I think the Marvel Mystery Oil restored some power too. Unfortunately the memory card I used to film the footage climbing a steep grade erased my footage climbing and the Van was able to stay in 4th/overdrive where it normally would shift into 3rd. Next time I do my Trip I'll see if it happens again where I can stay in 4th/OD on the steepest section
The V10 is great. I did this exact same run with a lift kit. Lost a little MPG but still got 16. The key is drive 60 MPH. Let the impatient people drive around you. When you go 65+ your MPG is 14 and lower
@@JohnDrivesAnything WHAT?! 16 is nuts for a v10. Even at "only" 60mph. I'm a chevy guy and need to upgrade to a 3/4 ton truck. I really like the early 2000s silverado trucks, but they are a good bit more expensive and the more common 6.0 LS really isn't a great truck engine IMO. The last one I drove seemed to be an absolute dog due to size of truck. Also, the MPGs didn't seem good at all. Heard of some guys that claim they get pretty much the same MPGs as the 8.1L. Those are some reason why i'm really considering an early 2000s f250 v10. The MPGs seem to be better and I can find them between $2k to $3k. I know people brag about diesel mpg, but diesel is also $1 more/gallon plus all the other maintenance. I'd really like to find a v10 with a manual, but I don't think I've seen one.
@@Ka_Gg The V10 is really underappreciated since Ford Truck guys are all about the Power Stroke. The numbers were pretty good for their time too. Of course modern blows it away but when you compare it to the old 7.3 stock for stock it's making 60 more horsepower and only 30 ft lbs of torque behind it. 420 is not bad for a vehicle this old and affordable. The car guy in me had to get the V10 over the V8 when getting a van
@@JohnDrivesAnything Yeah way too many people go overboard in terms of how much power they need. The absolute most I would be towing is 10k lbs. Pretty much a diesel truck on a 20ft trailer. I have looked a lot at the 7.3s, but I really won't be using the truck a lot and having a diesel sit for a while worries me. Plus the diesel market is nuts. There is f250 v10 at $3k obo in my area and I'm considering it. either a bad head gasket or oil cooler...oil in coolant. Really, I just want a cummins in a early 2000s silverado, but that'll never happen.
@@Ka_Gg if you can find one at a decent price, don't piss around with the older Ford V-10 (the 2-valve versions up to 2004) and get a 2005 and newer V-10 that is the 3-valve version. This is for a few reasons. 1. It has more power (obviously) and essentially more than a stock 7.3 diesel although still lacking in comparison to the 6.0 diesel (but those can be problematic so not even worth comparing really unless you know the 6.0) Also, I don't believe that the fuel mileage is any worse (from what I've read) so you wouldn't be losing anything there. 2. The 2005 and newer have a different front suspension with coil springs instead of leaf springs and the ride is supposed to be better. Honestly, if you read my other comments, I have a 2002 F-250 extended cab long bed with the 6.8 V-10 but I also now have a 2005 F-350 4 door long bed with single rear wheels and a 2005 F-250 4 door with long bed and single rear wheels. Both of these have 6.0 diesel engines with the 5-speed automatic transmissions. The F-350 sits higher and has different tires (more winter or off road terrain but not too aggressive) and is the XLT version with carpet and other more fancy features like power windows, automatic temp control with buttons on the steering wheel for temp, radio, and so on. It has a sliding rear window, message center and so on.. The F-250 sits lower and is just the XL version with vinyl floor, no power windows, bench seats front and rear, has standard radial all-weather tires and rides harsher for some reason. It's louder as well but I'm sure that has to do with the carpet interior vs. the vinyl flooring to dampen the sound. Anyway, the F-350 rides really nice for some reason. In comparison to my 2002 with the V-10, it's a better ride. But, in fairness, my friend has a 2002 F-350 with dual rear wheels and a 7.3 Powerstroke and 6-speed manual transmission that rides really nice as well. I would have to get in one and then the other and do a comparison. But, since it has coil over suspension, the newer 2005 "should" ride better so I would suggest to get a 2005 or newer if you can. 3. The 2005 and newer V-10 models will have the 5-speed transmission which will help just a little with overall performance. Personally, I have never really cared for the 4-speed automatics in the Fords as they just don't have enough gears in my opinion but now, even 6 gears isn't enough since they now have the 10 speed autos so whatever. The 5-speed auto transmissions are supposed to be a lot better overall in terms of longevity and reliability as well so that's an obvious plus. So, for various reasons, I would suggest to get a 2005 and newer for the transmission options as well. 4. The newer 2005 V-10 which is the 3-valve version still has standard camshaft SPROCKETS AND NOT "phasers" or "variable timing" phasers like the 5.4 engines have that constantly have problems. So, like the older 2-valve versions with similar standard sprockets (gears essentially), these engines are typically known to be very reliable as well because they don't have to worry about the cam phasers taking a dump on you. Of course, they "can" break down as well but as long as they are maintained, many owners have been happy and many engines are easily over 200k and many with 300k and some even more than 400k miles. You don't see too many "nice" 2005 and newer V-10 trucks on the market. You might see some "beaters" out there but try to find one in good condition that doesn't have a skyrocket price on it. Good luck. In other words, there's a reason many people hold on to these newer V-10 models. 5. You can look for one with a manual transmission but those are going to be hard to find as well. And just so you know, I was thinking I would want a manual transmission as well like my buddy has in his 2002 with the 7.3 (the 6-speed) however, after owning these two 2005 F-350 and F-250 models with the 5-speeds, I don't think I could want a manual again. You have to think about this: How nice is it to just put it in "D" and just have to worry about one pedal and you don't have to use your right arm to shift and you can just drive? It's nice just having to worry about the accelerator pedal and nothing more when you have an automatic. Sure, I know there are concerns about the automatic transmission going out and manual transmissions are "typically" more reliable with the exception of the clutch going out if you don't know how to drive very well. But, if what many of the forums say are true and the members that have them are not BSing anyone, I would have faith in the 5-speed lasting a while. Power wise, they are supposed to have just as much power by the time you figure the multiplication that the torque converter adds as the manual transmissions. Possibly even more. If it was the older 4-speed, I would say that the decision would be harder and I could understand wanting to sway towards the 6-speed. I get it. And in fairness, I may try to snag a 6-speed 6.0 one of these days or else a 2005 and newer V-10 with a 6-speed manual myself just because I am considering doing an experiment with lower 3.23 or 3.55 gears instead of 3.73 that a lot of them have. But, I don't know. Getting in and putting it in Drive and being done with shifting is super nice. It spoils a person. Especially when you're hauling a trailer or camper pulling hills. It's nice not to have to shift so much going up and down a hefty grade.
Just bought a 2004 F250 crewcab v10 with under 61k miles. Other than some clear coat peeling on the tops of the camper, cab and hood the rest is pretty much mint. Steering is tight and drives like a dream. Bought pretty cheap.
Nice the Diesel gets so much love that the V10 gets hardly any love. A van with a Diesel would of cost me $15000 or more. I got my van for $6800. The V10 actually makes more horsepower then the 7.3 Diesel and isn't to far behind in torque. It's not very good on fuel and it needs to rev to make power but if these motors are good enough for RVs I'm sure my van will last a long time since it's half the weight of an RV
97 E350, 6.8 ,3.73 gears. The best I've managed us 11mpg running empty. With a 6x10 enclosed trailer and 14 people in the van averaging 70mph for 800 miles 9mpg. On all my E350s with the needle just touching the E takes 27.8 gallons to top off.
How fast do you go? My Van has been lifted since this video and I can do 17 mpg as long as I keep the speed at 60 MPH. I'm about to tow my 2500 pound Geo Tracker with my van. What kind of MPG do you think I'll get keeping my speed at 55?
If you have the patience to go 60 MPH you will get 16+ MPG 65 MPH you're down to 14-15. If you do 1 on ramp full throttle run that uses about 2 gallons of fuel LOL and there goes your quest for a good MPG run. I want to retain my 500 mile range so when I get this thing lifted I will stick to 265/75-16 tires and not go 285s. My last van had a roof rack, this van will not get one.
@@JohnDrivesAnything I just went through the tire sized debate for my winter tires. I bought 235/85 16s to get a little more ground clearance and a little taller gear. Maybe that 10mm narrower will help on my road trip.
@@lordllewellynofdarkdelight2613 My last van was a 1992 5.0 and it was so wimpy I murdered the fuel economy in that going from 235 to 285 tires. Couldnt stay in over drive anymore because the gearing was too tall. These vans have 3.73s and If I go 265s I beleive I will be 3:55s equivalent which is still a decent towing gear and freeway gearing. If my van ends up hunting gears then I will get it re-geared to 4:10s so that the 265s on them are back to being equivalent to 3:73s. I beleive my last van with had equivalent of a 2:92s with the 285 tires and if just couldn't hold overdrive anymore. I think this van has the power to turn 265s without a regear,
@@lordllewellynofdarkdelight2613 Once I get my lift I'll keep the 245s on it for a while since they are still new looking. Most likely I'll regear to 4:10s with 265s. I like how this van can hold overdrive on most mountain grades.
@@JohnDrivesAnything the reason I mentioned it is my father has a BMW 7 series with a V8 that once upon a time sat at 1600 rpms @ 60 mph and used 8 Ltrs of fuel ⛽ per 60 miles. It now sits on 1050 rpms @ 60 mph and goes through 5.5 Ltrs / 60 miles
@@SGTMARSHALL1 This van does ok when just freeway driving. When you use this as a daily driver with stop and go Traffic it gets 10-12 MPG. My Daily driver is a Fiat 500 Abarth lol
@@SGTMARSHALL1 I have a 03 Corvette Z06 and that car can get 30 MPG if you drive it like a economy car 65 mph it's only turning at 1500 RPM. I wish my van had at least a 5 speed automatic to keep the RPM a little lower. It has the power to run a lower RPM. My 500 Abarth is turning at 2800 RPM in 5th gear I also have a 1992 Geo Tracker/Suzuki Vitara that does 3500 RPM in 5th gear at 65. With Big Engine vehicles a lower RPM really helps. I love fuel economy talk lol Skip to 5:22 and I got 30 MPG on a Corvette with a 5.7 V8. My Van with a 6.8 V10 can manage 19 at best.It's all about the weight and gearing/gears available ruclips.net/video/IM0UuuplNRc/видео.html
You should get a Toyota Prius instead. 600 mile range on 10 Gallons of fuel. I'm going to sell my Silver 1994 Toyota Celica to get a Toyota Prius and I'm converting it to a camper.
We've had a total of two prius we bought and drove. The last prius was a wagon, we were rearended on the freeway. This accident totalled the prius, my neck still hurts after a year and my wife fears driving on the freeway and won't do it. Nothing against prius. We now drive a 08 F350 4x4 crewcab Lariat. Feels so much safer but yeah the gas mileage is poor.
Man your really squeezing everything out of that V10! Best I’ve seen actually. We have Ford v10s work trucks at my job that are terrible mpg, loaded up and especially when towing.. that’s the reason I specifically went for the 5.4. I’ve got . My dash is the newer model so it has a tach and digital readout for average Mpg’s and stuff. The only problem is my bigger tires threw that info off.
If I do one full throttle on ramp pull it's all over lol. Seriously It feels like one full throttle on ramp pull sucks up a gallon of fuel. My worse ever MPG is 8. If I do nothing but errands and side street driving 9-10 is normal. If I just take it to work even with 90% freeway going to work I'm at about 14 MPG. This was a pure freeway run. This engine chugs fuel climbing and stop and go. Once I get a Geo Tracker or Samurai to tow behind it I'm wondering how bad my fuel economy will get just towing about 2500 pounds. Did you enjoy your stay at the Frazier Mountain Pilot? What kind of range are you getting with the bigger tires and lift?
@@JohnDrivesAnything The Pilot was pretty cool. I ate at The Wendy’s for dinner and had a French toast breakfast sandwich and dunkin coffee in the morning. The store is well stocked and lots of goodies!. I walked around the perimeter of the property when I was bored, no tweakers or anything weird and it was fairly quiet. I parked a row back behind where you were all the way up against the fence. It’s funny the main reason I wanted to explore that area is my favorite movie “THE FP” by Jason Trost is from there. If you haven’t seen it you must! A total 80s throwback vibe.
@@JohnDrivesAnything If you can stand not using cruise, you'll actually do better by lightly using the throttle to "climb" hills while pulling and gaining more speed going down them and only allowing the vehicle to shift out of overdrive when completely necessary. If you set the cruise, you won't get as good of fuel mileage especially when towing because it won't hold 4th gear that well. And if you're towing, it may downshift into 2nd more times than you would like also. I had a 1992 E-350 with a 5.7 (351 Windsor) EFI. I got about 13.5 (roughly) doing 65 to 70 without anything in it. I hauled my 5000 pound minivan with a single car trailer (probably around 1800 to 2000 pounds by itself) and it did fine. But it will "suck" the fuel if you can't find the sweet spot. Even if you set the cruise at 60 or 55 mph, it will still be worse than if you adjusted the throttle yourself.
@@eldridge201 I plan on getting a Geo Tracker in the next 6 months to flat tow behind my van. They only weigh 2500 pounds so hopefully I don't lose too much from the 16-17 I usually get at the 60 MPH I drive at. I do 60 slow lane all the time. If I do 65 I get 14 MPG. I was thinking of getting a 5 Star Tune. That's suppose to help with the gear hunting
This is in California when Orange man bad was around. I was able to fill up this whole tank off under $100 before now it takes like $140 Thanks Brandon
No I just used a go pro mount. Thats all I had at the time dont want to drive and hold the camera. I got a tripod for the middle of my van now. Appreciate your input
Dude, don't overthink it man if you can 14 mpg out of a 6.8 your doing good man the only way to get really good gas mileage is to reduce your weight and drive slower that's pretty much it and choose the flattest route possible thats it marvel mystery oil honestly dont do anything
It's actually fun for me to track mpg. It makes the drive more entertaining to try to get the MPG has high as possible. My van has been lifted since this video and recently pulled off 17.4 MPG Cruise Control 60 MPH the whole way no traffic. Here's the Van now. I know bigger tires will hurt the FE a little. I'm just going 3 inches bigger on the tire nothing crazy ruclips.net/video/y-YYodNaIus/видео.html
**UPDATE on 7-16-21** (I actually get better fuel mileage with my 2002 Ford F-250 than I state in these comments. I'll post my revised numbers) Your test is not realistic I'm sorry. Nothing against you but there are very few people that are driving under at least 65 mph or 70 mph anywhere in the United States. In your test, you wanted to try to stay at close to 60 mph and even mentioned you would slow down to 55 mph if you needed to. NOBODY drives that slow. Also, you mentioned trying to drive behind semi trucks. That's fine to try and "draft" with semi trucks and help your aerodynamics and therefore, it would help your fuel mileage however, people don't drive like that OTHER SEMI TRUCK DRIVERS. No typical driver on the road with a regular automobile is spending their time on a trip trying to figure out how to drive behind semi trucks or go slow enough to only 55 or 60 mph. People want to get from point A to point B as quicky as they can (typically) so they don't care about drafting or only doing 60 mph. Even though there are a lot of interstates that still have 70 and 75 mph speed limits (and some are 80 mph), the majority of people are going close to 80 mph and above EVEN IF/WHEN the speed limits are only 70 or 75 mph. The thing is, NOBODY is going to slowly "turtle" along at 60 mph when everyone around them is doing 75 or 80 mph. They just don't. So, for those reasons, your test isn't really a "real world" test. I have a 2002 Ford F-250 with the 2-valve 6.8 V-10 and I think it's a pretty good engine for the most part. It's got okay power. I'm a Ford guy so I like Fords. I pulled a smaller U-Haul trauler recently like it was nothing. However, I also recently pulled a 32 foot gooseneck camper that probably weighed somewhere around 7000 to 8000 pounds. Not much really if you consider some of the 12000 to 15000 pound campers out there today. Anyway, I got about 7.5 to 8 mpg and I was driving "nice". I wasn't going too fast but was around 65 mph to 70 mph. But, unfortunately, like many other people have complained, it doesn't get the best fuel mileage normally. I actually get better mileqge than "most" other Ford V-10 owners from what I've read so I'm doing better at least but still not great. I get about 14 to 15 mpg if I'm going 65 to 70 mph with no wind and not towing anything. 70 to 75 and it drops to 12 to 13 it seems depending on wind. At about 80 mph, I'm getting around 11 to 12 not pulling anything. This is if I set the cruise and just let it shift on its own going up and down small to medium grade hills such as the I-90 interstate in South Dakota. (There aren't very many actual steep hills from one end of the state on the interstate to the other and it's a fairly flat terrain). I don't typically go 85 mph but I'm sure if I did, it would be at least as low as 10 mpg if not down to 9 I'm sure. I sometimes drive without cruise to gain speed going down hills and just lightly push the throttle to go up hills to minimize shifting and load on the engine but I think it maybe only gains me about 1/2 mpg at best. Probably more like 1/4 mpg. So, it's really not worth it to try to drive it "nice" and conserve fuel in my opinion so I usually just set the cruise. I don't know if I could get 18 mpg if I drove 60 mph but I'm sure I could get at least 16 to 17. But again, NOBODY drives that slow so the test isn't relevant. There might be a super duper small percentage of people out there driving that slow. Maybe. So, this wouldn't apply to the majority of people driving their vehicles today.,
I'm one of the few people who take my time. Its funny I'll see people fly by me and an hour later the same person fly by me again. If you take your time in gigantic vehicles like this it pays off. I'll get 14-15 MPG if I do 60 MPH. Almost 18 is worth taking my time.
@@JohnDrivesAnything again, that's fine if you want to drive that slow. But you're not uncovering some unknown secret on how to save fuel and/or get better fuel mileage. You're simply driving slow. So.....no big discovery there. As I typed previously, hardly anybody wants to drive that slow even if they are taking a vacation and want to see the scenery along the way. It just "typically" doesn't happen. EVERYONE KNOWS that if you slow down, you can get better fuel mileage. But nobody gives a crap about that. People just simply are impatient in today's world and want to get places a lot faster so they drive fast. And people bitch about the fuel mileage while still wanting to drive 75 mph or faster. It's simply a "duh" situation. Of course the fuel mileage is gonna suck going that fast. Look, you seem like a decent fellow and I'm not criticizing you as a person. But you're just not uncovering something unique or unknown. I'm sorry. So, to me, for that reason, the video is sort of pointless. I was hoping you figured out some way to get better fuel mileage but you didn't. Also, just as an FYI, I went to school for automotive technology and worked at a couple Ford dealerships as a tech. *(Just because I type that or have that knowledge DOES NOT MEAN that I think I know everything. OF COURSE I DON'T)* I also owned a 1993 Ford E-250 club wagon (extended cargo van like yours) with a 5.7 - 351 Windsor. I got about 13.5 mpg if I was doing 65 to 70 mph with little to no wind. I think it had 190,094 miles when I sold it a few months ago. I only put about 10,000 to 15,000 miles on it (maybe) and the plugs looked okay so I never changed them but I'm sure they should have been changed. I couldn't get the timing adjusted because the distributor was stuck and I wasn't going to piss with it anymore but it was only off by maybe 1 degree anyway if I remember correctly. So, I don't think you're getting much more than the 13 to 15 mpg anyway.
@@eldridge201 I just enjoy making fuel economy videos and getting the most out of my gallon of fuel lol. PEople do drive slow. Were called hypermilers it's the opposite of driving enthusiastically lol
For the most part you are correct. I've got a 4bt Cummins in my old 77 F150. If I hold at 60mph I'll get around 30mpg in a truck shaped like a 1970's lunchbox. If I push to 70mph, I'll get about 26-27mpg. You can do the math from there. Where I adamantly disagree with you is that EVERYONE is impatient (or under time constraints) enough to drive a slower speed. In my new V10, on long trips where my schedule is not mandatory or critical, I'm still going to set my cruise control for max economy. Why? One, because I enjoy the drive and scenery, and two because I'm not going to spend $20 more just to get where I'm going faster. Life is not a race. Even though, as you correctly pointed out, it seems to be with most drivers.. But does it have to be? Why? I'll try to squeeze as much MPG out of my new V10 as I can unless I'm in a rush. Maybe someday I'll pop my 4bt into my new truck and get back to 30mpg, but it doesn't mean the test isn't "real world" - it just means the tester has a different set of priorities. If people want to spend money getting somewhere faster, good on them. If people want to enjoy the ride and spend the money they saved on some good beer instead - welcome to my club. That's the "real world".
@@brentruss2168 "real world" is referring to the majority of people in general. And as you pointed out, I'm not wrong. "Most" (the majority of people) want to get places a lot faster. It's for a variety of reasons but I think many of them outside of just being impatient is that people are so spoiled now. Cars ride so much better now than they did years ago. They are quieter, smoother in operation, handle so much better, have way more power, and can get down the road at 75 or 85 mph better than 55 mph 30 or 40 years ago. Heck, I'll bet even you yourself have caught yourself just "cruising" down the road in your newer V-10 and looked down and all of a sudden realized you were doing 75 or 80 when you thought you were doing 60 or 65. Unless you set your cruise every single time, I'm sure this has happened a few times. It's because cars just go so much easier now. At least if they are in good mechanical order and shocks, struts, tires, suspension, brakes, steering, and so on are working well. And so, because of all of this, people get "spoiled" with how well a car can practically "glide" down the road with little to no road noise and don't even notice that they're doing 75 to 80. But anyway, I actually edited my post above because it turns out, I am getting better mileage that I thought with my truck. Just recently I weighed it with a trailer towing a 2000 Chevy Suburban with 30 bags of pine bark nuggets inside of it (probably around 400 to 450 pounds), 2 large air compressors for a walk in cooler at a convenience store (960 pounds for both), and my pickup. Total weight was 20,040 pounds with everything including my pickup, trailer, the Suburban on the trailer, the 30 bags in the Suburban, my 2 compressors and everything else. Trailer weighs 4,420 pounds empty with chains, straps, binders, and spare tire. My pickup weighed 7,780 at the time after unloading the trailer. I still had some tires and other stuff in the back. I have 3.73 gears with 4-speed automatic and had a Superchips tuner running the fuel mileage XS tune in it (No, I did NOT run the tow tune or performance tunes like I could have). Anyway, from Sioux Falls, South Dakota back to Pierre, South Dakota, I got about 8.25 to 8.50 mpg doing between 70 and 75. I would say that's pretty good with that much weight. But that's just me. Granted, the interstate is pretty flat but still. That's not bad. Either way, I understand that "some people" can choose to drive slower. I don't disagree with that. But that is NOT "real world" since the "real world" doesn't drive slow. They just don't. I don't care if this person wants to drive slow. Obviously, it doesn't affect me so it makes no difference. I'm just simply setting things straight and calling a spade a spade.
I think the Marvel Mystery Oil restored some power too. Unfortunately the memory card I used to film the footage climbing a steep grade erased my footage climbing and the Van was able to stay in 4th/overdrive where it normally would shift into 3rd. Next time I do my Trip I'll see if it happens again where I can stay in 4th/OD on the steepest section
Nice! I can't wait to log my first road trip and see if my engine can duplicate this.
Thanks for the video! Good to see what is possible. I like seeing mpg videos. Makes me feel a little better when considering the v10.
The V10 is great. I did this exact same run with a lift kit. Lost a little MPG but still got 16. The key is drive 60 MPH. Let the impatient people drive around you. When you go 65+ your MPG is 14 and lower
@@JohnDrivesAnything WHAT?! 16 is nuts for a v10. Even at "only" 60mph.
I'm a chevy guy and need to upgrade to a 3/4 ton truck. I really like the early 2000s silverado trucks, but they are a good bit more expensive and the more common 6.0 LS really isn't a great truck engine IMO. The last one I drove seemed to be an absolute dog due to size of truck. Also, the MPGs didn't seem good at all. Heard of some guys that claim they get pretty much the same MPGs as the 8.1L.
Those are some reason why i'm really considering an early 2000s f250 v10. The MPGs seem to be better and I can find them between $2k to $3k. I know people brag about diesel mpg, but diesel is also $1 more/gallon plus all the other maintenance.
I'd really like to find a v10 with a manual, but I don't think I've seen one.
@@Ka_Gg The V10 is really underappreciated since Ford Truck guys are all about the Power Stroke. The numbers were pretty good for their time too. Of course modern blows it away but when you compare it to the old 7.3 stock for stock it's making 60 more horsepower and only 30 ft lbs of torque behind it. 420 is not bad for a vehicle this old and affordable.
The car guy in me had to get the V10 over the V8 when getting a van
@@JohnDrivesAnything Yeah way too many people go overboard in terms of how much power they need. The absolute most I would be towing is 10k lbs. Pretty much a diesel truck on a 20ft trailer.
I have looked a lot at the 7.3s, but I really won't be using the truck a lot and having a diesel sit for a while worries me. Plus the diesel market is nuts.
There is f250 v10 at $3k obo in my area and I'm considering it. either a bad head gasket or oil cooler...oil in coolant.
Really, I just want a cummins in a early 2000s silverado, but that'll never happen.
@@Ka_Gg if you can find one at a decent price, don't piss around with the older Ford V-10 (the 2-valve versions up to 2004) and get a 2005 and newer V-10 that is the 3-valve version.
This is for a few reasons.
1. It has more power (obviously) and essentially more than a stock 7.3 diesel although still lacking in comparison to the 6.0 diesel (but those can be problematic so not even worth comparing really unless you know the 6.0)
Also, I don't believe that the fuel mileage is any worse (from what I've read) so you wouldn't be losing anything there.
2. The 2005 and newer have a different front suspension with coil springs instead of leaf springs and the ride is supposed to be better.
Honestly, if you read my other comments, I have a 2002 F-250 extended cab long bed with the 6.8 V-10 but I also now have a 2005 F-350 4 door long bed with single rear wheels and a 2005 F-250 4 door with long bed and single rear wheels. Both of these have 6.0 diesel engines with the 5-speed automatic transmissions.
The F-350 sits higher and has different tires (more winter or off road terrain but not too aggressive) and is the XLT version with carpet and other more fancy features like power windows, automatic temp control with buttons on the steering wheel for temp, radio, and so on. It has a sliding rear window, message center and so on..
The F-250 sits lower and is just the XL version with vinyl floor, no power windows, bench seats front and rear, has standard radial all-weather tires and rides harsher for some reason. It's louder as well but I'm sure that has to do with the carpet interior vs. the vinyl flooring to dampen the sound.
Anyway, the F-350 rides really nice for some reason.
In comparison to my 2002 with the V-10, it's a better ride. But, in fairness, my friend has a 2002 F-350 with dual rear wheels and a 7.3 Powerstroke and 6-speed manual transmission that rides really nice as well.
I would have to get in one and then the other and do a comparison. But, since it has coil over suspension, the newer 2005 "should" ride better so I would suggest to get a 2005 or newer if you can.
3. The 2005 and newer V-10 models will have the 5-speed transmission which will help just a little with overall performance. Personally, I have never really cared for the 4-speed automatics in the Fords as they just don't have enough gears in my opinion but now, even 6 gears isn't enough since they now have the 10 speed autos so whatever.
The 5-speed auto transmissions are supposed to be a lot better overall in terms of longevity and reliability as well so that's an obvious plus.
So, for various reasons, I would suggest to get a 2005 and newer for the transmission options as well.
4. The newer 2005 V-10 which is the 3-valve version still has standard camshaft SPROCKETS AND NOT "phasers" or "variable timing" phasers like the 5.4 engines have that constantly have problems.
So, like the older 2-valve versions with similar standard sprockets (gears essentially), these engines are typically known to be very reliable as well because they don't have to worry about the cam phasers taking a dump on you.
Of course, they "can" break down as well but as long as they are maintained, many owners have been happy and many engines are easily over 200k and many with 300k and some even more than 400k miles.
You don't see too many "nice" 2005 and newer V-10 trucks on the market. You might see some "beaters" out there but try to find one in good condition that doesn't have a skyrocket price on it. Good luck.
In other words, there's a reason many people hold on to these newer V-10 models.
5. You can look for one with a manual transmission but those are going to be hard to find as well. And just so you know, I was thinking I would want a manual transmission as well like my buddy has in his 2002 with the 7.3 (the 6-speed) however, after owning these two 2005 F-350 and F-250 models with the 5-speeds, I don't think I could want a manual again.
You have to think about this:
How nice is it to just put it in "D" and just have to worry about one pedal and you don't have to use your right arm to shift and you can just drive?
It's nice just having to worry about the accelerator pedal and nothing more when you have an automatic.
Sure, I know there are concerns about the automatic transmission going out and manual transmissions are "typically" more reliable with the exception of the clutch going out if you don't know how to drive very well.
But, if what many of the forums say are true and the members that have them are not BSing anyone, I would have faith in the 5-speed lasting a while. Power wise, they are supposed to have just as much power by the time you figure the multiplication that the torque converter adds as the manual transmissions. Possibly even more.
If it was the older 4-speed, I would say that the decision would be harder and I could understand wanting to sway towards the 6-speed. I get it.
And in fairness, I may try to snag a 6-speed 6.0 one of these days or else a 2005 and newer V-10 with a 6-speed manual myself just because I am considering doing an experiment with lower 3.23 or 3.55 gears instead of 3.73 that a lot of them have.
But, I don't know. Getting in and putting it in Drive and being done with shifting is super nice. It spoils a person. Especially when you're hauling a trailer or camper pulling hills. It's nice not to have to shift so much going up and down a hefty grade.
Just bought a 2004 F250 crewcab v10 with under 61k miles. Other than some clear coat peeling on the tops of the camper, cab and hood the rest is pretty much mint. Steering is tight and drives like a dream. Bought pretty cheap.
Nice the Diesel gets so much love that the V10 gets hardly any love. A van with a Diesel would of cost me $15000 or more. I got my van for $6800. The V10 actually makes more horsepower then the 7.3 Diesel and isn't to far behind in torque. It's not very good on fuel and it needs to rev to make power but if these motors are good enough for RVs I'm sure my van will last a long time since it's half the weight of an RV
97 E350, 6.8 ,3.73 gears. The best I've managed us 11mpg running empty. With a 6x10 enclosed trailer and 14 people in the van averaging 70mph for 800 miles 9mpg.
On all my E350s with the needle just touching the E takes 27.8 gallons to top off.
How fast do you go? My Van has been lifted since this video and I can do 17 mpg as long as I keep the speed at 60 MPH. I'm about to tow my 2500 pound Geo Tracker with my van. What kind of MPG do you think I'll get keeping my speed at 55?
That opening scene looks like behind the Toyota headquarters building in Torrance near 190th and Van Ness??
That intro was made in 2020 when everything was locked down. It's in a industrial area in San Diego.
This makes me reluctant to put my luggage basket and luggage pods on the roof. lol
If you have the patience to go 60 MPH you will get 16+ MPG 65 MPH you're down to 14-15. If you do 1 on ramp full throttle run that uses about 2 gallons of fuel LOL and there goes your quest for a good MPG run. I want to retain my 500 mile range so when I get this thing lifted I will stick to 265/75-16 tires and not go 285s. My last van had a roof rack, this van will not get one.
@@JohnDrivesAnything I just went through the tire sized debate for my winter tires. I bought 235/85 16s to get a little more ground clearance and a little taller gear. Maybe that 10mm narrower will help on my road trip.
@@lordllewellynofdarkdelight2613 My last van was a 1992 5.0 and it was so wimpy I murdered the fuel economy in that going from 235 to 285 tires. Couldnt stay in over drive anymore because the gearing was too tall. These vans have 3.73s and If I go 265s I beleive I will be 3:55s equivalent which is still a decent towing gear and freeway gearing. If my van ends up hunting gears then I will get it re-geared to 4:10s so that the 265s on them are back to being equivalent to 3:73s. I beleive my last van with had equivalent of a 2:92s with the 285 tires and if just couldn't hold overdrive anymore. I think this van has the power to turn 265s without a regear,
@@JohnDrivesAnything I noticed my V10 hunts a little bit now with my 85 series 235s.
@@lordllewellynofdarkdelight2613 Once I get my lift I'll keep the 245s on it for a while since they are still new looking. Most likely I'll regear to 4:10s with 265s. I like how this van can hold overdrive on most mountain grades.
Out of curiosity, how many speed transmission and what gear ratios ?
4 Speed with 3:73 Gears. 60 MPH I'm at 1800 RPM
@@JohnDrivesAnything the reason I mentioned it is my father has a BMW 7 series with a V8 that once upon a time sat at 1600 rpms @ 60 mph and used 8 Ltrs of fuel ⛽ per 60 miles. It now sits on 1050 rpms @ 60 mph and goes through 5.5 Ltrs / 60 miles
@@SGTMARSHALL1 This van does ok when just freeway driving. When you use this as a daily driver with stop and go Traffic it gets 10-12 MPG.
My Daily driver is a Fiat 500 Abarth lol
@@JohnDrivesAnything I have project car and was thinking with the right combination that motor would get some economy to rival most 6 cylinder engines
@@SGTMARSHALL1 I have a 03 Corvette Z06 and that car can get 30 MPG if you drive it like a economy car 65 mph it's only turning at 1500 RPM. I wish my van had at least a 5 speed automatic to keep the RPM a little lower. It has the power to run a lower RPM. My 500 Abarth is turning at 2800 RPM in 5th gear I also have a 1992 Geo Tracker/Suzuki Vitara that does 3500 RPM in 5th gear at 65. With Big Engine vehicles a lower RPM really helps. I love fuel economy talk lol Skip to 5:22 and I got 30 MPG on a Corvette with a 5.7 V8. My Van with a 6.8 V10 can manage 19 at best.It's all about the weight and gearing/gears available ruclips.net/video/IM0UuuplNRc/видео.html
You should get a Toyota Prius instead. 600 mile range on 10 Gallons of fuel. I'm going to sell my Silver 1994 Toyota Celica to get a Toyota Prius and I'm converting it to a camper.
Prius camping life
Hahahahaha!
In a Prius you don't need to buy a generator for camping .
Freeway is 47 average going 65 to 70 miles . On city driving stop and go I was able to achieve at least 60.
We've had a total of two prius we bought and drove. The last prius was a wagon, we were rearended on the freeway. This accident totalled the prius, my neck still hurts after a year and my wife fears driving on the freeway and won't do it. Nothing against prius. We now drive a 08 F350 4x4 crewcab Lariat. Feels so much safer but yeah the gas mileage is poor.
I put MM in every tank. 175K on my F150. The only time I lost fuel economy is when I swapped the tires out with AT instead of street threads.
I got my Van Lifted for desert off roading. Im reluctant to get bigger tires dont want to ruin my Fuel Economy
was this is colorad?
Grapevine California
whats the ratio of mmo mix
4 ounces per 10 gallons
What was that digital gauge? What vehicle was it on?
Ultra Gauge on a 1999 Ford Econoline.
When i was driving a v10 the gas gauge was broken so every 10 mins it went up!
Every 10 seconds my gas gauge goes down.
what year is this van??? thx
1999 Same Engine was used all the way up to 2014. Here's a video I recently made of it ruclips.net/video/G_8YZmadMSI/видео.html
The Excursion has a 44gal tank at least mine does
I wish this had a 44 Gal Tank only 35 on the Vans even the extended Models only have 35
Oh I thought you was talking about an Excursion my bad
my too
Man your really squeezing everything out of that V10! Best I’ve seen actually. We have Ford v10s work trucks at my job that are terrible mpg, loaded up and especially when towing.. that’s the reason I specifically went for the 5.4. I’ve got . My dash is the newer model so it has a tach and digital readout for average Mpg’s and stuff. The only problem is my bigger tires threw that info off.
If I do one full throttle on ramp pull it's all over lol. Seriously It feels like one full throttle on ramp pull sucks up a gallon of fuel. My worse ever MPG is 8. If I do nothing but errands and side street driving 9-10 is normal. If I just take it to work even with 90% freeway going to work I'm at about 14 MPG. This was a pure freeway run. This engine chugs fuel climbing and stop and go. Once I get a Geo Tracker or Samurai to tow behind it I'm wondering how bad my fuel economy will get just towing about 2500 pounds. Did you enjoy your stay at the Frazier Mountain Pilot? What kind of range are you getting with the bigger tires and lift?
@@JohnDrivesAnything The Pilot was pretty cool. I ate at The Wendy’s for dinner and had a French toast breakfast sandwich and dunkin coffee in the morning. The store is well stocked and lots of goodies!. I walked around the perimeter of the property when I was bored, no tweakers or anything weird and it was fairly quiet. I parked a row back behind where you were all the way up against the fence.
It’s funny the main reason I wanted to explore that area is my favorite movie “THE FP” by Jason Trost is from there. If you haven’t seen it you must! A total 80s throwback vibe.
I feel safe up there so it's my go to sleeping spot on the road. I'll look that movie up right now.
@@JohnDrivesAnything If you can stand not using cruise, you'll actually do better by lightly using the throttle to "climb" hills while pulling and gaining more speed going down them and only allowing the vehicle to shift out of overdrive when completely necessary.
If you set the cruise, you won't get as good of fuel mileage especially when towing because it won't hold 4th gear that well. And if you're towing, it may downshift into 2nd more times than you would like also.
I had a 1992 E-350 with a 5.7 (351 Windsor) EFI. I got about 13.5 (roughly) doing 65 to 70 without anything in it. I hauled my 5000 pound minivan with a single car trailer (probably around 1800 to 2000 pounds by itself) and it did fine.
But it will "suck" the fuel if you can't find the sweet spot. Even if you set the cruise at 60 or 55 mph, it will still be worse than if you adjusted the throttle yourself.
@@eldridge201 I plan on getting a Geo Tracker in the next 6 months to flat tow behind my van. They only weigh 2500 pounds so hopefully I don't lose too much from the 16-17 I usually get at the 60 MPH I drive at. I do 60 slow lane all the time. If I do 65 I get 14 MPG. I was thinking of getting a 5 Star Tune. That's suppose to help with the gear hunting
I get 550-600 miles on a full tank driving on highway only 91 octane
Nice do you have a tune?
@@JohnDrivesAnything no tune . No cat, everything else stock
Worse than a hummer 😂
LOL I can sleep in it at least. Save money on Hotel Rooms
ruclips.net/video/2V_VTMtbjgo/видео.html
Awesome gas prices,
the gas is $4.25 in California lol
This is in California when Orange man bad was around. I was able to fill up this whole tank off under $100 before now it takes like $140 Thanks Brandon
Get a Tacoma now or use hydrogen gas is getting crazy
Go 500
Wish I had a 40 gallon tank so I can go for 600
@@JohnDrivesAnything that would be nice to have
500 mils a ear, dis guy has rots gras. I need ebeg fur gras lots moneys
Could t have picked a better spot for the camera? Soooo annoying and made me close out the video
No I just used a go pro mount. Thats all I had at the time dont want to drive and hold the camera. I got a tripod for the middle of my van now. Appreciate your input
Lots mils in dis vran gras xpenciv
Dude, don't overthink it man if you can 14 mpg out of a 6.8 your doing good man the only way to get really good gas mileage is to reduce your weight and drive slower that's pretty much it and choose the flattest route possible thats it marvel mystery oil honestly dont do anything
It's actually fun for me to track mpg. It makes the drive more entertaining to try to get the MPG has high as possible. My van has been lifted since this video and recently pulled off 17.4 MPG Cruise Control 60 MPH the whole way no traffic. Here's the Van now. I know bigger tires will hurt the FE a little. I'm just going 3 inches bigger on the tire nothing crazy ruclips.net/video/y-YYodNaIus/видео.html
So all you did was run marvel thru it
I always run MMO when I do road trips
@@JohnDrivesAnything and that gave you your mpg gains?
**UPDATE on 7-16-21** (I actually get better fuel mileage with my 2002 Ford F-250 than I state in these comments. I'll post my revised numbers)
Your test is not realistic I'm sorry. Nothing against you but there are very few people that are driving under at least 65 mph or 70 mph anywhere in the United States.
In your test, you wanted to try to stay at close to 60 mph and even mentioned you would slow down to 55 mph if you needed to. NOBODY drives that slow. Also, you mentioned trying to drive behind semi trucks. That's fine to try and "draft" with semi trucks and help your aerodynamics and therefore, it would help your fuel mileage however, people don't drive like that OTHER SEMI TRUCK DRIVERS. No typical driver on the road with a regular automobile is spending their time on a trip trying to figure out how to drive behind semi trucks or go slow enough to only 55 or 60 mph.
People want to get from point A to point B as quicky as they can (typically) so they don't care about drafting or only doing 60 mph.
Even though there are a lot of interstates that still have 70 and 75 mph speed limits (and some are 80 mph), the majority of people are going close to 80 mph and above EVEN IF/WHEN the speed limits are only 70 or 75 mph. The thing is, NOBODY is going to slowly "turtle" along at 60 mph when everyone around them is doing 75 or 80 mph. They just don't.
So, for those reasons, your test isn't really a "real world" test.
I have a 2002 Ford F-250 with the 2-valve 6.8 V-10 and I think it's a pretty good engine for the most part. It's got okay power. I'm a Ford guy so I like Fords. I pulled a smaller U-Haul trauler recently like it was nothing. However, I also recently pulled a 32 foot gooseneck camper that probably weighed somewhere around 7000 to 8000 pounds. Not much really if you consider some of the 12000 to 15000 pound campers out there today. Anyway, I got about 7.5 to 8 mpg and I was driving "nice". I wasn't going too fast but was around 65 mph to 70 mph. But, unfortunately, like many other people have complained, it doesn't get the best fuel mileage normally. I actually get better mileqge than "most" other Ford V-10 owners from what I've read so I'm doing better at least but still not great.
I get about 14 to 15 mpg if I'm going 65 to 70 mph with no wind and not towing anything. 70 to 75 and it drops to 12 to 13 it seems depending on wind. At about 80 mph, I'm getting around 11 to 12 not pulling anything. This is if I set the cruise and just let it shift on its own going up and down small to medium grade hills such as the I-90 interstate in South Dakota. (There aren't very many actual steep hills from one end of the state on the interstate to the other and it's a fairly flat terrain). I don't typically go 85 mph but I'm sure if I did, it would be at least as low as 10 mpg if not down to 9 I'm sure.
I sometimes drive without cruise to gain speed going down hills and just lightly push the throttle to go up hills to minimize shifting and load on the engine but I think it maybe only gains me about 1/2 mpg at best. Probably more like 1/4 mpg. So, it's really not worth it to try to drive it "nice" and conserve fuel in my opinion so I usually just set the cruise.
I don't know if I could get 18 mpg if I drove 60 mph but I'm sure I could get at least 16 to 17.
But again, NOBODY drives that slow so the test isn't relevant. There might be a super duper small percentage of people out there driving that slow. Maybe. So, this wouldn't apply to the majority of people driving their vehicles today.,
I'm one of the few people who take my time. Its funny I'll see people fly by me and an hour later the same person fly by me again. If you take your time in gigantic vehicles like this it pays off. I'll get 14-15 MPG if I do 60 MPH. Almost 18 is worth taking my time.
@@JohnDrivesAnything again, that's fine if you want to drive that slow.
But you're not uncovering some unknown secret on how to save fuel and/or get better fuel mileage.
You're simply driving slow. So.....no big discovery there.
As I typed previously, hardly anybody wants to drive that slow even if they are taking a vacation and want to see the scenery along the way. It just "typically" doesn't happen.
EVERYONE KNOWS that if you slow down, you can get better fuel mileage. But nobody gives a crap about that. People just simply are impatient in today's world and want to get places a lot faster so they drive fast.
And people bitch about the fuel mileage while still wanting to drive 75 mph or faster. It's simply a "duh" situation. Of course the fuel mileage is gonna suck going that fast.
Look, you seem like a decent fellow and I'm not criticizing you as a person. But you're just not uncovering something unique or unknown. I'm sorry.
So, to me, for that reason, the video is sort of pointless. I was hoping you figured out some way to get better fuel mileage but you didn't.
Also, just as an FYI, I went to school for automotive technology and worked at a couple Ford dealerships as a tech. *(Just because I type that or have that knowledge DOES NOT MEAN that I think I know everything. OF COURSE I DON'T)*
I also owned a 1993 Ford E-250 club wagon (extended cargo van like yours) with a 5.7 - 351 Windsor. I got about 13.5 mpg if I was doing 65 to 70 mph with little to no wind. I think it had 190,094 miles when I sold it a few months ago. I only put about 10,000 to 15,000 miles on it (maybe) and the plugs looked okay so I never changed them but I'm sure they should have been changed.
I couldn't get the timing adjusted because the distributor was stuck and I wasn't going to piss with it anymore but it was only off by maybe 1 degree anyway if I remember correctly.
So, I don't think you're getting much more than the 13 to 15 mpg anyway.
@@eldridge201 I just enjoy making fuel economy videos and getting the most out of my gallon of fuel lol. PEople do drive slow. Were called hypermilers it's the opposite of driving enthusiastically lol
For the most part you are correct. I've got a 4bt Cummins in my old 77 F150. If I hold at 60mph I'll get around 30mpg in a truck shaped like a 1970's lunchbox. If I push to 70mph, I'll get about 26-27mpg. You can do the math from there.
Where I adamantly disagree with you is that EVERYONE is impatient (or under time constraints) enough to drive a slower speed. In my new V10, on long trips where my schedule is not mandatory or critical, I'm still going to set my cruise control for max economy. Why? One, because I enjoy the drive and scenery, and two because I'm not going to spend $20 more just to get where I'm going faster.
Life is not a race. Even though, as you correctly pointed out, it seems to be with most drivers.. But does it have to be? Why?
I'll try to squeeze as much MPG out of my new V10 as I can unless I'm in a rush. Maybe someday I'll pop my 4bt into my new truck and get back to 30mpg, but it doesn't mean the test isn't "real world" - it just means the tester has a different set of priorities. If people want to spend money getting somewhere faster, good on them. If people want to enjoy the ride and spend the money they saved on some good beer instead - welcome to my club. That's the "real world".
@@brentruss2168 "real world" is referring to the majority of people in general.
And as you pointed out, I'm not wrong.
"Most" (the majority of people) want to get places a lot faster. It's for a variety of reasons but I think many of them outside of just being impatient is that people are so spoiled now.
Cars ride so much better now than they did years ago. They are quieter, smoother in operation, handle so much better, have way more power, and can get down the road at 75 or 85 mph better than 55 mph 30 or 40 years ago.
Heck, I'll bet even you yourself have caught yourself just "cruising" down the road in your newer V-10 and looked down and all of a sudden realized you were doing 75 or 80 when you thought you were doing 60 or 65. Unless you set your cruise every single time, I'm sure this has happened a few times.
It's because cars just go so much easier now. At least if they are in good mechanical order and shocks, struts, tires, suspension, brakes, steering, and so on are working well.
And so, because of all of this, people get "spoiled" with how well a car can practically "glide" down the road with little to no road noise and don't even notice that they're doing 75 to 80.
But anyway, I actually edited my post above because it turns out, I am getting better mileage that I thought with my truck. Just recently I weighed it with a trailer towing a 2000 Chevy Suburban with 30 bags of pine bark nuggets inside of it (probably around 400 to 450 pounds), 2 large air compressors for a walk in cooler at a convenience store (960 pounds for both), and my pickup.
Total weight was 20,040 pounds with everything including my pickup, trailer, the Suburban on the trailer, the 30 bags in the Suburban, my 2 compressors and everything else.
Trailer weighs 4,420 pounds empty with chains, straps, binders, and spare tire.
My pickup weighed 7,780 at the time after unloading the trailer. I still had some tires and other stuff in the back.
I have 3.73 gears with 4-speed automatic and had a Superchips tuner running the fuel mileage XS tune in it (No, I did NOT run the tow tune or performance tunes like I could have).
Anyway, from Sioux Falls, South Dakota back to Pierre, South Dakota, I got about 8.25 to 8.50 mpg doing between 70 and 75. I would say that's pretty good with that much weight. But that's just me.
Granted, the interstate is pretty flat but still. That's not bad.
Either way, I understand that "some people" can choose to drive slower. I don't disagree with that. But that is NOT "real world" since the "real world" doesn't drive slow.
They just don't.
I don't care if this person wants to drive slow. Obviously, it doesn't affect me so it makes no difference. I'm just simply setting things straight and calling a spade a spade.