PDA

View Full Version : MPG's for the 2015-2016 2500 HD 6.0 gas burner


the sodfather
11-26-2016, 06:24 PM
Just curious of what folks are getting with the 2015-16 2500 HD 6.0 gas burner. Towing, normal city driving and empty highway running.

Tbos
11-26-2016, 06:49 PM
Someone on one of the Chevrolet forums recently said he found out 6.0 wasn't for the engine size when towing. It was for the mpg.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

GaryWT
11-26-2016, 08:35 PM
I have a F350 with a 6.2 and I get about 14 mpg daily and 10 or so when towing.

bsmith0404
11-27-2016, 07:51 AM
I had an older 6.0, 2002, and got 16-17 hwy empty, 13-14 around town and 8-9 towing. My brother in-law has a 2004 and gets about the same. I have a friend who has a 2014 and it seems the numbers haven't changed much, maybe +1 mpg. The 6.0 has been pretty consistent through the years.

schwalbach
11-27-2016, 08:20 AM
I have a 2015 6.0, If I baby it in town 11-12, freeway with no towing 75 mph, 15.5, towing a 2 horse trailer 10, and towing a fifth wheel camper 8 to 8.5.

Very disappointed in mpg, it seems GM could have got it figured out for the empty side with an improvement.

What disappoints me is I work for a trucking company, and our big rigs are pulling 80,000 lbs and getting close to 10 loaded. I realize they are diesel but empty we should be seeing much better than we are out of the 6.0

Oh and by the way I tried a tuner, the tuner box said I gained 2-3 mpg but hand calcs and dash said it never changed. seems they like to over report mpg.

Little Guy
11-27-2016, 08:21 AM
'09 2500 HD 16mpg hwy, 12mpg local, 8mpg towing

JRTJH
11-27-2016, 08:52 AM
'09 2500 HD 16mpg hwy, 12mpg local, 8mpg towing

That's very close to the same MPG we got with our 2013 F250 with the 6.2 gas engine. I'd suspect that with the technology available to auto manufacturers today, they're all fairly competitive, so I wouldn't expect you'd see a significant difference in the 5.0/5.3 or in the 6.0/6.2 engine families. Possibly a slight difference with the HEMI engines in solo MPG, but from a towing perspective, it takes a certain amount of energy to move a load. That means the BTU's needed from a gallon of gas to move a 10K trailer with a frontal area of 50 sq ft is going to be the same regardless of which truck is in front of the trailer, so they all will use close to the same amount of fuel to move the same load.

Diesel technology is a little different, between "regeneration/filter cleaning" technologies, fuel used to do that task, gearing and "power band" engineering, there can be a very noticeable difference in towing MPG even though the solo MPG are pretty close to the same among the big 3 manufacturers of diesel engine trucks. So, late model trucks with different exhaust systems can have some pretty dramatic differences in towing MPG.

the sodfather
11-27-2016, 11:32 AM
I have a 2015 6.0, If I baby it in town 11-12, freeway with no towing 75 mph, 15.5, towing a 2 horse trailer 10, and towing a fifth wheel camper 8 to 8.5.

Very disappointed in mpg, it seems GM could have got it figured out for the empty side with an improvement.

What disappoints me is I work for a trucking company, and our big rigs are pulling 80,000 lbs and getting close to 10 loaded. I realize they are diesel but empty we should be seeing much better than we are out of the 6.0

Oh and by the way I tried a tuner, the tuner box said I gained 2-3 mpg but hand calcs and dash said it never changed. seems they like to over report mpg.

Good info. Thanks!

notanlines
11-27-2016, 02:49 PM
Schwalback, I buy everything you said except the mileage on big rigs. A quote from Gizmodo.com echoes the real world: " More than two million semis travel some 120,000 miles apiece along America's arterial highways every year at an average efficiency of just 6 MPG. Six. Miles per gallon of diesel." Believe me, there are no trucking companies hauling 80K getting 10 MPG.

fjrandy
11-28-2016, 10:20 AM
Have a 16 pulling a Carbon 33 getting about 6.5 with no wind and a if it is windy at all 5.7 pulling though the Flint Hill of Kansas, not mountains but pretty hilly. Put K&N filter on help a little. Empty doing around 12.

SummitPond
11-28-2016, 01:37 PM
For what it's worth, my 2012 F250 (specs below in the signature area) gets about 12 mpg overall (I don't have a written breakdown separating city/hwy/towing). However, this past weekend (not towing) I averaged 19.7 mpg over 156 miles, mostly highway but some city. I normally don't do this well on the highway, which is why I noted it.

schwalbach
11-28-2016, 04:40 PM
NOTANLINES,

Here is a link to the latest on truck MPG, 10 is achievable.

http://www.peterbilt.com/about/media/2014/396/

I work for a large trucking company with in excess of 2,000 trucks, 8 is very achievable and 10 is possible.

larry337
11-28-2016, 05:12 PM
Well...I'm a truck driver for probably the largest trucking company in America. I would call 8mpg in long term real world conditions, an unrealistic expectation. 10 is not currently possible. Your article refers to a prototype on one test run. It uses technology that's not currently in full production. And we don't know how much this new technology would cost to build, or how it would perform long term. Currently, I'd say the average is still in the 6-7 range for everyday usage. 8 might happen once in a while but it's not a long term average. At least not yet anyway.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Turbocohen
11-28-2016, 06:33 PM
2012 Suburban 2500 6.0 HD with 96K miles. The 6.0 HD hasn't changed much for 2015-16, its a reliable workhorse and detuned for knock tolerance to permit heavy loading with reg unleaded. I averaged 8.5 mpg pulling a 269RB outback from Va to Orlando and back.

You will restore lost mpgs a little by regularly using Techron or a few other additives that reduce sulphur buildup from the back of the valve stem and piston tops. If you regularly use higher octane fuels a do not use at least a top tier detergent gasoline your mileage will get worse with age.

notanlines
11-29-2016, 12:21 PM
Schwalback, tell you what I'll do to show you what a fine fella I am. I'll agree that 6 is probably the average MPG on most big rigs.....7 on some, and you ship us some brownies from JJ's Bakery in Marshfield. After the brownies are delivered AND eaten, I'll agree that the MPG is closer to 8 and I'll ship you some genuine Florida Honeybell oranges, direct from the Okeechobee area. How can you turn this down?

schwalbach
11-29-2016, 03:30 PM
Notanlines, Here is some reading for you, just send the oranges. JJ's Never heard of them but I see they do exist may have to check them out when you send the oranges send a gift certificate as the MPG's are real as you will see in the reading.

http://www.truckinginfo.com/article/story/2016/06/breaking-the-10-mpg-barrier.aspx

http://www.truckinginfo.com/article/story/2016/06/on-the-cutting-edge.aspx

As we are getting off topic here I won't post anymore on this, but we shall agree to disagree on this.

rhagfo
12-07-2016, 02:53 PM
Have a 16 pulling a Carbon 33 getting about 6.5 with no wind and a if it is windy at all 5.7 pulling though the Flint Hill of Kansas, not mountains but pretty hilly. Put K&N filter on help a little. Empty doing around 12.

:banghead:

With fuel at 2.50 a gallon, you would recover the $10,000 cost difference in less than 50,000 miles, and really enjoy the towing experience.

I am assuming 12 mpg towing with a diesel.

Outback 325BH
12-07-2016, 05:27 PM
:banghead:



With fuel at 2.50 a gallon, you would recover the $10,000 cost difference in less than 50,000 miles, and really enjoy the towing experience.



I am assuming 12 mpg towing with a diesel.



In less than 50,000 miles TOWING HIS CAMPER. (Assuming your number lbs are correct.)

My capitalization is meant for highlighting not yelling...

Most people that choose a gasser do so because we don't tow all the time.

I have a 2016 F250 gasser and pull a 11,000 lbs TT... and get around 6.5 mpg. However, I only tow approximately 10% of the time.

For me personally, my reason for not going diesel were:
Initial cost
Potential repair costs (HPFP issues not covered by warranty for example)
Short trips (I routinely drive less than 1 mile cold, then shutdown)
I'm not afraid to rev the gasser like it is designed

Not saying a gasser is as good as a diesel. I LOVE the torque of the new ones. However, there are still valid reasons for going gasser.

I can get in the upper teens for mpg on the highway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

the sodfather
12-07-2016, 05:33 PM
In less than 50,000 miles TOWING HIS CAMPER. (Assuming your number lbs are correct.)

My capitalization is meant for highlighting not yelling...

Most people that choose a gasser do so because we don't tow all the time.

I have a 2016 F250 gasser and pull a 11,000 lbs TT... and get around 6.5 mpg. However, I only tow approximately 10% of the time.

For me personally, my reason for not going diesel were:
Initial cost
Potential repair costs (HPFP issues not covered by warranty for example)
Short trips (I routinely drive less than 1 mile cold, then shutdown)
I'm not afraid to rev the gasser like it is designed

Not saying a gasser is as good as a diesel. I LOVE the torque of the new ones. However, there are still valid reasons for going gasser.

I can get in the upper teens for mpg on the highway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Your reasons are exactly my reasons for going with gas.

JRTJH
12-07-2016, 06:13 PM
Your reasons are exactly my reasons for going with gas.

Those are the same reasons I chose a gas F250 in 2013. We live in northern Michigan, an area where diesel use for short trips is assuredly not a great idea. When we decided to travel more, especially trips in the mountains, our needs changed and that's when we considered a diesel. If we were still going to primarily use the truck for short summer trips within 100 miles of home with an annual longer trip to the southeast, we'd still be driving that truck. But, with the changes, diesel made sense for our situation.

Both gas and diesel have a well deserved "niche" with RV'ers. It really depends on what someone intends to do with the truck both when towing and when not towing... Each is a capable, strong towing machine depending on the use and needs of the buyer....

bsmith0404
12-08-2016, 05:18 AM
Just curious why people always talk about costs of repairs for a diesel being higher than a gas. Yes I understand that a repair could cost more, but the life expectancy is greater and the chances of paying for a repair are less likely and less frequent. Additionally, the powertrain warranty on the diesels for GM and Ram are 5 years/100k miles. So the average person doesn't have to worry about paying for a single repair for the first 5 years. At that point, many diesel owners are still very confident in their trucks reliability, where gas owners still get scared when they bust the 100k mile glass ceiling. Additionally, many used truck buyers shy away from a 100k mile gasser, but don't bat an eye at a 100k mile coal burner so they retain better resale value.

rhagfo
12-08-2016, 05:43 AM
In less than 50,000 miles TOWING HIS CAMPER. (Assuming your number lbs are correct.)

My capitalization is meant for highlighting not yelling...

Most people that choose a gasser do so because we don't tow all the time.

I have a 2016 F250 gasser and pull a 11,000 lbs TT... and get around 6.5 mpg. However, I only tow approximately 10% of the time.

For me personally, my reason for not going diesel were:
Initial cost
Potential repair costs (HPFP issues not covered by warranty for example)
Short trips (I routinely drive less than 1 mile cold, then shutdown)
I'm not afraid to rev the gasser like it is designed

Not saying a gasser is as good as a diesel. I LOVE the torque of the new ones. However, there are still valid reasons for going gasser.

I can get in the upper teens for mpg on the highway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Driving a gasser less than a mile and shutting down, is just as bad as doing to a diesel.

Outback 325BH
12-08-2016, 07:25 AM
Driving a gasser less than a mile and shutting down, is just as bad as doing to a diesel.



Not even close.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Outback 325BH
12-08-2016, 07:28 AM
Just curious why people always talk about costs of repairs for a diesel being higher than a gas. Yes I understand that a repair could cost more, but the life expectancy is greater and the chances of paying for a repair are less likely and less frequent. Additionally, the powertrain warranty on the diesels for GM and Ram are 5 years/100k miles. So the average person doesn't have to worry about paying for a single repair for the first 5 years. At that point, many diesel owners are still very confident in their trucks reliability, where gas owners still get scared when they bust the 100k mile glass ceiling. Additionally, many used truck buyers shy away from a 100k mile gasser, but don't bat an eye at a 100k mile coal burner so they retain better resale value.



Read up on HPFP failures and the costs associated with them. Ford doesn't warranty them or any other claim they see fit.

An entire new gas engine can be had for a fraction of the cost of a diesel repair.

You comments are the opposite of everything I have read and heard from modern diesel owners.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

rhagfo
12-08-2016, 08:09 AM
Read up on HPFP failures and the costs associated with them. Ford doesn't warranty them or any other claim they see fit.

An entire new gas engine can be had for a fraction of the cost of a diesel repair.

You comments are the opposite of everything I have read and heard from modern diesel owners.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well Ford is know for refusing warranty on the CP4, HPFP, but GM covers most and Ram uses the CP3 which is more reliable.

JRTJH
12-08-2016, 08:31 AM
There is some "speculation" going on among some posts here. Ford does not cover the LPFP (conditioning unit with water/fuel separator) in the extended warranty (past 36000 miles) but they do cover the HPFP and its associated fuel lines, injectors, etc. Here's the direct quote from Ford's 2015 warranty guide: Related to the fuel pumps, the parts in red are NOT covered, the parts in green ARE covered.

(4) Your vehicle’s direct injection diesel engine and certain engine
components are covered during the PowerStroke Diesel Engine Coverage
Period, which lasts for five years or 100,000 miles, whichever occurs
first. The following parts are covered during this extended coverage
period: the engine, cylinder block, heads and all internal parts, intake
and exhaust manifolds, timing gear, harmonic balancer, valve covers, oil
pan and pump, water pump, fuel system (excluding fuel lines, fuel tank
and frame mounted fuel conditioning module sometimes referred to as
the frame mounted pump/filter/water separator or frame mounted fuel
filter/water separator), high pressure lines, gaskets and seals, glow plugs, turbocharger, two-stage turbocharger assembly, turbocharger actuator, powertrain control module, high pressure fuel injection pump assembly, injectors, injection pressure sensor, fuel rail pressure sensor, exhaust back pressure regulator and sensor, exhaust pressure sensor, manifold
pressure sensor, intake air temperature sensor, crankshaft position
sensor, camshaft position sensor, accelerator switch.

NOTE: Some components may also be covered by the Emissions
Warranties. For more information, see pages 17-31.

Outback 325BH
12-08-2016, 01:23 PM
There is some "speculation" going on among some posts here. Ford does not cover the LPFP (conditioning unit with water/fuel separator) in the extended warranty (past 36000 miles) but they do cover the HPFP and its associated fuel lines, injectors, etc. Here's the direct quote from Ford's 2015 warranty guide: Related to the fuel pumps, the parts in red are NOT covered, the parts in green ARE covered.



(4) Your vehicle’s direct injection diesel engine and certain engine

components are covered during the PowerStroke Diesel Engine Coverage

Period, which lasts for five years or 100,000 miles, whichever occurs

first. The following parts are covered during this extended coverage

period: the engine, cylinder block, heads and all internal parts, intake

and exhaust manifolds, timing gear, harmonic balancer, valve covers, oil

pan and pump, water pump, fuel system (excluding fuel lines, fuel tank

and frame mounted fuel conditioning module sometimes referred to as

the frame mounted pump/filter/water separator or frame mounted fuel

filter/water separator), high pressure lines, gaskets and seals, glow plugs, turbocharger, two-stage turbocharger assembly, turbocharger actuator, powertrain control module, high pressure fuel injection pump assembly, injectors, injection pressure sensor, fuel rail pressure sensor, exhaust back pressure regulator and sensor, exhaust pressure sensor, manifold

pressure sensor, intake air temperature sensor, crankshaft position

sensor, camshaft position sensor, accelerator switch.



NOTE: Some components may also be covered by the Emissions

Warranties. For more information, see pages 17-31.



There are many reports of denying HPFP failures in the name of "water in fuel". Basically saying it is the customer's fault.

Either way, I'm not rolling the dice with them.

Won't buy a Government Motors for obvious reasons and won't buy a Fiat either.

[emoji846]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JRTJH
12-08-2016, 01:56 PM
There are many reports of denying HPFP failures in the name of "water in fuel". Basically saying it is the customer's fault.

Either way, I'm not rolling the dice with them.

Won't buy a Government Motors for obvious reasons and won't buy a Fiat either.

[emoji846]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There's always the "somebody" that claims a denied warranty repair but almost always, we only get the complainer's side of the story and never hear what the company actually said, only what "he says they said" which is almost always "slanted and half truths".... I guess we'll always have that kind of unverifiable "verified" report being claimed on the internet. The only HPFP denials I've read about (No I haven't read 100% of the internet's posts) have been denied because the owner added DEF to the fuel tank and "trashed" the pumps. So, I'd guess that is a "water in fuel" condition, but certainly not a "normally occurring condition".... I haven't heard of anyone being denied a HPFP repair if the LPFP filter and water separator have been maintained properly and appropriate "fuel only/not DEF" has been put in the fuel tank.

I've got 25+ K miles on my 2015 diesel and my brother-in-law has 200K+ on his 2010 6.4L diesel. Both of them have "about the same" kind of LPFP/water separator. Neither of us have ever had any water drain from the canister, so in my experience (limited as it might be) I haven't seen any "water contamination in the diesel fuel, so I'd guess it would take a significant amount of "bad fuel" to even cause a problem with the HPFP.

I might add that we live in an area where there's significant cold, wet weather and if there's going to be "tank condensation" and "water contamination" we're in the "perfect storm" type conditions, yet we've not seen an issue...

Maybe we're just lucky ??? At any rate, as many diesels as are on the road, if the HPFP was that "picky" I'd think that there'd be a lot more problems being posted than I've seen.

bsmith0404
12-08-2016, 06:51 PM
145k on my wonderful Government Motors D-max and the only repair I've had to make was an EGT sensor. I have added a FASS lift pump system which also adds a lower micron rated fuel filter and a separate water separator filter, but have never had any water drain from it. Additionally, I still run the stock filter/water separator so my fuel is getting double filtered. To be honest, I added the FASS system to save on filter costs. Changing a $30 filter every 10k miles or changing two $8 filters every 20k and a $30 filter every 50k (could have done an OE bypass and eliminated that filter, but decided not to). The FASS system filters are also much easier to change on the D-max than the OE filter. The system also adds a bit of extra piece of mind since it adds the lift pump, better filtration, and air removal which is better for the injectors. I've never had a fear of a denied warranty claim since Government Motors stands behind the D-max pretty much without question. After 145k pretty much trouble free miles, I'm happy to own one for obvious reasons.

Good info on the Ford Warranty, I read somewhere that they only had a 5 yr/50k warranty on the power stroke, I guess they decided to match the dmax and Ram.

As for Fiat, I'm not a big fan of their trucks, but they do have a great diesel engine with the Cummins.

Personally, I know a lot of diesel truck owners from all 3 makes and have never heard of a HPFP warranty claim denial. I've heard of some failures after the warranty has run out, but they seem to be fairly rare. Most of the ones I've heard of have been after a couple hundred thousand miles. I really don't care if someone wishes to tow with a gas truck (as long as I'm not behind them on a hill), I just don't understand the maintenance costs as a reason for it. Especially when you get 100k miles of warranty and most people change out trucks about the time the warranty would be running out anyway.

the sodfather
12-09-2016, 05:06 AM
All this diesel banter would be great if it was on its own thread. I don't see any relevance on this one.

"MPG's for the 2015-2016 2500 HD 6.0 gas burner"

Just sayin'...

rhagfo
12-09-2016, 02:58 PM
Have a 16 pulling a Carbon 33 getting about 6.5 with no wind and a if it is windy at all 5.7 pulling though the Flint Hill of Kansas, not mountains but pretty hilly. Put K&N filter on help a little. Empty doing around 12.


All this diesel banter would be great if it was on its own thread. I don't see any relevance on this one.

"MPG's for the 2015-2016 2500 HD 6.0 gas burner"

Just sayin'...

My Bad!:banghead:

I posted back to the post from Fjrandy that with his poor of fuel mileage, why he would not have opted to get a diesel, rig has a GVWR of 13,000. Diesel would pull that at about 12 mpg, and likely get close to 20 mpg empty, returning the up front cost in less than 50,000 miles.

Poster returned his reasons for not going diesel, biggest being short trips empty around town.

Sorry to have taken this thread on a Left turn!