Ranger vs. F150

[ctechbob]

It wouldn’t shock me if this were true, at least for steady state highway speeds. The differences in drag coefficient of the different size trucks would probably be dwarfed by the aerodynamic drag added by the trailer. Where I’d still expect some differences are in stop and go city traffic where weight differences of the vehicles could still have a noticeable effect on economy.

Yep, probaby right, but I'd imagine even that number is still down in the weeds as far as being better/worse.

I know if I slow down, below 65 or so my mileage shoots up to 12/13. Even better if I'm in the 55mph range.

Someone convince TFL to do a Ranger/F150/F250(Godzilla) MPG comparison. 3 Identical RV's Trailers all at the same time with highway/surface street mix.

Sponsored

 

[ranger 2020]

I think that frontal area has as much to do with fuel economy as weight, as long as total weight is close. When my Ranger was new, under 1000miles, I drove to Grand Rapids Mich to buy pellets for heating the house for the coming winter. I live aprox 30 miles from Toledo Ohio so it was a pretty good trip. Used my utility trailer @ 600lbs, a ton on the trailer, and 1/2 ton in the bed. The wife went along as she is the navigator in the family plus spare tire, jack, & emergency tools. On I96 if you don"t run at least 70 mph you stand a good chance of getting run over. So I pushed the haul/tow and off we went. Overall mpg was just over 17 mpg, figured on calculator. Went again the next week, same route, only this time with premium fuel and broke 18 mpg.

 

[Frenchy]

I think that frontal area has as much to do with fuel economy as weight, as long as total weight is close. When my Ranger was new, under 1000miles, I drove to Grand Rapids Mich to buy pellets for heating the house for the coming winter. I live aprox 30 miles from Toledo Ohio so it was a pretty good trip. Used my utility trailer @ 600lbs, a ton on the trailer, and 1/2 ton in the bed. The wife went along as she is the navigator in the family plus spare tire, jack, & emergency tools. On I96 if you don"t run at least 70 mph you stand a good chance of getting run over. So I pushed the haul/tow and off we went. Overall mpg was just over 17 mpg, figured on calculator. Went again the next week, same route, only this time with premium fuel and broke 18 mpg.

The frontal area will definitely make a difference. I have towed a few different things with my Ranger and none of them had the beg walls of a camper trailer. Size overall was usually about bed height at best and didn't affect wind drag much at all.

 

[jpaddy13]

I have towed with multiple F150's, from the 5.4, 5.0 and 3.5 ecoboost, and they have all been around the same mpg. The 5.4 was the worst of the bunch, 10 to 12 was the absolute best I could ever get and that is towing around the midwest and southern Ontario. I towed with 5.0 and the 3.5 out west and to the east coast of Canada/US and could consistently see 13 to 14 on either engine. My FIL with his 6.0 diesel F250 (with a 33' camper vs my 28', both lightweight models) saw around 13 -14 mpg. Just my experience and not really accounting for ALL the variables associated with towing, although I just towed my car trailer with the 350 inside, knocked down 16.1L/100 (~ 14.5 mpg) round trip, around 279 miles, and it felt comfortable doing it.

 

[Zvedza]

My 2021 Ranger Tremor gets about 25-26 mpg on the highway when not towing.

I never saw close to that in mine unless i was doin 50-60, what magic did you have in that baby?

 

[Jason B]

When it comes to the engines in our Ranger or F150s, they should be called Eco OR Boost. Once you really tax the engine and get that turbo spinning, the Eco part goes out the exhaust.

 

[Floyd]

When it comes to the engines in our Ranger or F150s, they should be called Eco OR Boost. Once you really tax the engine and get that turbo spinning, the Eco part goes out the exhaust.

You have a point but its pretty much true of anything you drive... a lead foot costs MPG.
My Ranger gets about the same loaded and towing on the road as it does not towing in town.
This has been true with every tow vehicle of mine so far.
The key is to mitigate acceleration and reduce speed when towing.
My RV trailer is small, only a couple thousand pounds, plus bikes, people, and cargo.
Fuel mileage is between 19 and 23 MPG when towing at 63MPH.
I save the 78MPH and the hard acceleration for light cargo and no trailer.

Driving my Ranger with no trailer or cargo I can choose any MPG number between 16 and 28 with the loud pedal. The Ranger sure does deliver power (at a cost) at WOT though!

 

[Frenchy]

When it comes to the engines in our Ranger or F150s, they should be called Eco OR Boost. Once you really tax the engine and get that turbo spinning, the Eco part goes out the exhaust.

For any vehicle with a turbocharger either you are getting good fuel mileage with no boost(AKA no fun) or not so good fuel mileage with boost(AKA usually fun stuff going on). It be the circle of life there

 

[EJH]

For any vehicle with a turbocharger either you are getting good fuel mileage with no boost(AKA no fun) or not so good fuel mileage with boost(AKA usually fun stuff going on). It be the circle of life there

Exactly true. My other vehicle is a Subaru Forester XT with a small displacement turbo. Same behavior in both the Ranger and Forester if you have a heavy foot. Fun though.

IMHO, the sweet spot for a mid-size tow vehicle will be the new gen Ranger when it is available with the 2.7L. I'd love a little more power for mountain driving. A F-150 is too big for me. The Raptor won't have enough of a tow rating for my 5k lbs trailer, sadly. It is rated at 5,500 lbs, which means a 550 lb hitch weight. The hitch weight is what will limit most travel trailers with the Raptor

 

[Frenchy]

Exactly true. My other vehicle is a Subaru Forester XT with a small displacement turbo. Same behavior in both the Ranger and Forester if you have a heavy foot. Fun though.

IMHO, the sweet spot for a mid-size tow vehicle will be the new gen Ranger when it is available with the 2.7L. I'd love a little more power for mountain driving. A F-150 is too big for me. The Raptor won't have enough of a tow rating for my 5k lbs trailer, sadly. It is rated at 5,500 lbs, which means a 550 lb hitch weight. The hitch weight is what will limit most travel trailers with the Raptor

With all the fancy tech in all the new trucks I can't say if I would go with many of them. My older brother was attempting to show off his new Colorado too me(mind you I'm not a Chevy guy at all) and then shows me how to turn the headlight on and off along with the fog lights....... Let's just say it's the same idea for the locker on the new Ranger coming out......

Because of that it points me to the Frontier again. Still on a basic level for simplicity

As for the towing capacity I suspect you can go more than 550 for a young weight. Just a question of how much more. To my understanding as long as you don't go more than 15-20% You are considered ok.

 

[maxbottomtime]

I will also agree that the Ranger tows well. Because of the camper I'm going to safely assume it is bigger in size compared to the Ranger? If so it is what it is. Best I can suggest if you like the Ranger is slow down and/or look at getting the bigger tank that Long Range Automotive is going to offer in the near future. With double the size it will help especially on trips without the camper

any link on that? Assume that's for 5G.

 

[Wes Siler]

High price, and in my opinion should be for offroad use only.

I'm not putting my family on top of one of those on the highway. A good impact and those welded brackets are ripping right off there and dumping fuel everywhere.

Offroad rock crawler, sure, all day.

Simply to be sold in oz, the tank has to comply with the Australian Design Rules, which are vastly more stringent and real world than any American regs. This is one of the reasons why Aussie 4x4 parts are so, so much higher quality than stuff designed here.

I have an LRA tank on the 200 series, and it's arguably the highest quality component on that vehicle.

More here: https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-gear/cars-trucks/build-overland-vehicle-like-australian/

 

[Frenchy]

Simply to be sold in oz, the tank has to comply with the Australian Design Rules, which are vastly more stringent and real world than any American regs. This is one of the reasons why Aussie 4x4 parts are so, so much higher quality than stuff designed here.

I have an LRA tank on the 200 series, and it's arguably the highest quality component on that vehicle.

More here: https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-gear/cars-trucks/build-overland-vehicle-like-australian/

Nice article, is it one you wrote or just been mentioned in with the lighting?

Never mind, just saw it was you

 

[Hawkeye]

I never saw close to that in mine unless i was doin 50-60, what magic did you have in that baby?

I've always gotten better mileage on vehicles than what they are rated to have. Don't do anything special but just drive 65-68 or so and take it easy with braking, acceleration, etc. Just the way I've always driven I guess.

 

[Hawkeye]

Thanks for the help everyone. I suspect that the basic cause is the front surface area of the camper with resultant wind resistance.

Sponsored