cc1999
Well-Known Member
Just because a motor is smaller does not always mean it will be more fuel efficient.
Sometimes especially here in KS and OK where I travel the most we have 15-30 mph winds everyday. The harder a turbo engine has to work the more fuel it will burn.
This was prime example of that seen in a TFL mileage comparison video that came out this morning. I have seen what they are seeing in the video here first hand many times.
It was not a surprise to me that the V8 F150 got nearly 2mpg better mileage then the 4cly turbo in the midsize GMC Canyon.
I have seen that same thing happens with some of our F150 V8 4x4 crew cabs in comparison to my turbo V6 on 250-mile trip and the V8 F150 got 18 mpg, and I got 14 mpg with my Ranger Raptor.
Depending on the terrain and overall situation it would not shock me to see a 2.7 v6 get better mileage in real world applications then the 2.3 i4 gets given the same scenario.
Sometimes especially here in KS and OK where I travel the most we have 15-30 mph winds everyday. The harder a turbo engine has to work the more fuel it will burn.
This was prime example of that seen in a TFL mileage comparison video that came out this morning. I have seen what they are seeing in the video here first hand many times.
It was not a surprise to me that the V8 F150 got nearly 2mpg better mileage then the 4cly turbo in the midsize GMC Canyon.
I have seen that same thing happens with some of our F150 V8 4x4 crew cabs in comparison to my turbo V6 on 250-mile trip and the V8 F150 got 18 mpg, and I got 14 mpg with my Ranger Raptor.
Depending on the terrain and overall situation it would not shock me to see a 2.7 v6 get better mileage in real world applications then the 2.3 i4 gets given the same scenario.
Sponsored
