2016 Ford V-10 and 6 spd transmission

[2016vegas]

We visited Big Bend the week after Thanksgiving. Awesome place!

[Oneilkeys]

I’ve found that the difference between averaging 65 and 75 mph in my 2016 6spd is about 1.5 mpg. I try to keep it down to 70 and get a little better than 9.0 mpg when I do that. Averaging 55-60 and I get over 10.0 mpg.

[Chance]

Originally Posted by Wrpt58

My experience has been that the V-10 has been pretty good. As some have said (Chance?) it really needs the Revs to make the horses necessary to pull in some instances. It is happy at 4-5k in a pulling situation.

The 6 speed seems to be pretty smooth to me, however, I got really uncomfortable with it at first when I was rolling down the mountain into Death Valley and it would not upshift when I thought it should. It still seems to like staying in the lower gear until practically all the load is off and your running "flat" again. Something to get used to, i guess.

I've got about 12-13K miles on mine now and not towing (yet). At 65 mph, it gets anywhere between 7 & 9 mpg, depending on wind and other environment/road conditions. I knew I wouldn't get the 10-12 mpg dealers will advertise. Just too much house to move at speed.

Me and the wife have to remind each other to limit the weight we add to the vehicle. F=ma all the time!!
The more m the more F is required to keep it at speed.

The toughest place I've driven a motorhome I think was Death Valley. To me it seemed worse than the Rockies. With the 5-speed there wasn't a good gear down low that would allow the engine to rev at a comfortable pace; I had to choose between going too slow to keep from overheating or speed up (which allowed the motorhome to upshift) which then required too much throttle which led to overheating.

Close gear spacing can help a lot. The 6-speed is a lot better than the 5-speed (converted 4-speed). Next up will be a 10-speed which should solve these problems.



P.S. -- By the way, in F=MXA, the A is for acceleration, not holding a steady speed. Extra weight in motorhome affects acceleration, hill climbing, and rolling resistance, but the biggest factor that affects fuel economy on the highway where most miles are usually driven is wind drag, and that's not affected by extra cargo weight. In city driving with lots of stop and go, extra mass does kill fuel economy, but on highway while holding steady speed it makes very little difference. In a large rig you probably wouldn't notice an extra 1,000 pounds very much at the fuel pump. Obviously there are other great reasons to keep weight down.

[Thehobe1]

Thats 466 gallons of gas at 7.5 mpg. So, without the toad you would have burned 62 less gallons of gasoline. At $3/gallon, that's $186 to tow the toad! (assuming 8.5 mpg without the toad)
How much use was the toad on the trip? We have rented cars for a day or two when traveling because we do not have a toad to bring. Is it worth dealing with the toad? We have not traveled too many places where we could not just use the RV for side trips. Do you bring it for safety if the coach breaks down?

[JamieGeek]

Originally Posted by Thehobe1

Thats 466 gallons of gas at 7.5 mpg. So, without the toad you would have burned 62 less gallons of gasoline. At $3/gallon, that's $186 to tow the toad! (assuming 8.5 mpg without the toad)
How much use was the toad on the trip? We have rented cars for a day or two when traveling because we do not have a toad to bring. Is it worth dealing with the toad? We have not traveled too many places where we could not just use the RV for side trips. Do you bring it for safety if the coach breaks down?

Well $186 is about the weekly rate for a rental. In our Axis the difference between toad or not in mpg is negligible (0.5 mpg or less).

[2016vegas]

Originally Posted by JamieGeek

Well In our Axis the difference between toad or not in mpg is negligible (0.5 mpg or less).

I've noticed that too Jamie. About same mpg with or without toad. Maybe they really do push going downhill.

[Thehobe1]

Originally Posted by JamieGeek

Well $186 is about the weekly rate for a rental. In our Axis the difference between toad or not in mpg is negligible (0.5 mpg or less).

I think people are not estimating their MPG that well because, I believe that to the first order, overall weight is the main contributor to fuel economy (assuming 60-65 MPH before air resistance becomes more significant). If someone is towing a 3,000 lb car with a 12,000 lb RV then the approximate mpg should decrease by around 25%. That would be a 10 mpg down to a 7.5 mpg which I think is a more reasonable final mpg. Efficient cars get around 30 mpg and weigh 3500 lbs on the freeway and this is consistent with 8.5 mpg for a typical small RV (12,000 lbs). (3.5/12)*30=8.75 Seems consistent with my premise.

Certainly, if one drops their constant speed to 55 mph and drives on straight, flat road they may get another 1 mpg but some of the estimates I have seen are too optimistic.

[alarmingfriend]

Originally Posted by Oneilkeys

Has anyone purchased a motorhome with one of the 2016 Ford V-10's with the 6 speed transmission. I have read reviews that estimate 10% better gas mileage and less shifting on hills. Does anyone have any experiences?

Going from a 1990 Monaco Monarch with a 4 speed V-10 to a 2018 Thor Challenger LX I can tell you that the hills are much smoother and yes less shifting, but the same rules still apply with gas mileage, it is a bit more efficient but if you overload you can loose the efficiency fast. Example Waste tanks and fresh water tanks you need to keep low. I travel with 10% full Fresh water tank.
We also tow an older 2001 Jeep Wrangler 4.0 "Inline six". 2 dogs, 2 people, water, tow vehicle, we still on average run at 9 MPG.
That is 3 Florida trips from Las Vegas, with the basic documenting mileage and gallons at fill up.

[2016vegas]

Originally Posted by Thehobe1

I think people are not estimating their MPG that well because, I believe that to the first order, overall weight is the main contributor to fuel economy (assuming 60-65 MPH before air resistance becomes more significant). If someone is towing a 3,000 lb car with a 12,000 lb RV then the approximate mpg should decrease by around 25%. That would be a 10 mpg down to a 7.5 mpg which I think is a more reasonable final mpg. Efficient cars get around 30 mpg and weigh 3500 lbs on the freeway and this is consistent with 8.5 mpg for a typical small RV (12,000 lbs). (3.5/12)*30=8.75 Seems consistent with my premise.

Certainly, if one drops their constant speed to 55 mph and drives on straight, flat road they may get another 1 mpg but some of the estimates I have seen are too optimistic.

We simply do the math for mpg (gal/miles=mpg) . We do estimate $25 to travel each 100 miles (just a ball park for trip cost planning) Miles * 0.25 = fuel cost I usually set our cruise at 63mph and get 9-10 with toad and 10-11 without. This varies in the mountains due to terrain. I'm wondering how much I will change my RPM choices since installing the sound deadening.

[JamieGeek]

Originally Posted by Thehobe1

I think people are not estimating their MPG that well because, I believe that to the first order, overall weight is the main contributor to fuel economy (assuming 60-65 MPH before air resistance becomes more significant). If someone is towing a 3,000 lb car with a 12,000 lb RV then the approximate mpg should decrease by around 25%. That would be a 10 mpg down to a 7.5 mpg which I think is a more reasonable final mpg. Efficient cars get around 30 mpg and weigh 3500 lbs on the freeway and this is consistent with 8.5 mpg for a typical small RV (12,000 lbs). (3.5/12)*30=8.75 Seems consistent with my premise.

Certainly, if one drops their constant speed to 55 mph and drives on straight, flat road they may get another 1 mpg but some of the estimates I have seen are too optimistic.

My mpg values are measured not estimated. The one thing I do like about the Jensen JRV-215 radio is that it has a fuel log feature: At each fill up enter in miles traveled, gallons consumed, and price paid. At any time you can pull up the log and see the mpg for all your trips.

[Chance]

If towing a 4,000-pound car only reduces fuel economy by no more than 1/2 MPG (as reported by many owners), wouldn't you expect that an extra 1,000 pounds of water and/or cargo would reduce fuel economy by roughly no more than 1/8 MPG.

If weight affected highway fuel economy as much as some claim, the difference in fuel economy between 16,000- and 24,000-pound motorhomes on similar chassis would be huge, and it isn't. Fuel economy reports here and in other forums show no more than 1 MPG difference on average between lighter and heavier Class As when both built on F-53 chassis.

Traveling light to improve performance, safety, etc. is understanble, but as it relates to saving gasoline, just enjoy the motorhome. An extra 40 or 50 gallons of water (~ 400 pounds) can't possibly make that much difference to worry about.

[Chance]

Originally Posted by Thehobe1

I think people are not estimating their MPG that well because, I believe that to the first order, overall weight is the main contributor to fuel economy (assuming 60-65 MPH before air resistance becomes more significant). If someone is towing a 3,000 lb car with a 12,000 lb RV then the approximate mpg should decrease by around 25%. That would be a 10 mpg down to a 7.5 mpg which I think is a more reasonable final mpg. Efficient cars get around 30 mpg and weigh 3500 lbs on the freeway and this is consistent with 8.5 mpg for a typical small RV (12,000 lbs). (3.5/12)*30=8.75 Seems consistent with my premise.

Certainly, if one drops their constant speed to 55 mph and drives on straight, flat road they may get another 1 mpg but some of the estimates I have seen are too optimistic.

It doesn't work that way -- you're oversimplifying too much, and in my opinion cherry picking data to support your assumption, when other factors are involved that don't apply here. As an example, small cars may only weigh 1/4 the weight, but their engines and frontal area are also much smaller by comparison to a motorhome with a V10.

If your assumption about weight was correct, then owners of 12,000-pound Axis would be getting twice the MPG as owners of 24,000-pound Challengers, and they clearly don't even come close to that.

Even at 60 to 65 MPH a large part of energy is used to overcome wind drag.

[16ACE27]

Originally Posted by Chance

It doesn't work that way -- you're oversimplifying too much, and in my opinion cherry picking data to support your assumption, when other factors are involved that don't apply here. As an example, small cars may only weigh 1/4 the weight, but their engines and frontal area are also much smaller by comparison to a motorhome with a V10.

If your assumption about weight was correct, then owners of 12,000-pound Axis would be getting twice the MPG as owners of 24,000-pound Challengers, and they clearly don't even come close to that.

Even at 60 to 65 MPH a large part of energy is used to overcome wind drag.

What Chance said. The toad is just being sucked along in the drag stream. It's weight makes more of a difference on hilly and winding roads but on a straight-away at 60 - 65 MPH the effects are minor compared to the wind drag factor of the frontal area on the MH.

[RV Pirate]

From what I understand, the 6 speed in not a true six speed as most of us would assume. There is an extra gear that is only used at low temps, I believe it was something like 20 degrees and below (can't remember the temp I read) This extra gear is used in place of the other, not in addition to it , so essentially it's still a 5 speed no matter what the temp is..

I can only detect 5 shifts in our 2017 Challenger, which has the 6 speed.

[vkb]

Interesting conversation ! When we pull our 6x10 enclosed trailer with the dresser and accessories inside..our mileage drops to about 9.5 ...

[Mike in AZ]

We just did a round trip from Phoenix to Vegas. I filled the tank at the local Sam’s Club as we were leaving, and reset the trip mileage. Filled up at the same Sam’s upon return.

67.5 gallons
534 miles driven
7.9 mpg

No toad

2017 Challenger 37LX

YMMV (hey, that phrase applies here better than any other time I’ve seen it used, LOL).

[Thehobe1]

Originally Posted by 2016vegas

We simply do the math for mpg (gal/miles=mpg) . We do estimate $25 to travel each 100 miles (just a ball park for trip cost planning) Miles * 0.25 = fuel cost I usually set our cruise at 63mph and get 9-10 with toad and 10-11 without. This varies in the mountains due to terrain. I'm wondering how much I will change my RPM choices since installing the sound deadening.

I also have a new, not broken in, Veags 25.2. I was traveling pretty fast but only had the "toad" I was driving (the Vegas 25.2 itself). My 2200 mile trip got 8.64 MPG from Wisconsin to California. I admit, I was taking advantage of the 80 mph speed limits in Wyoming and Utah, but mostly doing around 65-70 otherwise. I hope you are correct about the mpg. I was actually expecting more like 10 mpg! I was also went through Madison Wi with quite a few stops for red lights. Three of my rear tires were only at 50 lbs thanks to the Camping World fine delivery program. Now that I am in California, I will have to slow down since the max speed limit is 70 mph.
I will test the best mpg in the future by slowing way down and get the absolute best MPG for a future update.

[DenverTransplant]

I use the Road Trip app to record gas usage. Average for my ACE 30.1 over about 18 months and 5,630 miles is 7.64 MPG. This includes a lot of mountain driving at high altitude and pulling our Mini Cooper S and its dolly. The mileage also skews a bit lower due to generator usage, which I think runs about 1/2 gallon per hour. Guessing at about 50 hours of generator time, that corrects to about 7.68 MPG

We've run as low as 6 MPG and as high as 10 MPG. Climbing and accelerating affect gas mileage. Base consumption is due to wind drag and drive train friction, then climbing and accelerating then increase consumption. The effect of towing is really only due to the climbing and accelerating part as you are lifting weight or making it go faster. Going downhill with the toad will increase brake load or cause you to go a bit faster under engine braking. Simple first year mechanical engineering stuff, or even high school physics.

We usually run at 60-65 MPH on freeways and less (often much less) on other highways. I can make it up I-70 approaching the tunnels (at 10,000 ft) at 35-40 MPH, but the engine is screaming. Same going down with the engine downshifted. I recently added Dynamat to the doghouse so we will see how much it gets quieted down.

The 6 speed downshift is quite effective going down from the tunnels. Initially the downshifting wasn't working and I had to go to Ford to have the ECM refreshed to fix a software bug that inhibiting the downshifting. Before the fix we took one trip over the continental divide and by the time we got to the bottom of Vail Pass, the brakes were really, really hot even with babying them on the way down. Not that way after the fix.

[Thehobe1]

Originally Posted by DenverTransplant

I use the Road Trip app to record gas usage. Average for my ACE 30.1 over about 18 months and 5,630 miles is 7.64 MPG. This includes a lot of mountain driving at high altitude and pulling our Mini Cooper S and its dolly. The mileage also skews a bit lower due to generator usage, which I think runs about 1/2 gallon per hour. Guessing at about 50 hours of generator time, that corrects to about 7.68 MPG

We've run as low as 6 MPG and as high as 10 MPG. Climbing and accelerating affect gas mileage. Base consumption is due to wind drag and drive train friction, then climbing and accelerating then increase consumption. The effect of towing is really only due to the climbing and accelerating part as you are lifting weight or making it go faster. Going downhill with the toad will increase brake load or cause you to go a bit faster under engine braking. Simple first year mechanical engineering stuff, or even high school physics.

We usually run at 60-65 MPH on freeways and less (often much less) on other highways. I can make it up I-70 approaching the tunnels (at 10,000 ft) at 35-40 MPH, but the engine is screaming. Same going down with the engine downshifted. I recently added Dynamat to the doghouse so we will see how much it gets quieted down.

The 6 speed downshift is quite effective going down from the tunnels. Initially the downshifting wasn't working and I had to go to Ford to have the ECM refreshed to fix a software bug that inhibiting the downshifting. Before the fix we took one trip over the continental divide and by the time we got to the bottom of Vail Pass, the brakes were really, really hot even with babying them on the way down. Not that way after the fix.

Interesting that the Ford V10 of your ACE lists 320HP/460 Torque and my 2017 Vegas lists 305HP/420 Torque.

"simple Physics": As an Electrical Engineer, I took many Physics courses and know that it takes a certain energy to pull a certain load and you have actually supported that argument when you talk about being "pusherd" by your toad. YES, you are being pushed, not by F=MA, because most of the time, there is no acceleration, just a constant force determined by the weight of your entire load. The net acceleration on a level trip is almost 0. The best mileage for a car with a typical modern profile will get it's best gas mileage at around 45 mph and will decrease as speed increases due to a 4th power wind resistance equation that takes over above that. Driving at 63 mph saves you a lot of gas! I can't keep my speed down to that level because I am determined not to hold up any traffic and get terrible stares from passing drivers- that's my problem. I typically drive at the posted speed limit and as such use more gasoline than the typical RV driver. Note, I am not complaining about other RV drivers here. Again, it's my problem.

The force needed to move the RV's at freeway speed at <60 mph is determined by the frictional losses in engines, tires, transmissions, bearings, etc and the weight being pulled. These losses are all similar on modern vehicles because we are using the same chassis components and in our case the same engines. So, most of the claimed differences are in speed and changes in speed (acceleration). I would assume that most drivers that are pulling a toad are probably reducing their speed when towing as I certainly would. Towing a vehicle typically gets more and more unstable as speed is increased (that's physics). I have personally experience this effect while towing a vehicle. The tail does wag the dog. Most RV drivers would not notice this effect going at normal speeds and pulling a load much lighter than the RV but I don't see too many RV'ers driving >90 mph! I would like to know where they do start to go unstable...experience anyone?
I am sure I will get many comments on this because we all like to get the most MPG we can report.

[JamieGeek]

Originally Posted by Thehobe1

Interesting that the Ford V10 of your ACE lists 320HP/460 Torque and my 2017 Vegas lists 305HP/420 Torque.

... snip ...

Yes the E350/E450 engine in the Axis/Vegas units is the 2-valve version of the V-10 and the F-53 chassis gets the higher powered 3-valve version.

The force needed to move the RV's at freeway speed at <60 mph is determined by the frictional losses in engines, tires, transmissions, bearings, etc and the weight being pulled. These losses are all similar on modern vehicles because we are using the same chassis components and in our case the same engines. So, most of the claimed differences are in speed and changes in speed (acceleration). I would assume that most drivers that are pulling a toad are probably reducing their speed when towing as I certainly would. Towing a vehicle typically gets more and more unstable as speed is increased (that's physics). I have personally experience this effect while towing a vehicle. The tail does wag the dog. Most RV drivers would not notice this effect going at normal speeds and pulling a load much lighter than the RV but I don't see too many RV'ers driving >90 mph! I would like to know where they do start to go unstable...experience anyone?

As a fellow EE I fail to see the physics behind it being more unstable at a higher speed: It is a complex system and could very well be more stable at a higher speed (or about the same).

I've driven our Axis towing my C-Max at 75 mph (probably close to 80 mph at times) and its just as stable as it is at 65.