Ford makes mid-year Super Duty changes to improve fuel economy
Rather than wait for the 2009 model year to roll around, Ford has decided to introduce two new fuel saving changes to the 2008.5 Super Duty that should improve fuel economy for the big trucks by about 1.5 mpg. That may not sound like much, but for vehicles that barely break the double-digit barrier in mpg, it's a big improvement. The changes include reducing the rear axle ratio on certain F-250 and F-350 models and extending their underbody chin spoilers by 3.93 inches. If you're a truck person, you're no doubt wondering how Ford will maintain the maximum tow rating for these trucks while reducing their rear axle ratios. With big trucks, a higher rear axle ratio means more towing capacity, while a lower rear axle ratio provides better fuel economy. In this case, Ford says that these Super Duty trucks will still be able to tow the same amount of weight as before, though our friends at Pickuptruck.com suspect that 0 to 60 performance and acceleration in general, especially while towing, will drop. Click here to view the specific changes for each iteration of the Super Duty that's affected.
[Source: Pickuptruck.com]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg "2011 Audi A8: Live from Miami")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
DALLAS 9:26PM (1/29/2008)
I think ford should build a 4.5L Supercharged twin turbo
I6 diesel electric hybrid with Hydralic Launch assist thus
astronomicly increasing fuel efficiency
Reply
Andrew 4:07PM (1/02/2008)
I wonder what generated interest in fuel economy. [/sarcasm]
Reply
Daniel 9:51PM (1/02/2008)
Is there a law that says pickups must have the aerodynamics of a brick?
tankd0g 4:17PM (1/02/2008)
Token effort at best, but this sure is a sign of the times.
Reply
cowboy bob 4:22PM (1/02/2008)
"Lowering chin spoiler", Hmmm...... Wonder how that will work on the job sight eh? I see 'em all busted up now because they stick down to low and get hit with everything. Great idea on a vehicle that routinely needs good ground clearence. As to the axle ratio redux- sometimes when you need to "hump" a little with a load, you punch it expecting good results,(power). If it ain't there, you just keep your foot in it. So how much are we saving now par'dner?
Reply
geo.stewart 4:38PM (1/02/2008)
after-market adjustments do not count towards CAFE, so... ripping that spoiler off, or Ford selling one at a discount gets em by.
As for the axle rating, again towards CAFE. in the scheme of things, I'm guessing a relatively cheap tweak to the ECU will take care of any issues there after its sold if it is an issue.
As mentioned 1.5mpg doesnt sound like much but you are talking 10% in two easy moves.
the hard part will be the computer tests to find little ways to streamline the body and get another 5 or 10%.
Mulad 4:53PM (1/02/2008)
geo.stewart: These trucks are too big to count in CAFE calculations.
Russell 4:28PM (1/02/2008)
"Ford makes mid-year Super Duty changes to improve fuel economy"
Yea, but did they have to make it so darn ugly?
Reply
rooster 4:30PM (1/02/2008)
Perhaps an effort to stave off governmental meddling in business affairs?
Reply
Richard 4:43PM (1/02/2008)
Oh, please. Modern trucks - especially with modern, 6 speed transmissions - generally have more than enough power. I actually had a '99 F350 with the V10 - by today's standards, "laughably underpowered," and the first time I towed with it after selling my '93 (only 10k lbs) I was overall happy with the power but slightly disappointed. Then I realized that, for some stupid reason, I'd dropped the transmission into 2nd gear for the launch instead of drive.
My older truck was diesel with a manual transmission that topped out at around 13mph in 1st gear. Even in the "pre-turbo" diesel days, I could uphill start more weight than I could comfortably tow.
There's no real reason to keep penalizing highway mileage for the majority of people who don't need 4.33:1 gears but buy them anyway because they're "for towing." Folks who actually need that kind of pull can easily get it, after all - and they're almost certainly not cutting down the 450-650 line (which, in today's world, are often cheaper as well as being more powerful than the more-blinged-out 250/350s).
Just MHO of course. And for everyone who "absolutely needs" every last piece of performance from their truck, all day every day... how on earth did they ever survive 10 years ago, before everyone and their dog was driving a 650 lb ft diesel? Amazing...
Reply
Dan 5:15PM (1/02/2008)
No kidding. To hear some people tell it it's a black mark if the truck and 8,000lb trailer has to kick out of OD to keep speed on a grade.
BAM 5:47PM (1/02/2008)
Seriously. As a child I still remember my parents towing their travel trailer with a C10 Chevy with a 250 inline six and three on the tree....and it was hitched to the dealer installed (with name embossed) bumper!!!
I get so tired of people telling me that I am killing my 2006 F150 because I am towing a 7000 travel trailer. It tows it just fine.....
And in terms of rear ends...that just means a certain number will need to be produced and sold with a 3:73. If you need a 4:10 or higher, then you just check the option box.
And if you lose your chin spoiler....just look around the mall parking lot, there should be lots laying around after they get caught on the parking stops.
Owain Ozymandias Buck 11:46PM (1/02/2008)
Amen!
We don't haul any more than we used to twenty years ago.
The comfort and good brakes and handling of a modern truck are nice when the road gets long though. But heck yeah, with more efficient engines, patience is all you need.
kay 12:29AM (1/03/2008)
Arent those 7.3s great! Although 13 mph is generous, more like 1.3 mph in first (one day I will be rear ended taking off from a light...) I still have mine, and beat on it as a workhorse at least every other day, tows anything I strap to the back of it with no complaint, I dont even think it slows it down. The most complicated piece of electrics on it is the radio. If im not loaded with 3.75s in the rear I can get an honest 21mpg. Towing a VW across NY (at 60 Ill admit) I got 20! I bought a new one thinking that surely in 15 years things have improved. They did, they ride nicer, and they stop a whole lot better, but I cant park the damn thing, it barely fits in the garage, and 16mpg, hmmm I rather like the old one more every day, but maybe I can keep the brakes...
geo.stewart 4:48PM (1/02/2008)
aerodynamics have to be next.
G.M. claims its 2007 Chevrolet Tahoe slips through the air eight percent more efficiently, with the result of a three percent fuel economy improvement.
Can the cabs or front be redesigned? not little but largely can they think outside the box>
Reply
mike 4:49PM (1/02/2008)
Ohhh booo hooo. The only thing these people tow is their wives and their multiple chins.
Reply
jonathan 7:54AM (1/03/2008)
My brother-in law bought a 2008 F350 and on a recent trip hauling 3 adults and a kid to NC he told me he looked down at the instant fuel economy and it was showing 8.5mpg going down the highway! I'm sure he would gladly take the taller gears and additional 1.5mpg, as he drives ~ 60,000 miles for year for his construction business.
Reply
Guenther 8:50AM (1/03/2008)
Thats horrible- I've been running an 08 6.4 powerstroke 4wd CC DRW in testing (8000# vehicle weight) and I'm seeing 12-13mpg. If his truck is brand new, it will improve some. The fuel econ will be that low if the truck is running a re-gen, where raw fuel is dumped into the exhaust to burn off captured particulates.
MikeW 6:41PM (1/02/2008)
The problem is the 3 speed auto + overdrive, let the stick guys keep on, keeping on.
Where is the ZF 6hp34? If you ask ZF, they will build it. Ford can get a group buy with BMW & the VW group.
If Ford gets this transmission, no axle ratio change would be needed.
Mileage could be 'found' through a more aggressive torque converter lockup strategy. Even lockup in 1st gear with tow/haul mode.
A side benefit would be a markedly shorter reverse gear ratio, though it would still be taller than the Duramax/Allison & Cummins/,
Though the turbodiesel would have to be derated some, not as much as the 325hp/600ft-lbs in manual transmission & 4.88 axle automatics. Say 340hp & 625ft-lbs.
If they really wanted mileage, Ford could switch the axles from 75w-140 to 75w-90 oil.
Add capacity to prevent overheating, or add fins to the cover, or add a system to circulate a coolant through the differential to cool the oil as needed. (keep 75w-90 under 175C)
http://www.mobil.com/USA-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENPVLMOMobil1_Synthetic_Gear_Lubricant_LS_75W-90.asp
http://www.mobil.com/USA-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENPVLMoMobil1_Synthetic_Gear_Lubricant_LS_75W-140.asp
or use half 75w-90 and half 75w-140.
PTO for automatics? maybe it is time for an electric PTO. Dual alternator is/was an option?
Reply
Guenther 8:06AM (1/03/2008)
What 3speed +OD are you referring to? I was under the (rather solid) impression that the Powerstroke, which is mostly what we're talking about here, given its 75+% take rate, was backed with the 5 speed powershift trans. Higher rear axle options would be fine for many users that do more carrying than pulling. If they're really getting a 1.5mpg improvement, thats awesome- that amounts to 10-15%. Thats HUGE. Deeper axles will still be available. As for ground clearance- the write-up says "certain" models, so perhaps it's intended for 2wd trucks.