also at the time, Diesel Fuel cost WAY less...AND a person did NOT have to add the Blue DEF (which a quick search online says that a person needs 1 Gallon of DEF [about $6.50 per/Gal.] or [$4.57 per/Gal in 55 Gal DEF Drum] for Every 50 Gallons of Diesel Fuel.
So many things come to mind...so where is a normal person expected to store a 55 Gal Drum? So, if it was me, I'd be buying 2.5 Gals...but anyway...so that means that not only does the Diesel Engine Option Cost WAY more...and Diesel Fuel now Costs WAY more (at least here in the NW). But then a person is also adding DEF at the ratio of 1:50 that's another cost of 13¢ to 8.3¢ for every gallon of Diesel.
As a person will see below our '97 Cummins pretty much got 22-24 everywhere it went empty and averaged 14.9 pulling 4,000 lbs...where my wife's new 2017 Honda Ridgeline gets 26.3 on the Highway all the time...and has averaged 22.3 MPG over it's whole life...and we got 15.3 pulling the same 4,000 lbs. BUT NOW keep in mind this is a Boat which is more aerodynamic...Yet it would seem that Diesels no longer pencil out anymore UNLESS a person has serious heavy hauling to do like 20,000 - 30,000 lbs, and is pulling those types of heavy weights all the time.
So a 2020 Dodge ECO Diesel in good weather gets 12.43 MPGs and on a 28 degree day the TFL team gets 11.5 MPG with a Honda Ridgeline. So again, I know the Dodge was pulling 7K and the Honda 4K...and yes I know some people need to pull more. But my point is more about the viability and "True" Cost of Diesels anymore.
So, I'm not trying to be a Debbie Downer on diesel, as a person will see below...I've owned a bunch of rigs...and YES, I'm 50 now...so maybe I am old and do not want a harsh ride anymore...and I love to "borrow" my wife's Ridgeline and put it in Sand Mode where it's i-VTM4 / SH-AWD puts all the power down and rockets up to speed and around corners (it actually handles better them my car does). So for me and our much LOWER towing needs...Gas is the most practical for us (just food for thought).
New '94 Suburban 2500 454 4x4 - 9.4 MPG Normal / Pulling 8.3 MPG / Best Ever 13.1 all downhill from Lassen National Park to Redding, CA. ;-)
Used '92 F-150 4.9L Straight Six 2WD - 14.0 MPG Normal / Pulling 12.9 MPG / Best Ever 15.9
New '97 Dodge Cummins Diesel 2500 4x4 - 22-24 MPG Normal / Pulling 14.9 MPG / Best Ever 870 Miles out of 1 Tank 24.1 MPG
New '00 Toyota Tundra Access Cab 4x4 - 14.1 MPG Normal / Pulling 12.1 MPG / Best Ever 18.1
Used '99 Toyota 4Runner SR5 4x2 - 17.2 MPG Normal / Pulling 15.1 MPG / Best Ever 22.3
New '05 Tundra Double Cab 4x4 - 13.8 MPG Normal / Pulling 12.1 MPG / Best Ever 19.5
New '08 Highlander Sport AWD - 17.9 MPG Normal / Pulling 15.2 MPG / Best Ever 22.4
New '11 Tundra CrewMax 4x4 - 12.9 MPG Normal / Pulling 10.0 MPG / Best Ever 19.1
New '13 Tacoma Double Cab TRD Sport 4x4 12.8 MPG Normal (VERY DISAPPOINTING) / Pulling 11.5) / Best Ever 18.5
New '17 Honda Ridgeline RTS i-VTM4 AWD - 22.3 MPG Normal Average / Pulling 15.3 MPG / Highway Ave has been 26.3 MPG
You talk about an over thinker. Gheeze. Face it, the new Ram and their engineers are for real and they are going to continue to siphon huge amounts of cash from the other truck manufactures. People are switching from Ford and GM, I am buying a Ram because it is the best most durable truck out there. The IHS safety test also confirmed it is the safest truck. The truck of the year tests (go watch the testing for that) is real. This truck is amazing and the Ram engineers really did their homework. Time to switch to a truck where the engineers care, Ford and GM are all about Walmart style business which is just sell sell sell and worry about the other stuff later.
Awkward moment when your V6 gets worse mpg than a truck towing
Some interesting numbers. Previous Ecodiesel got 13.3 mpg doing the same test. This new Ecodiesel from towing to empty it dropped 70%. By far the biggest drop they have tested.
12.4 towing and 40 empty is not bad at all
Jason Reyes how far off do you think?
Tow Piglet I think it's off 10-14 mpg.
I dont think that MPG number is off by much. 2500 and 3500 diesel pickup can get 25 to sometimes 30mpg, this ram 1500 weighs about 2500+ lbs less than a 3500.
Then again the previous model ecodiesel didnt get close to 40 so who knows. Weird
Jason Reyes lol too funny but true I just did a 50k mile review on my 2019 3500 and came to similar conclusion
That motor ain't broke in yet so I would like to see a rerun. If it get same number i may be sold on this truck beside the hemi
Whoa. 40mpg in a pickup? That is really good. As for the mpg display being 30% off, I am not all that surprised. Why not? My 07 RAM's readout is at least 20% anytime I get over a 20mpg average. So, I always check at the pump. I am curious to see what the error is when I get a 25mpg tank now. That said, nice work; thank you for sharing the video.
With small figures, the error rate increases with tiny variations. Literally, running that test twice, maybe three times in a row and y’all would be good, eliminating those minor pump inconsistencies that skew the results.
This is not rocket science channel.
Raul Serrano Understood. But to run a professional channel, they need to present things in a professional manner. And to call mommy and daddy Chrysler after one anomalous result is silly. They’ll probably run it a few more times, though.
I dont even own a truck and never have a need to tow anything yet I watch every video you all put out!
Redo the test on a road going 55-60. If you guys got that going 70 I can’t imagine what it would get going 55!
Ryan Norris you’d be looking at 15-30% better mph. But that applies to any vehicle and realistically are you going to drive 55mph on a highway, no.
John Moore all highways in my area in central Pennsylvania are 55, it only gets up to 70 on our interstates and turnpikes.
Ryan Norris but realistically are you going to go 55mph, we have 55mph highways by me but everyone goes 65-70mph.
@@johnmoore1495 you obviously haven't driven on PA roads 😂
Yes, do the 98 mile loop at a slower speed.
I love these videos one is a old guy that hauls daily and the other is paid off by gm. Ram are the most reliable,best riding,best driving,and nicest trucks on the road. With higher resale and zero problems I lost my ass in my trucking company trying ford and gm both lived in the shop constantly and my rams kept on going day after day. I tripled my $ due to switching to ram 10 years ago. You can’t find a driver to drive pos fords or gm products because they don’t get paid when it’s broke. All 14 of my ram HD’s do haul after haul with better mpg and absolutely no breakdowns or recalls unlike gm junk
those were unbelieveable numbers. I think people would be crazy to not consider purchasing the new ram EcoDiesel
98 ➗ 2.449 is right, just over 40 US mpg which would be just over 48 imperial mpg. Great figures for a vehicle that size. Well done Mr Truck! 👍
This is amazing! Just one question, why dont you guys fill the tank to the brim, like fill the fuel tank up to where you could literally see the fuel up to the rim where you screw fuel tank cap? Imo this will solve the guessing game if the fuel pump no. Are correct, or just the effects of the fuel bubbles triggering an early shut off to the fuel pump nozzle making the result questionable.... love your show guys keep it real.
this makes sense.
The fuel going in displaces air and vapor. Since fuel vapor is considered pollution, the air getting pushed out goes through a charcoal filter to absorb the vapor. It's slowly reintroduced to the engine when running later. Same principle as a carbon trap just behind the air filter. If you fill the tank up to the filler neck, there's a good chance that liquid fuel will make it into the charcoal canister. Not only will this trigger a check engine light, but if enough gets in there, it'll actually slow the flow of air out (and consequently fuel in) so much that every nozzle will auto-shutoff on even the lowest setting. This happened to a friend of mine and it took 15-20 minutes to fuel his 14 gallon tank a tiny bit at a time.
If those mpg numbers are on that is some awesome mpg numbers. Thanks for sharing Andre, Kent and TFL Trucks.
You're welcome
Could be a fresh hot load of foamy diesel. I've had as much as 20% foam after many fill ups with diesel.
Wow, my buddies EcoDiesel just blew its water pump at 50,000 miles, thanks I’ll keep my Tundra. Here in Canada there’s an EcoDiesel class action lawsuit for EcoDiesel failures.
My dads is at 35k miles with some sensor issue.
My friend has one with 130k with no issues. It's pretty hit and miss.
Italian quality.
I'll stick with the hemi.
That's the key, those engines has more serious issues after ridiculously low mileage, they looks good on the paper but doesn't last long. These are not GM engines those are VM Motori, poorly designed and cheap manufactured Italian engines.
Before you consider to buy one read customer's reviews first!!!
@@js-wy8fg
In my experience GM hasnt been particularly good. Neither has ford. Toyota for my next truck. I hate to be buying Japanese trucks but they seem to be the most reliable right now.
The problem is how dependable is that eco-diesel engine this time around?
wont know for a couple years. id definitely wait til the next generation of the engine.
Again you guys got to remember you have the prototype so the prototype is probably tuned to the max. Once we got our hands on the production model it'll probably only get 29 to 31 miles a gallon. I would love to have a 40 mile per gallon truck though. That would be insane. That would never buy another car again if it was.
40 mpg?! That's too crazy. I wonder if RAM sent them Andre a ringer. 🤨🤔. I mean, that's Passat diesel numbers from a few years ago.
WRXXXual 40 MPG Does not seem right so they’re gonna have to do it again in another video because in my head I did the math and it did not seem right
@@mustangdbest220 idk it's definitely plausible! If I drive super conservatively with my 2019 f350 dually diesel I can get around 20-21 mpg
@@tundras4ever552 that doesn't seen right because RAM is shit
Some press guys got 40ish in the new Silverado diesel. Read it a couple months ago during 1st press launch.
@@mustangdbest220 the math is very straight forward. They ran a known course of travel, and the pumps are certified by the state (assumption here is that the certification is up to date). The only other thing I can think of is that the truck is tweaked from FCA 🤔
Just run as many laps as tank allows and repeat computation. This will minimize approx error. By the way, technology behind that engine is probably the most advanced at the moment.
Run the test again...if accurate, they’ll sell a gazillion of them!
Please, hurry hurry hurry with a follow up test ASAP because if y'all get a similar result i have some pickups to order!
Thank y'all for the countless hours you contribute in making content!
Is there a way to confirm that none of these diesels go into regen mode when doing the loop?
Now that the big 3 have a 1/2 ton diesel, you guys MUST do an Ike and an MPG test with them! Get the trucks as IDENTICAL as possible too.
I get 28 with my 2018 with 4x4 crew doing combined driving and highway at 80 mph. I do have a GDE tune from 1500 mile though. so I also have 250 hp to wheels.
Impressive fuel economy. More importantly, while I realize it may be tempting, if Andre is towing a trailer it needs to be a horse trailer. It does not matter how much some camper trailer company offers you to showcase their product, if Andre cannot find a way to reference "old town road" does anything even matter? Rock on guys!
Wow that's amazing, I don't even get that on my motorcycle.
I’ve got a 20 ecodiesel Ram limited. I don’t tow a ton but I do occasionally put pallets of flooring in it. I’ve put as much as 3500 lbs in the bed. I’m a big fan, the mileage is better than the Nissan Altima 3.5 I used to drive!
40 mpg is awesome. The best I've ever gotten in my 6.2 silverado was 26. 12.0 towing 9000 lbs. I might have to switch to diesel.
jster91 but why? You get the exact same towing from an NA engine and you dont have to worry about upkeep costs of diesel.
@@BetaRacer24 True. And I like the power from the 6.2. It's a beast.
The diesels require more expensive fuel and def. I doubt you’d save anything. The truck didn’t really get 40 mpg.
Drove a 2019 Rebel V6. Pretty new had 1500 miles on it. Great truck, went from Plymouth, Mi to Marquette, Mi. First stop was just over Mackinac Bridge on US 2. Mpg was 14.7 at approximately 80 mph. Without resetting trip odometer the mpg Rose to 16.8. This leg was done at about 65 mph outside city limits all the way to Negaunee, Mi. This vehicle is seriously underpowered with a V6 gas engine. It is also equipped with an electric fan. Hopefully the diesel with direct drive coolant fan or an extra trans cooler. Electric fans cycling allow coolant in radiator to rise to a level that won't allow it to cool a trans pulling a heavy load on all vehicles.
1st gen ecodiesel.... we got 34 mpg to Louisiana and back. These numbers are not suprising
That’s why I am subscriber and loyal fan of you guys always getting accurate information , much love and respect ✊🏾 from California!!!
At 40 mpg, I just may change from Nissan Titan to a Dodge Ram eco diesel in 2020...
Great video I own since new a 2002 F150 XLT Super Cab 5.4 Triton 2 valve 4x4 with 4 speed auto 137,000 miles with 3.55 tow package and happy that I get 16 mpg.
Wonder what the eco diesel rebel will get. Would be an untouchable overlanding rig.
My 2016 hybrid sedan gets around 40 combined, it goes 490 miles with a 12 gallon tank on the highway. This truck is more efficient than a hybrid sedan, hard to believe that.
I don’t buy it. Do it again.
A much more accurate test would be over a 500 mile circuit because the filling error would have much less effect on the results.
If that # is even close to that, I would buy one!!
I drive a 2016 Ram Laramie 4X4 EcoDiesel (after recall repair) and I average 24 MPG to drive 120 miles (averaging 70-75 mph). This 2020 Ecodiesel is averaging 40 mpg. Am I missing something here? Please let me know.
I imagine this truck is at least over 30 hwy but 40 seems up there. Even if it did pull that off in a single run I bet that isn’t a normal result for this truck.
It's not. Pump 5 gallons into the downpipe over 30 miles and the MPG is shit like all the DPF equipped diesels.
I have a 2020 limited EcoDiesel 4x4 with the 3.92 and as heavy as you can get with options. On long highway trips I set my cruise at 72 and get 27.5 mpg consistently. Country roads at 45-55 I average 30 - 31 mpg.
My configuration is nearly the worst you can get for fuel economy, so I would believe mid 30’s in a light 2x4
40 mpg in 2 wheel....holy *#&! 4x4 should be 35...thats amazing.
I wanna see what the Chevy does
4x2 trucks are useless. 4x4 is only a 1 mpg penalty at most in real world conditions. I doubt this thing gets more than 28 mpg empty. +-1 gallon when filling up is normal.
Brian not really I bought my 2wd truck to tow and haul never once needed 4x4
Ohioguy Try towing up a steep muddy launch ramp with a 4x2 pickup. Try backing a heavy trailer up a steep driveway in the rain without 4x4.
Compare all the half ton diesels
Glad to see you guys aren't buying that number at face value. I bet the pump kicked off before it was truly topped off. The way I used to do it was to fill it up till it was literally coming out of the top. Shake the truck to get any air pockets out and fill it up till it was truly topped off. After driving my trip I would do the same thing again so I really knew exactly how much fuel it used. I don't do it with my new truck because I heard it can damage the evap system but it never hurt any vehicle that I've had before, I've done it to my wife's 2012 Malibu since it was new and its pushing 200,000 miles.... I just don't trust the 30 second method you guys use, seems to be easily botched by a pump that kicks off too easily or could be different depending on if the gas nozzle is all the way in the filler or not creating a vacuum....
This thing is fuel efficient as my mom’s 2014 Honda Civic in empty :/
The best mileage i ever achieved with the 2001 corolla i just sold, was 42mpg highway. In a way, its not surprising, considering the 1 tons get upwards of 20mpg.
If this were proven to be accurate, The car world would fall flat. Truck sales would rocket and cars would tank for the imports.
@@matthewrobertson156 i dunno, the tdi beetles were getting upwards of 50mpg on the highway..
@@machinist7230 There will still be niche cars that will be there. But the point many people choose a car over a truck/SUV because of fuel. Once you can obtain 40MPG in a truck your striking a nerve in the car market. Some would say 35MPG is the sweet spot. People in general prefer the conveniences and capabilities of a truck (which are why the sell) but many one vehicle families choose a car due to the fuel consumption as a deciding factor in a compromise. This would be a game changer if it holds true IMO. I'm not a diesel guy but would seriously consider this for my next vehicle as many on the fence probably would as well.
@@matthewrobertson156 in a sense, this is already why cars are on the downswing. Even at 20-25 mpg, trucks are already much more efficient than they were 15 years ago and with the low price of oil adjusted for inflation, many folks just don't see the justification for a car which has less utility and only marginally more luxurious.
Love how you guys investigate and dont leave it to chance! Best in the business!
This v6 diesel should be in the pro master van as well. I don't know why they stopped with the 3.0 4banger diesel tho.
It's mind boggling they aren't putting this engine in the promasters
You can on the Promaster 3500.
@@dillonh321 wow, good looking out lol 👍
@@dillonh321 I don't see them on the ram promaster site to build them with that option, at least yet.
@@fsas190 Somewhere online I saw them for sale maybe they stopped producing them until next gen ecodiesel launches.
I have a 2007 ram 3500 dually rwd that got exceptional rolling freeway mileage of 19mpg ... I made only one modification / K&N filter and get 23 to 25mpg which is of the carts! I take extreme care of my 6.7 / 408 cummins with 4000m oil changes and every other fuel filter change 8000m
I don't believe 40mpg with that EcoD... So since that mileage is Outrageous if you could do a Re-Test that would answer Our disbelief... You Guys are Great Thank You 💥💥💥💥💥
This is another reason the Cummins needs an 8 speed behind it!
It needs a manual option most of all
Well the computer was fairly accurate in the first run while towing, so my money would be on fueling variations caused by either the pump not being calibrated, as you suggested, or something in the fuels plumbing/venting which caused the auto shut off to trigger earlier.
Word is that one of these trucks was driven from Michigan to Texas and got 36 mpg, so 40 mpg is not out of the realm on a short loop like that.
Shawn Colburn potentially, but that’s still a 10% improvement over however it was operated on that run. Driving 70mph as well casts more doubt on that figure. If they did 55 sure, but the wind drag causes me to think more a case of a wonky fill.
@@ALMX5DP I can see that there is a good chance of a fuel fill problem. On the other hand I don't recall this video talk about wind that would have drastically decrease mpg. Also a trip from MI to TX which was probably over two days with many variations in driving conditions such as wind, temperature and altitudes would have a greater affect on mpg. Again, I'm not disagreeing that there could be a fueling problem, just stating a short loop could have better results than a long loop.
Shawn Colburn oh I was just referring to the speeds. Wind resistance increases by the velocity squared, so if they actually achieved 40mpg going 70mph, then doing that same run at a much more economy minded 55 would have resulted in even greater fuel economy which seems unlikely given all the other parameters.
I have had situations like that before where I filled up, and I got an insane number on my fill up. However, the next time that I filled up, it was a significantly lower number then normal. I assume possibly an air bubble of some sort? I really don't know. But I have had weird stuff like that happen before. It would be pretty cool though, if that is actually the real numbers! Can't wait for your part 2 of the video!
Get the GM truck, it would be nice to see a comparison
That's awesome empty. I drive a similar route a couple times a week for work, my work car (2015 Chrysler 200 4cyl with 175k miles on it) usually gets about 28mpg mixed driving..that's measuring it at the pump. One day it got about 42 mpg with the same similar trip...lol