V8’s don’t work hard to make the power. Turbo 6 engines force fuel and air in to match v8 power. I’ve experienced this same result a lot over the years. The turbo engines are working much harder to produce similar results and fall flat on power when in hot conditions.
Because of the towing rear end, engine is doing 2500 rpm on the freeway. I have the 3.92 and 3.22 in two of my trucks and they make 16 and 26 respectively
@ericneal1872 you don't have to put premium fuel in any modern vehicle. The computer will take car of ignition timing on its on. The worst that will happen is you will make less power and maybe less mpg.
As an owner on a 22 3.5 eco boost and a 21 5.0 with 3.73s can confirm the 5.0 is the better more fuel efficient engine. That top end coyote power feels much better on the highway too.
@@MB-jz3uu I traded the 5.0 on the 3.5 because I bought into twin turbo v6 nonsense. Also I wanted a lariat and it was a heavily discounted 3.5 space white lariat. The ST is my wife’s car.
@@Jez-p9k no lie a 5.0 with 3.73 40mph and above will outrun a 3.5. It’s neck and neck with my wife’s explorer st. (Anyone who has been in one knows how quick they are.) also don’t mean to dog on the 3.5 it’s also a great motor I just think unless your towing the 5.0 is the better all around choice.
Majority of truck sales are of the expensive ones. Over half the truck sales from GMC are the Denali, AT4, and AT4X. Showing that expensive trucks are selling because people want them. I would much rather buy an expensive truck over a quarter of $1 million Ferrari. I know that’s not a great comparison, but I much rather have the truck.
They have to gear it lower because those little 3 liters aren't made to drag around a 6000lb truck, it's already straining the crap out of the engine, if it had taller gears it would really be a dog, not a good dog either
@noobasdfjkl Why thank you for the correction, but I would think if they are performing tests they would be doing them as accurately as possible. Hard to say what difference it would have made when the others had them and one did not.
Did anyone see what rpm the Ram was cruising at? 3.92s and and the 8 speed (which has a shorter top gear than either Ford or GM) might have played a role. Not that it would have made a huge difference or if the Ram is even available with another rear end option.
Few things here. the coyote showed in video by epa rating to be 16/24 city/hwy that has to be a typo... that should be the epa on a 4x2 not a 4x4 configuration. the coyote should be 16/22 city/hwy. which makes more sense and its much closer to its claim since you avaraged 19.1mpg. second thing is the GMC had a bed cover which helps the mpg as well as the air suspension which lowers the car on hwy speeds hence the better than epa rating mpg.
Of course, it all depends what you're looking for in a truck. I wanted a full size pick-up truck with gasoline engine, front and rear lockers, disengaging sway bar, 4.10s, and a winch. My options were severely limited. Mileage was the absolute lowest of my concerns.
Great video again guys but one major flaw. You have demonstrated that a tonneau cover greatly improves fuel millage which the GMC and Ford has on but not the RAM. Hope someone reads this and redoes the test. Keep trucking.
Yeah, cylinder deactivation added to the Coyote in 2021. I have that engine, and so far it's been great, but I'm not seeing any real fuel savings to justify the added complexity.
Question - was premium fuel REQUIRED on the GM? Or was it "recommended"? If so, it would have been better to just use regular on the GM, as that's what most people will do, and would provide a better baseline between all 3 trucks.
yes and no.. Seems like all new engines have some failures. GM can't build enough 6.2s right now. You want an engine that can go forever get a Toyota 3.5L v6 or an old HOnda.
I own a GMC with the 5.3l. I would debate whether or not its more reliable than the hurricane when you factor in the DFM system. I have had some very expensive issues with mine
I was completely smitten with my new '23 F-150 w/ the 3.5 and 26 gal tank. And now I just learned that '24 F-150's come with the 36gal tank STANDARD. Damnit.
I'm curious about something. I noticed the Ram Rebel was the only truck that wasn't equipped with a tonneau cover. Sure would think that could change the efficiency numbers of the Hurricane.
The AT4 gets better gas mileage than the AT4X, and is a better trim comparison to those other two trucks. But if the prices are that close, the AT4X comes with superior shocks and front and rear e-lockers.
Purchased new a 2013 Ford F150 Platinum 4x4 with the V6 Ecoboost engine. Eventually, I traded it in for a '22 GMC AT4 with the 6.2 l V8. Both trucks are fantastic and they both did what they were purchased to do ... daily driver with some luxury and could do the work I needed for weekends at my ranch. The fuel mileage on my Ecoboost was disappointing (avg. 13 city/17 hwy), although the power was definitely there. The 6.2 l V8 for the GMC is much more efficient, and I really was surprised when I figured out I was getting better mileage (15 city/ 19 hwy). I suspect the biggest difference in my test cases was the 6 sp v 10 sp transmission, plus the GMCs cylinder deactivation. No knock against TFL per se, but these 'real world reviews' at 5-11,000 ft. elevation do not reflect the operating environment for the typical US buyer. There's a strong negative bias inherent in a N/A engine v. turbo or EV at that altitude. I understand this is the world we're living in now (turbos/hybrids/EVs) but there's no question the high altitude testing is biased against N/A propulsion.
Well it’s all very interesting. And I’m not surprised that the “new” engine did not do as well. My preferences would be a V8. But this is a sample size of one. My question is, do we really need 450 horsepower in everything? We survived for years with trucks that had 225 horsepower and an awful lot of those trucks are still on the road.
I had a ford 3.5 eco boost and Inloved the low end truck. It was faaaaast! But I started learning that turbocharged trucks were not as efficient on highway than a big v8.
Guys please do an apples-to-apples comparison. I appreciate all the testing you do, but keep in mind that the Ram didn't have a tonneau cover like the other two trucks. This difference will negatively impact the Ram's fuel economy
While i get your point, it wont make that much of a difference. Everyone just assumes small engines will do better but adding boost says otherwise. In a heavy truck, you have to walk a fine line of trying to keep rpm's low, but high enough that the engine is making sufficient power to move the truck without lagging the engine. Sometimes that means running the engine in boost, which means mileage drops
I have had 2 Ford Ecoboosts and both were better at towing then previously owned V-8s but actually got worse MPG when you tow because you get into high boost which means a lot more fuel being consumed faster.
@@cmiles97x38 I’ve seen what happens to aluminum engines tow near cap, turbos go out fast, turbos blow, the engines don’t go back to normal after flexing, the aluminum engine cannot handle the brutal abuse a v8 can, I mean yeah if you’re towing what people usually do 2k-7k lbs with a normal utility trailer or light like I see a lot, I tow a 16ft trailer with a compact trailer and 2-2 1/2 cords of wood, honestly I’m surprised my transmission hasn’t busted and my rear shocks haven’t broke 😂, I usually tow/haul 10-13k, including with hilly terrain up to 13% grain. Ontop of that those 10speed transmissions are garbage I feel, my wife used to have a F150 with the 10 speed and it overheated quite a bit and we never used it for towing and use it for commuting and sometimes only drove up to 5 to 6 hours a day and it would heat up bad in the middle of it even driving two hours so we traded it. Why do you think in-line six engines that are used for towing are usually made of cast-iron still especially the HD ones?
@@kenwolf2431 yeah, but if you do some research there have been lawsuits over it… I wasn’t saying all are bad, it happened with hers and it’s not unknown to happen with them.
Can y'all do the $50k trucks, which we are more likely to have than the 80k offroaders? Like crew cabs with 3.21-3.42 gear ratios? Apples to oranges to test 3.21 to 3.92 ratios... And 87 octane gas. Let's really see MPGs for real what most of us will be using.
Great test. Can anyone answer how much the Rams 3.92 hurt its mile per gallon. If your going to test trucks, these 3 are pretty close in HP but not close in gear ratio.. Why not get a Ram with a 3.55 ratio & test it on the same loop, to see if it makes ant difference.
I think ram had it right with the v8 ram rebel gt im too old school for my own good i think the ford is underrated in this configuration & the gm is as well but fuel efficiency isnt the 1st thing i think of in a non diesel half ton
Not a comparable truck but my 23 ram 1500 classic reg cab long box 4x4 hemi with 3.92 gears on longer loops (200-400 miles) with mixed mountains and flat highway (I’m up in BC) will average 20-22 mpg if I hover around 60-70 mph. That’s hand calculated at the pump too
I'll keep my 12 Ram 2500 6.7 Cummins. No Def big tank pulls my empty 12000 lb fifth wheel around like nothing is behind me even in the Rockies. The diesel where I live is $0.02 cheaper than Gas (,why I don't know) I parked my Yukon while #2 is less. A lot more fun to drive.
Good video. I have a 2024 Sierra 1500 5.3L V8 lifted with 6inches on 35s and I’m getting 17 hwy. Really no complaints. I do wish the tank was at least a 30 gallon though but 24 still gets me on fill ups once every 7 days. Around 340 mileage, so not awful. Stock was 425 mileage and 21 hwy.
I can't believe people actually think a 6 cyl turbo truck is going to get better MPG than a V8... honey, you need a decent amount of power to move that big, heavy truck. If you take a V6 that can get 30MPG/hwy that normally comes in a sedan into a big, heavy truck, its going to have to work harder to move the truck around. Add a turbo, you'll need more fuel to make more power with the turbo, so 30MPG highway, becomes more like 20-23. Meanwhile a Coyote V8 in an F150 can muster 25+ MPG on the highway because it doesn't have to work that hard to move the truck. In the end, they will do roughly the same in gas mileage, yet the government seems to think V8's are less fuel efficient... then again these same politicians pushing environmental legislation can't define a woman, a barrel shroud, a stock, or an assault weapon, so I digress.
"Is this Oregon? Are you the gas station attendant?" Actually since 2022, Oregon got rid of that law so you can get gas yourself and not have to wait on someone
@@FirearmHobbyist They are selling hundreds of thousand of them, just not a fast or as much as before. Still incredible amounts, but no one pays sticker except during the Covid market.
@@cmiles97x38 Lol point taken... besides, those aren't the real volume movers. Not everyone is going for an offroad truck when they go to buy. So, you'd probably end up in the mid 50's with that discount putting you in the high 40's/low 50's.
Apparently you don't understand gear ratios. The test was terrible, will not work for efficiency without having equal rear-end ratios and tire size. What kind of idiot can't understand this? American schools are really falling behind apparently.
I mostly agree, but if you think back to the origins of the Ford Modular 4v it goes back to the early 90s. 30 years is pretty old now 🤣. The Coyote itself is only 14ish years old though.
@@Michael-eg3hc ..Strange because electric and inline 6 cyl are the oldest school,older than modern V8's...late 1800's they had electric cars and early 1900's inline 6 cyl were around..
Not only did the ford do better fuel economy it also had the extra benefit of using regular fuel instead of premium fuel like the other two. I would like to see the same test done with the Turbo 6 cylinder trucks (Ford, Ram, Toyota)
Actually higher octane fuel burns slower to prevent pre destination, so if the motor doesn’t benefit from it it would get worse fuel economy by using it.
You should really learn about stuff before making stupid comments the low output hurricane does not require premium it only needs 87 the h.o requires premium
My Dad's old 76 square body C10 chevy only had a 16 gallon tank and got 12 mpg. It got 12 mpg going up hill, down hill, flat land, towing a 6000 lb trailer, falling out of an airplane idling.
My father-in-law's 76 ford f250 4x4 with a 390 four barrel got 6 miles to the gallon in the same conditions it didn't matter what it was doing, 6 miles to the gallon. It came with factory dual tanks and he had extra fuel tanks put in the box cavities so they could go camping with their camper on it and not stop every hour for fuel lol
Thats how they came from the factory on this episode and most likely is how most consumers will receive the trucks which is why they are doing the real life test duh!!! 🙄
I'll also be honest, The Fast Lane xxxx doing comparisons of NA engines with Turbocharged engines is completely pointless for 90% of the population since they test at a mile high or higher in elevation. They need to move out of Colorado to make their testing relevant for the vast majority of people.
While I totally love V8 engines, I have to say I see the perks of an I-6. Only one head, one head gasket, very low vibration. BUT add the two turbos and the lack off better efficiency, the V8s are here to stay, unless the bureaucrats force the manufacturers and the people to buy something less efficient and most likely more expensive in maintenance - two Turbos ain't chap and ain't making working on the engine any simpler...
Good old government thinking. Burning more fuel is fine as long as the emissions out the tail pipe is lower when measured. Modern diesels are the same way. More fuel means more refining, more transportation and distribution. Not to mention the extra complexity, parts and manufacturing just for emissions equipment. Doesn't matter how much cost, energy and extra material has to go into a vehicle. Or even the longevity of the vehicle. Just as long as that tailpipe reading is below a certain number, lol.
@@stever5359 Mostly agree, but one has to question the logic of over-complexity in the pursuit of emissions. There is the law of diminishing returns that needs to be factored more often than it is.
@stever5359 you say that, but at the same time, removing or deactivating those systems often gains more power, better fuel economy and more reliability. I'm not saying there should be no rules. But if you talk to mechanics or even just do some research on things like auto stop/start. Cylinder deactivation, DPFs, ect. It's hard to see how they are worth it in the big picture.
@@8ball_998 the F250 I deleted, keeping the stock 400 hp setting improved approximately 1 mpg. It didn’t smoke but its exhaust was noticeably more eye watering.
@@stever5359 no, modern diesels are worse with all these emissions gadgets due to making them less efficient. They run hotter, get less MPGs and do not last as long or as reliably as pre-emissions diesels. Sure they might make more power, for a time until those emissions gadgets throw a code lol. You come off as one of those lemmings who worships government regulations thinking they really care about you or the environment. The EPA and 99.9% of the government departments and agencies are cancer 😂....
It was an almost fair comparison. Keep in mind. The RAM Rebel did not have a tonneau cover over the bed of the truck, where the other 2 did. I don't know that would have a major impact on the MPG, but it is something to consider.
Very intrigued by a straight 6 in a half ton truck.. the way trucks used to be made. I grew up around Chevys 250 and Fords 300 6 cylinders, with granny 4 speeds those trucks would pull a barn down.
I'm intrigued by why Stellantis decided to remove the oil dipstick. It's almost as though they want to make it more difficult to get an accurate oil consumption reading.
Skip all three: buy the Duramax 3.0L Inline-6 Turbo Diesel (305hp / 495 lb-ft). Consistently get 32-34 mpg on my commute. Refined, quiet and pulls confidentiality. Do the math on yearly fuel cost difference between the premium fuel recommended gas turbos & 6.2V8 at 17-19mpg vs the baby duramax turbo diesel at 30 mpg.
If you want the I6-TT to be more efficient you need to stay out of boost. Which means driving it like grandpa on a Sunday morning. Same with the 3.5 EB. Boost kills their MPG.
I hope that Straight 6 in the Ram goes into the latest generation Jeep Wrangler. It would be a throwback to the old CJ5 and CJ7 that had a 4.2L (IIRC) straight 6 engine in the top models.
@@gearheadtechnology : Apologies for not clarifying. The I6 core engine is what I am referring to. Doesn't need the 400HP but can be had with a single, intercooled turbo, detuned to meet the Jeep Wrangler's needs. A Straight or Inline 6 cylinder (I6) is a smoother running engine than a V6 or V8 so there's that added benefit. Then there is the nostalgia benefit. Many people that remember the CJ5, and CJ7 I6 might be more willing to spend money on a I6 Wrangler than the I4 version. Or a hybrid with a normally aspirated I6 engine might be more appealing to some. Again, this is just my wish, and opinion, nothing else. I'm just putting it out there.
I will stick with my 2015 Ram 1500 Sport 5.7l 8 speed with 32 gallon fuel tank. 17mpg freeway, 8-9mpg towing my 8.5k lb trailer with no lack of power up the mountains. 3.92 gears with 8 speed tyranny is awesome for towing!
@JokerG16 there's probably a digital way of checking your oil level in the gague cluster, like BMW, but you have a point. A dipstick is more reliable.
No no no, we can't have stuff like that because that gods in government with their EPA have deemed it so. We have to obey or their autistic witch priestess Greta Thunberg will say "how dare you"...
Premium gas is a deal breaker. In your tests you should also include the cost to fill up - I bet there would have been an eye-opening difference between the Coyote and the other two.
My 2016 coyote is pretty efficient compared to my friends' newer trucks. The 3.5eb is even better but I prefer the V8 durability and having less components stuffed under the hood.
Not really my 2023 RAM 5.7 Hemi gets 23 mpg hwy here with 3.92 gears..I had a rental with 3.21 and was the same gas mileage as you need more gas pedal to get off the line with 3.21 vs 3.92..
I did the same thing. Sold the 3.92 to get back in a 3.21 because of all my highway driving. I actually didn't like the shift points on the 3.92 in the city either, but I'm getting rid of my 2020 Ram 1500 and getting a F-250 or F-350 after all the issues Ive been having.
You must not tow I'm straddled with a '21 5.7 with a 3.21's that sucks when towing that I got when nothing had a 3.92 during covid days around here now everything is out of this world in price with a 3.92.
@eddyz7567 Stellantis has the money to keep the V8 but it's a foreign company that does not know what Americans want because they are a foreign company that owns Chrysler Jeep Dodge and Ram. They have the money to keep it that's bullshit saying due to emissions just look at Ford and and GM still have the V8 so the emissions crap you claim is bullshit.
@@eddyz7567 ford and GM still has the V8 fact Stellantis could keep their V8 but instead did not have the balls to keep it so they killed it a big mistake they have the money to keep but instead their foreign brains do not understand what Americans want since they are a foreign company that bought a American auto maker. Stellantis has no balls to keep when they can
Each of these trucks needs a price deactivation system.
Auto-removes $30k from the price tag at the first stop sign on the test drive 😂
Automatically depreciates when you leave the dealership😅
@@cliffyb5896 It needs a deprece-o-meter next to the speedometer.
😂😂😂😂😂😂
I agree
That blacked out Peter built at the start is the coolest truck in the video
😂
Best fuel economy per pound too
The RAM with the new six-cylinder engine got the worst MPG of the 3 😂😂😂
Keep in mind that both of the V8s have cylinder deactivation. That might explain why they performed better than the i6.
V8’s don’t work hard to make the power. Turbo 6 engines force fuel and air in to match v8 power. I’ve experienced this same result a lot over the years. The turbo engines are working much harder to produce similar results and fall flat on power when in hot conditions.
Because of the towing rear end, engine is doing 2500 rpm on the freeway. I have the 3.92 and 3.22 in two of my trucks and they make 16 and 26 respectively
@@lordjoshrum...ok.
The 5L also gets better real mileage than the Ecoboost.
Every car reviews should include fuel capacity especially with the latest trend by manufacturers placing small tanks in their vehicles.
Guys, the standard output turbo 6 doesn’t require premium only the high output. Look it up
Standard fuel in CO is 85 Octane. S.O. turbo requires 87. Thus in high elevations states such as CO, you have to put "premium" fuel in it. Look it up
@@ericneal1872 Well the whole country isn't at elevation so it should be mentioned in the video that it doesn't "require premium"
Ram had missed opportunity to make the 3.0 i6 twin turbo a Diesel! Would’ve been like a bmw diesel
@ericneal1872 you don't have to put premium fuel in any modern vehicle. The computer will take car of ignition timing on its on. The worst that will happen is you will make less power and maybe less mpg.
Also you shouldn’t push more gas into it once stops that it y’all messing with evaporate sistem by pushing it
As an owner on a 22 3.5 eco boost and a 21 5.0 with 3.73s can confirm the 5.0 is the better more fuel efficient engine. That top end coyote power feels much better on the highway too.
If anything it always more fun. The 2.7l is the engine people should get anyway
How many cars you got? I also see an Explorer in you profile.
I call BS on better highway power on the coyote.
@@MB-jz3uu I traded the 5.0 on the 3.5 because I bought into twin turbo v6 nonsense. Also I wanted a lariat and it was a heavily discounted 3.5 space white lariat. The ST is my wife’s car.
@@Jez-p9k no lie a 5.0 with 3.73 40mph and above will outrun a 3.5. It’s neck and neck with my wife’s explorer st. (Anyone who has been in one knows how quick they are.) also don’t mean to dog on the 3.5 it’s also a great motor I just think unless your towing the 5.0 is the better all around choice.
$80,000????? For a TRUCK?? I hope they all go out of business.
Don’t worry, our tax dollars will bail them out when they come crying saying they can’t understand why they won’t sell.
For a half ton. Tacoma’s 1/4 trucks are 60k. We’re in a terrible market
How american... what a hater😭😭
Majority of truck sales are of the expensive ones. Over half the truck sales from GMC are the Denali, AT4, and AT4X. Showing that expensive trucks are selling because people want them. I would much rather buy an expensive truck over a quarter of $1 million Ferrari. I know that’s not a great comparison, but I much rather have the truck.
So no more new vehicles to buy?
3.92 gear in the RAM has a lot to do with MPG highway
Thank you
They have to gear it lower because those little 3 liters aren't made to drag around a 6000lb truck, it's already straining the crap out of the engine, if it had taller gears it would really be a dog, not a good dog either
Don't make excuses for it should have done a lot better
Than do what GM does and rate it differently rather than saying 24 mpg
The Tremor w/ the V8 is 👌🏿😮💨
GM's tiny fuel tank was the primary reason I eliminated it early in my shopping. When you start towing that just doesn't get you very far.
Imagine having an EV
That's why I bought the 3.0 Dmax.
@@eblamo I'd rather not.
Calling a V8 with Cylinder Deactivation and Electronic Injection “Old School” is WILD
They’ve had it since 2008
Actually started with GM in the 80's
@@orlandovega6384 2008 isn't old school
So no cover on the Ram and it had the tallest gearing. Kinda a no brainer on why it was the least efficient.
Was going to say that. I'm no physicist, but that would make a difference I assume.
Covers consistently make very little difference in instrumented testing. You also mean shortest gearing.
@noobasdfjkl Why thank you for the correction, but I would think if they are performing tests they would be doing them as accurately as possible. Hard to say what difference it would have made when the others had them and one did not.
I feel like turbo engines never hit the EPA numbers unless you literally never build any boost the entire drive.
The hemi with the same 3.92 gears will get better mpg on the hwy..
My 2013 F-150 with the 3.5 regularly gets 21+mpg on the highway doing 80mph through MT mountain passes.
Did anyone see what rpm the Ram was cruising at? 3.92s and and the 8 speed (which has a shorter top gear than either Ford or GM) might have played a role. Not that it would have made a huge difference or if the Ram is even available with another rear end option.
Few things here. the coyote showed in video by epa rating to be 16/24 city/hwy that has to be a typo... that should be the epa on a 4x2 not a 4x4 configuration. the coyote should be 16/22 city/hwy. which makes more sense and its much closer to its claim since you avaraged 19.1mpg.
second thing is the GMC had a bed cover which helps the mpg as well as the air suspension which lowers the car on hwy speeds hence the better than epa rating mpg.
Actually the Ford looks like it has a bed cover too.
Of course, it all depends what you're looking for in a truck. I wanted a full size pick-up truck with gasoline engine, front and rear lockers, disengaging sway bar, 4.10s, and a winch. My options were severely limited. Mileage was the absolute lowest of my concerns.
Best efficiency on cheapest gas with biggest tank. Nice mix.
Again we prove what is already known. A smaller displacement engine working harder burns more fuel. Turbos make power efficiently but boost uses fuel.
Wow... Great information. Thank you TFL! I was surprised by the Hurricane's poor performance here, very surprised.
that premium fuel ⛽️ is a problem for me, no that's ,
I would rather get the Ram V 6
motor before having to buy premium Fuel
Same here. I love my V6 Ram and I'd only get a used Hemi if I were to upgrade. Wouldn't be able to afford the '25 trucks anyways.
Great video again guys but one major flaw. You have demonstrated that a tonneau cover greatly improves fuel millage which the GMC and Ford has on but not the RAM. Hope someone reads this and redoes the test. Keep trucking.
GM 6.2L an engine that hasn't been touched since 2014, against the 5.0L refreshed in 2021, and a brand new 3.0L Twinturbo. Damn.
Umm while nothing complete redesign or anything the fuel management and cylinder deactivation was updated in 2019 on the 6.2s
@@dustinharvey7394 ya a program change and more of those lifters everyone hates. But still engine same 10 year old engine.
Yeah, cylinder deactivation added to the Coyote in 2021. I have that engine, and so far it's been great, but I'm not seeing any real fuel savings to justify the added complexity.
The same displacement from 7 years earlier...
And they increased the price you pay for the same old engine. The gm 5.3l is garbage so they had to use the 6.2l to keep gm in conversation.
Question - was premium fuel REQUIRED on the GM? Or was it "recommended"? If so, it would have been better to just use regular on the GM, as that's what most people will do, and would provide a better baseline between all 3 trucks.
Recommended. I put in plus and occasionally premium.
I am pretty sure the 6.2 has a lifter and cam shaft deactivation as well. On demand self machining
Lol you are correct!
First time I see inspector Gadget in a TFL trio review... Thanks for the entertainment y'all.. Good video!
I bet V8s have more durability down the line though
Not with cylinder deactivation
yes and no.. Seems like all new engines have some failures. GM can't build enough 6.2s right now. You want an engine that can go forever get a Toyota 3.5L v6 or an old HOnda.
I own a GMC with the 5.3l. I would debate whether or not its more reliable than the hurricane when you factor in the DFM system. I have had some very expensive issues with mine
@@donleamon8653 I agree, so good idea not to buy a v-8 that has that then.
Considering the Hurricane is built by French/Italian company Stellantis I seriously doubt it last 100k.
Looking for my 1st truck. I'm currently pulling a very nice 4,200 lb lawncare setup (Wright Mowers and Stihl) with a Mini Van full-time. Lol
I was completely smitten with my new '23 F-150 w/ the 3.5 and 26 gal tank. And now I just learned that '24 F-150's come with the 36gal tank STANDARD. Damnit.
Love my coyote it is a “modern’ V8 !
Which truck was in the lead and which were drafting?
Gear ratio is the killer in the ram.
17.2 is exactly what I get in my Ram 5.7L HEMI, too. That's interesting.
I'm curious about something. I noticed the Ram Rebel was the only truck that wasn't equipped with a tonneau cover. Sure would think that could change the efficiency numbers of the Hurricane.
V8 is the best
Any difference that the ram was the only one without a bed cover?
The AT4 gets better gas mileage than the AT4X, and is a better trim comparison to those other two trucks. But if the prices are that close, the AT4X comes with superior shocks and front and rear e-lockers.
Purchased new a 2013 Ford F150 Platinum 4x4 with the V6 Ecoboost engine. Eventually, I traded it in for a '22 GMC AT4 with the 6.2 l V8. Both trucks are fantastic and they both did what they were purchased to do ... daily driver with some luxury and could do the work I needed for weekends at my ranch.
The fuel mileage on my Ecoboost was disappointing (avg. 13 city/17 hwy), although the power was definitely there. The 6.2 l V8 for the GMC is much more efficient, and I really was surprised when I figured out I was getting better mileage (15 city/ 19 hwy). I suspect the biggest difference in my test cases was the 6 sp v 10 sp transmission, plus the GMCs cylinder deactivation.
No knock against TFL per se, but these 'real world reviews' at 5-11,000 ft. elevation do not reflect the operating environment for the typical US buyer. There's a strong negative bias inherent in a N/A engine v. turbo or EV at that altitude. I understand this is the world we're living in now (turbos/hybrids/EVs) but there's no question the high altitude testing is biased against N/A propulsion.
Can you do a comparison between the 5.7 hemming and the straight 6? Blows my mind that they would go backwards on efficiency
Its not displacement, its HP.
420hp requires a certain amount of fuel no matter the # of cylinders or displacement.
Well it’s all very interesting. And I’m not surprised that the “new” engine did not do as well. My preferences would be a V8. But this is a sample size of one.
My question is, do we really need 450 horsepower in everything? We survived for years with trucks that had 225 horsepower and an awful lot of those trucks are still on the road.
I had a ford 3.5 eco boost and Inloved the low end truck. It was faaaaast! But I started learning that turbocharged trucks were not as efficient on highway than a big v8.
Guys please do an apples-to-apples comparison. I appreciate all the testing you do, but keep in mind that the Ram didn't have a tonneau cover like the other two trucks. This difference will negatively impact the Ram's fuel economy
While i get your point, it wont make that much of a difference. Everyone just assumes small engines will do better but adding boost says otherwise. In a heavy truck, you have to walk a fine line of trying to keep rpm's low, but high enough that the engine is making sufficient power to move the truck without lagging the engine. Sometimes that means running the engine in boost, which means mileage drops
Cubic Inches - GM 376, Ford 307 and Stellantis 183.
You need to take that in-line six on the gauntlet, I would like to see prove itself against the V8, especially in a high stressed towing situation
I have had 2 Ford Ecoboosts and both were better at towing then previously owned V-8s but actually got worse MPG when you tow because you get into high boost which means a lot more fuel being consumed faster.
@@cmiles97x38 I’ve seen what happens to aluminum engines tow near cap, turbos go out fast, turbos blow, the engines don’t go back to normal after flexing, the aluminum engine cannot handle the brutal abuse a v8 can, I mean yeah if you’re towing what people usually do 2k-7k lbs with a normal utility trailer or light like I see a lot, I tow a 16ft trailer with a compact trailer and 2-2 1/2 cords of wood, honestly I’m surprised my transmission hasn’t busted and my rear shocks haven’t broke 😂, I usually tow/haul 10-13k, including with hilly terrain up to 13% grain. Ontop of that those 10speed transmissions are garbage I feel, my wife used to have a F150 with the 10 speed and it overheated quite a bit and we never used it for towing and use it for commuting and sometimes only drove up to 5 to 6 hours a day and it would heat up bad in the middle of it even driving two hours so we traded it. Why do you think in-line six engines that are used for towing are usually made of cast-iron still especially the HD ones?
@@TheAudi585 Another story I have had the 10 speed in several vehicles and they never overheated once.
@@kenwolf2431 yeah, but if you do some research there have been lawsuits over it… I wasn’t saying all are bad, it happened with hers and it’s not unknown to happen with them.
@@cmiles97x38 yea, as we all know that when towing with a v8 you get better mpg right?🙄
For those prices, I'll keep my loaded Titan Pro4X! I was actually somewhat interested in the I6 engine too, but not for that price!
When will we see some drag races and ecoboost & tundra comparison twin turbo videos?
They dont want the toyota engine to explode under pressure. So no toyota
Them ecoboost will eat them tundras up lol
Just because you throw a smaller placement in doesn't mean it's going to get better mileage, that 6 turbo will be working harder to keep up with an 8
Can y'all do the $50k trucks, which we are more likely to have than the 80k offroaders? Like crew cabs with 3.21-3.42 gear ratios? Apples to oranges to test 3.21 to 3.92 ratios... And 87 octane gas. Let's really see MPGs for real what most of us will be using.
You guy's are great...I dig your reviews
Great test. Can anyone answer how much the Rams 3.92 hurt its mile per gallon. If your going to test trucks, these 3 are pretty close in HP but not close in gear ratio.. Why not get a Ram with a 3.55 ratio & test it on the same loop, to see if it makes ant difference.
What a cool test. Nice work, guys.
I was wondering how much influence the different axle ratios of the tested trucks has on the MPG?
I think ram had it right with the v8 ram rebel gt im too old school for my own good i think the ford is underrated in this configuration & the gm is as well but fuel efficiency isnt the 1st thing i think of in a non diesel half ton
The GM 6.2L is premium recommended, not required. Only reason I have it.
WE ALWAYS OVER FILL AND DAMAGE THE VENT SYSTEM. SO DONT BUY A TRUCK WE TESTED
😂😂😂 that’s the TFL way of doing things
Stop shouting .
Who hurt you
Seems like you may not like TFL?
I don’t think they fill it that full, but about a $4 part will fix that.
It doesn't matter I'm keeping my V8 no matter what.
The hurricane doesnt need premium. The standard is best with mid grade but can run on 87. The HO runs on premium.
The Ram was the only truck without a tonneau cover. 🤔 Wonder if that helped or hurt its fuel economy.
My 2010 Sierra Denali had Eaton lockers front and rear from the factory….
Not a comparable truck but my 23 ram 1500 classic reg cab long box 4x4 hemi with 3.92 gears on longer loops (200-400 miles) with mixed mountains and flat highway (I’m up in BC) will average 20-22 mpg if I hover around 60-70 mph. That’s hand calculated at the pump too
I'll keep my 12 Ram 2500 6.7 Cummins. No Def big tank pulls my empty 12000 lb fifth wheel around like nothing is behind me even in the Rockies. The diesel where I live is $0.02 cheaper than Gas (,why I don't know) I parked my Yukon while #2 is less. A lot more fun to drive.
Good video. I have a 2024 Sierra 1500 5.3L V8 lifted with 6inches on 35s and I’m getting 17 hwy. Really no complaints. I do wish the tank was at least a 30 gallon though but 24 still gets me on fill ups once every 7 days. Around 340 mileage, so not awful. Stock was 425 mileage and 21 hwy.
If highway fuel economy and torque for pulling is the need, then go for the diesel option.
I think the real test, is a comparison with the 5.7 Hemi . So people can figure out why they need a new truck ?
Next time test the 5.3L its the best engine for longevity. I own 2 GMTs with 5.3L 05 Suburban similar to Davids has 360k, 07 Yukon 230k
I can't believe people actually think a 6 cyl turbo truck is going to get better MPG than a V8... honey, you need a decent amount of power to move that big, heavy truck. If you take a V6 that can get 30MPG/hwy that normally comes in a sedan into a big, heavy truck, its going to have to work harder to move the truck around. Add a turbo, you'll need more fuel to make more power with the turbo, so 30MPG highway, becomes more like 20-23. Meanwhile a Coyote V8 in an F150 can muster 25+ MPG on the highway because it doesn't have to work that hard to move the truck. In the end, they will do roughly the same in gas mileage, yet the government seems to think V8's are less fuel efficient... then again these same politicians pushing environmental legislation can't define a woman, a barrel shroud, a stock, or an assault weapon, so I digress.
I'll keep my 485 hp 585 torque f 150 eco..19.5 mpg combined..21-22.5 highway..19 crew fx4 3:31 gears..
"Is this Oregon? Are you the gas station attendant?" Actually since 2022, Oregon got rid of that law so you can get gas yourself and not have to wait on someone
That folks think $80,000 is a good price for a pick up truck is nuts!
That’s why trucks aren’t selling right now
They sell trucks in such high volume that usually you find them either under MSRP or heavily discounted.
@@FirearmHobbyist They are selling hundreds of thousand of them, just not a fast or as much as before. Still incredible amounts, but no one pays sticker except during the Covid market.
@@Knight21030 Sure 10% off MSRP makes it a $72,000 truck, so much better LOL!
@@cmiles97x38 Lol point taken... besides, those aren't the real volume movers. Not everyone is going for an offroad truck when they go to buy. So, you'd probably end up in the mid 50's with that discount putting you in the high 40's/low 50's.
Looks like the Hurricane got downgraded to a tropical depression.
hahahah - good one!🤣
How did their hurricane compare against previous generation hemi?
Love that comment!
Apparently you don't understand gear ratios. The test was terrible, will not work for efficiency without having equal rear-end ratios and tire size. What kind of idiot can't understand this? American schools are really falling behind apparently.
@@PedroKing99 the hemi is was/were now unfortunately
Calling a coyote an “old school V8” is WILD 🤦🏾♂️😂
I mostly agree, but if you think back to the origins of the Ford Modular 4v it goes back to the early 90s. 30 years is pretty old now 🤣. The Coyote itself is only 14ish years old though.
If it ain't got pushrods it ain't old school hahaha
They are saying the v8 engine in general is old school
Sweet Pic of a shitbox. Poor ass.
@@Michael-eg3hc ..Strange because electric and inline 6 cyl are the oldest school,older than modern V8's...late 1800's they had electric cars and early 1900's inline 6 cyl were around..
Not only did the ford do better fuel economy it also had the extra benefit of using regular fuel instead of premium fuel like the other two. I would like to see the same test done with the Turbo 6 cylinder trucks (Ford, Ram, Toyota)
My interpretation was they used Premium Fuel in ALL the trucks. So on regular the Ford may get worse fuel mileage if they used regular grade fuel.
Actually higher octane fuel burns slower to prevent pre destination, so if the motor doesn’t benefit from it it would get worse fuel economy by using it.
@@MikeAlexander-t5k well you'll never know how it is affected until they try so there's that.
I agree, a turbo comparison would ne nice!
You should really learn about stuff before making stupid comments the low output hurricane does not require premium it only needs 87 the h.o requires premium
The 5.0 coyote is a beast. I have a 2013 with 549000km all OG. Burns no oil, tranny shifts like new. How can I complain about that?
I guess my 2017 with 178,000km is just broken in awesome.
Your good for a long time bud
I'd complain it's not in imperial.
341000 miles
Ford is the one who does it, the others are trying, every great has its cheap copies.
F150 with the 36 gallon tank standard is awesome
Yes it is
GM & RAM need the 36 gallon fuel tank as standard as well
My 2011 f150 came standard with a 36 gallon tank .
My Tundra has a 38 gallon fuel tank. But at 16 MPG on a good day. 😭😭😭
Love my gas burner. 😎
Yep. 700 mile range with my 2.7 is pretty damn nice. Though it can be a bit annoying when the gas pumps cut you off at $100.
My Dad's old 76 square body C10 chevy only had a 16 gallon tank and got 12 mpg. It got 12 mpg going up hill, down hill, flat land, towing a 6000 lb trailer, falling out of an airplane idling.
My father-in-law's 76 ford f250 4x4 with a 390 four barrel got 6 miles to the gallon in the same conditions it didn't matter what it was doing, 6 miles to the gallon. It came with factory dual tanks and he had extra fuel tanks put in the box cavities so they could go camping with their camper on it and not stop every hour for fuel lol
I had a ‘74 3/4 ton square body in high school. I think it got 3 feet to the gallon.
Idk how yall are getting such bad mpg, I have a c10 and a k5. My c10 get 17 mpg, and the k5 gets 11 with a built big block.
My 76 Silverado 400 engine got 12 mpg highway. Dual saddle tanks 40 gallons gas. In town short trips. Warm ups cold winter 3 mpg. Towing 7 mpg.
@@arvbergstedt3303
I believe it, it seems trucks from that era were thirsty beasts
392 and 373 and 342 gear ratio dosen't seem like a far highway mpg comparison to me.
Seems bias or maybe just incompetent to not mention it.
Regardless even if mpg was same the ram required premium fuel ....
That's definitely a big L
@@bcelectricc Doesn't require it in the SO not sure why they said it does.
@chris6743 ok not sure because that would suck !! I had a vehicle that ran premium only and not only is it more costly not everyone has premium fuel .
Thats how they came from the factory on this episode and most likely is how most consumers will receive the trucks which is why they are doing the real life test duh!!! 🙄
These trucks are now $200k, but good news! We've marked them down 50%
WHAT A BARGAIN!
Do uou realize how stupid this comment is?
The Great American Con Job!
I have a 21 F 150 with the coyote. It is amazingly efficient. Highway I get 23ish mpg consistent
Ram had the steepest axle ratio which hurts hiway MPG.
The axle ratio really has no impact
The Ford was a 3.73.. I thought the Rams wasn't as aggressive. I'm to lazy to go back and look. What was the Rams gearing?
@@workct4102 Not true. I understand the combination of the ten speed coupled with higher rear end, and the results are a forgone conclusion...
It certainly does@workct4102
Depends on the final drive ratio and the ratio in tenth gear.
Be honest, we want the rumble and sound of a V8
I'll also be honest, The Fast Lane xxxx doing comparisons of NA engines with Turbocharged engines is completely pointless for 90% of the population since they test at a mile high or higher in elevation. They need to move out of Colorado to make their testing relevant for the vast majority of people.
While I totally love V8 engines, I have to say I see the perks of an I-6. Only one head, one head gasket, very low vibration. BUT add the two turbos and the lack off better efficiency, the V8s are here to stay, unless the bureaucrats force the manufacturers and the people to buy something less efficient and most likely more expensive in maintenance - two Turbos ain't chap and ain't making working on the engine any simpler...
680 miles to a tank in the F150 not bad damn
Right. Not bad damn. Also not gonna happen.
Who wants their office computer in the dash!
100% agree
Yep I don't need a giant screen in my dash, I need a dash in my dash, showing RPM, Speed, fuel level, temps, and THAT'S IT!
Good old government thinking. Burning more fuel is fine as long as the emissions out the tail pipe is lower when measured. Modern diesels are the same way. More fuel means more refining, more transportation and distribution. Not to mention the extra complexity, parts and manufacturing just for emissions equipment. Doesn't matter how much cost, energy and extra material has to go into a vehicle. Or even the longevity of the vehicle. Just as long as that tailpipe reading is below a certain number, lol.
Modern engines are considerably more powerful and efficient as well as longer lasting thanks in large measure to emissions regulations.
@@stever5359 Mostly agree, but one has to question the logic of over-complexity in the pursuit of emissions. There is the law of diminishing returns that needs to be factored more often than it is.
@stever5359 you say that, but at the same time, removing or deactivating those systems often gains more power, better fuel economy and more reliability. I'm not saying there should be no rules. But if you talk to mechanics or even just do some research on things like auto stop/start. Cylinder deactivation, DPFs, ect. It's hard to see how they are worth it in the big picture.
@@8ball_998 the F250 I deleted, keeping the stock 400 hp setting improved approximately 1 mpg. It didn’t smoke but its exhaust was noticeably more eye watering.
@@stever5359 no, modern diesels are worse with all these emissions gadgets due to making them less efficient. They run hotter, get less MPGs and do not last as long or as reliably as pre-emissions diesels. Sure they might make more power, for a time until those emissions gadgets throw a code lol.
You come off as one of those lemmings who worships government regulations thinking they really care about you or the environment. The EPA and 99.9% of the government departments and agencies are cancer 😂....
It was an almost fair comparison. Keep in mind. The RAM Rebel did not have a tonneau cover over the bed of the truck, where the other 2 did. I don't know that would have a major impact on the MPG, but it is something to consider.
My 2022 ram 5.7L did not achieve top MPG until it had about 25,000 miles. Now getting 17-18 city & 20-21 HWY in MI. For a full size 4x4 I'm happy.
I was honestly interested in the straight six right up until you said premium fuel 👎
I think it only requires premium in the high output hurricane. They have a standard and high output for the hurricane
@@jakewilson24 good to know thanks
Premium is required for advertised power numbers. The engine runs fine on regular but at reduced output.
Any turbo charged engines should use premium due to the engine running hot
@@jakewilson24 this Rebel has the standard output engine.
Very intrigued by a straight 6 in a half ton truck.. the way trucks used to be made. I grew up around Chevys 250 and Fords 300 6 cylinders, with granny 4 speeds those trucks would pull a barn down.
I'm intrigued by why Stellantis decided to remove the oil dipstick. It's almost as though they want to make it more difficult to get an accurate oil consumption reading.
Have to admit, I'm surprised by the Hurricane's result. But I suppose those short gears didn't do it any favors
Skip all three: buy the Duramax 3.0L Inline-6 Turbo Diesel (305hp / 495 lb-ft). Consistently get 32-34 mpg on my commute. Refined, quiet and pulls confidentiality. Do the math on yearly fuel cost difference between the premium fuel recommended gas turbos & 6.2V8 at 17-19mpg vs the baby duramax turbo diesel at 30 mpg.
Just be careful if you're pregnant as exposure to Diesel has been linked to Autism.
If you want the I6-TT to be more efficient you need to stay out of boost. Which means driving it like grandpa on a Sunday morning. Same with the 3.5 EB. Boost kills their MPG.
I have a Powerboost running 35's on a 3" lift. 70 and under on the highway, I still get better than 20mpg.... above 70 with boost, it's around 17mpg.
Or you get it without the towing gear ratio.
ok so just dont use the engine then got it
RAM Should I stuck with the HEMI
I hope that Straight 6 in the Ram goes into the latest generation Jeep Wrangler. It would be a throwback to the old CJ5 and CJ7 that had a 4.2L (IIRC) straight 6 engine in the top models.
How so? did the cj5 and cj7 have over 400hp? It will be nothing like those.
Yeah but the AMC 4.2 and 4.0 are legendary for their reliability and you can't even check the oil on this garbage engine....
@@hank1556 It's on the dash now but I agree I'd prefer a dipstick
@@gearheadtechnology : Apologies for not clarifying. The I6 core engine is what I am referring to. Doesn't need the 400HP but can be had with a single, intercooled turbo, detuned to meet the Jeep Wrangler's needs. A Straight or Inline 6 cylinder (I6) is a smoother running engine than a V6 or V8 so there's that added benefit. Then there is the nostalgia benefit. Many people that remember the CJ5, and CJ7 I6 might be more willing to spend money on a I6 Wrangler than the I4 version.
Or a hybrid with a normally aspirated I6 engine might be more appealing to some. Again, this is just my wish, and opinion, nothing else. I'm just putting it out there.
I will stick with my 2015 Ram 1500 Sport 5.7l 8 speed with 32 gallon fuel tank. 17mpg freeway, 8-9mpg towing my 8.5k lb trailer with no lack of power up the mountains. 3.92 gears with 8 speed tyranny is awesome for towing!
Huge news in Toyota Tundra world with a massive recall for engine failures we need a TFL video soon on it!
The bigger news is that they decided not to recall 2024's despite documented evidence of 2024 Tundras with the exact same engine failure.
😂 I’ll keep my Titan
This is my surprised face.😶
Wait untill you deal with the problems of the cylinder deactivation for GM
Dealers aren't even letting them do tradeins because the fix date is unknown.
Manually check the oil in all of these
Too bad the Hurricane has no oil dipstick
@@cap10newport95 exactly my point
@@cap10newport95wait seriously? why would they not put a dipstick?
@@JokerG16 so customers can't complain about the oil consumption.
@JokerG16 there's probably a digital way of checking your oil level in the gague cluster, like BMW, but you have a point. A dipstick is more reliable.
If they want to push turbos so much, offer them on V8s so we can actually shred.
A 4 cylinder turbo is just purely lame.
We have the wrangler with the online 4 cylinder and thay things rips man, I was super impressed, go drive one
No no no, we can't have stuff like that because that gods in government with their EPA have deemed it so. We have to obey or their autistic witch priestess Greta Thunberg will say "how dare you"...
@@joshsteward1488 he won’t drive one, just rather bitch about em
Premium gas is a deal breaker. In your tests you should also include the cost to fill up - I bet there would have been an eye-opening difference between the Coyote and the other two.
Using Premium, the cost is close to Diesel prices and Diesels get much better fuel economy under load.
The eye opening difference is that only the 6.2 requires premium, the ford and ram are made for running 87
That's the beauty of the GM 6.6 no deactivation and no need for premium fuel. Also the 2500 has a 36gal tank
@@pathunter7003 yeah they should've said that in the review. Kinda misleading and invalidates their shit for me in the future.
@@business6846 👍
My 2016 coyote is pretty efficient compared to my friends' newer trucks. The 3.5eb is even better but I prefer the V8 durability and having less components stuffed under the hood.
That RAM 3.92 rear axle ratio is a major MPG killer. I had one for 2 years before trading it (bought it in 2021 when no trucks could be found)
Not really my 2023 RAM 5.7 Hemi gets 23 mpg hwy here with 3.92 gears..I had a rental with 3.21 and was the same gas mileage as you need more gas pedal to get off the line with 3.21 vs 3.92..
Transmission final gear ratio matters much more!
I did the same thing. Sold the 3.92 to get back in a 3.21 because of all my highway driving. I actually didn't like the shift points on the 3.92 in the city either, but I'm getting rid of my 2020 Ram 1500 and getting a F-250 or F-350 after all the issues Ive been having.
You must not tow I'm straddled with a '21 5.7 with a 3.21's that sucks when towing that I got when nothing had a 3.92 during covid days around here now everything is out of this world in price with a 3.92.
@@NoLimitsCommemorativWhat issues?
GM and Ford have multiple engine options. Idk why Stellantis didn’t have the Hurricane engine ALONG with the Hemi.
Emissions
@@eddyz7567 the same emissions the other companies don’t give a crap about?
@eddyz7567 Stellantis has the money to keep the V8 but it's a foreign company that does not know what Americans want because they are a foreign company that owns Chrysler Jeep Dodge and Ram. They have the money to keep it that's bullshit saying due to emissions just look at Ford and and GM still have the V8 so the emissions crap you claim is bullshit.
No disagreements really. Just saying every automaker is going smaller displacement across the board to meet EPA emissions regulations.
@@eddyz7567 ford and GM still has the V8 fact Stellantis could keep their V8 but instead did not have the balls to keep it so they killed it a big mistake they have the money to keep but instead their foreign brains do not understand what Americans want since they are a foreign company that bought a American auto maker. Stellantis has no balls to keep when they can
Damn my 6.2 suburban 10 speed gets 23mpg at about 75