Hey Dave,

Have an 01 supercab, 4x4, 3:73, 265's. Regular driving from town traffic to flying down the highway's I average about 12 mpg.

Highway's around 15 mpg (if you stay away from the 94mph killswitch).

Stop and go city around 10, but hey It's hard to get milage in anything standing still.

Wouldn't change the truck in any way!

Mike

 

Ten days ago I just traded in my 2003 SD with a 5.4 and 3.73 4X2 for a 4X4 V-10 SD with 3.73. The 5.4 I had in the first truck gave me consistently 13.5 mpg in town driving. On the highway I got about 16 mpg. Not very impressive, but not bad either for a truck weighing nearly 6 grand dry.

As for the comment about the 5.4 being underpowered and over-rated, I say that's b/s in the highest degree. I towed my 30 footer into high mountain campgrounds (over 10,000 ft) 700 miles away from here through steep passes and that little 5.4 did great.

I never got less than 9 mpg and did as well as 10 mpg towing.

 

I think more accurately, the 5.4l did the job, as did mine.

I just wasn't happy with consistently getting 10-11MPG average out of my truck, which didn't have that much power to warrent low fuel economy. Does it do the job? Sure, I pulled our #7,500 loader several times and it did fine. My point was, the 5.4 can't boast spectacular economy, nor can it boast the best power. I could have had a V-10 and not done any worse.


Now you want to talk about "great", go with the 6.0l. No comparison.

 

Just got back from a mini-vacation at our "soon to have a house built on it" property in Northern California and am impressed with the overall miles per gallon my 2001 King Ranch 4WD delivered (5.4L stock). San Diego, CA to Lake Almanor, CA via a stop over in Reno, NV (both coming from and returning to San Diego) for a total of 1,336 miles. Best was 19.2 mpg with the overall average approx. 17.4 mpg. Route was US 395 (from San Diego to Reno) so speeds varied from the low 20's through towns to just above 90 a few times (mostly 75 to 80 mph) with altitude starting a 326ft finishing at 4,728 ft with the highest point being 8,400 ft.
Prior to the trip I had the oil (5W-20 synthetic) and filter changed and added TriboTech IJP to the oil and TriboTech Spectrum to an empty fuel tank just before filling and TriboTech Accuphase to the transmission. Back in 1991 I first tried TriboTech products in my 1991 Explorer 4dr. (oil, fuel and transmission treatments) and "she" is still going strong at 180K miles on original engine and transmission (treatments every 60,000 miles) - though the paint is in very sorry condition.
Seems that a tonneau cover makes a difference in mpg (along with whatever the TriboTech products did to make the engine perform). Truck performed great for the entire trip. On the long uphills we turned the AC off but kept in on for most of the trip.
While in Reno we got to see some of the early arrivals for the Hot August Nights celebration - a mint '53 Corvette and quite a few classic Ford F-100's and 150's. Many came over to see the KR too.

 

All,

I just bought a 04, F-250 SD. My first tank was 11.59mpg. Big difference between that and my 01 F-150 with the same engine.

I'm cursious if anyone has the 4.10 LS rear? I didn't want it on the new truck but it was the only one they had with 4x4 electronic shift and captains chairs. I didn't want to have to get out to lock and unlock the hubs.

Is there a huge difference between the 4.10 and the 3.73's? I'd have to drop down to a 28 inch tire if I wanted to get close to the 3.73. But if there is a big difference in mpg I'd consider it. I know I have a beast that hogs gass but I thought it's be better that what I'm getting.

FYI, I only have 700 miles on it. I know Ford says to wait till you break it in to start and measure the MPG but I think that's so there is some miles on it so you can't bring it back. LOL!

 

um, you would have to go to a LARGER tire to get close to the 3.73. The 4.10 is a lower gear than the 3.73, so to get your rpms in the same range as a truck equipped with 3.73's, you would have to get bigger tires. I personally think you got the better of the two gears, especially if you will be doing a lot of towing or plan on putting bigger tires on.

 

When I looked up the tire size difference and put my current gear ratio in the calculator found at http://www.mgb.bc.ca/misc/tirecalc.html it told me the ratio would be higher.

I have 30.6 inch tires now and plugged in 33 inch it gave me a new ratio of 4.42. I must be reading or understanding it wrong.

 

Looks like the info I was reading was a suggestion as to a new gear to get back to original.

This site, http://www.off-road.com/tools/gearcalc.html , has a better definition and give you the actual whan increasing the tire size.

Thanks for making me rethink that one japickar!!

I'll have to see how big I can go on the stock suspension. Looks like there is a lot of room. I want the better gas mileage. I will be using it more for plowing. I know the lower end would be better but I don't want to sacrifice mpg when I'm paying $2.12 per gallon.