"the Mooch"

sav0r

Member
My company had some where around 33 vehicles, mostly pickups, but we are reducing our fleet now for various reasons.

I am the fleet manager among other things. We have five Ecoboost F150s. None of them get above 20mpg. More like 16. We were very excited when we bought them, being in construction we spend a lot of money of fuel each year. It's not panned out. Especially in that one of the trucks is an absolute lemon. It's got a motor and a transmission about 5k after the warranty expired.

We also have three Dodge Diesel 2500's. They get decent mileage but Chrysler products bring an entirely different set of problems. They go through control arms like crazy. The ball joints are terrible.

I can't speak to the other ones, though I have heard great things about the Toyota. My EcoBoost Escape (a company vehicle) gets around 22 on mid grade fuel with ample highway driving. With more city it's closer to 21. If I run cheap fuel it gets 19 mpg. My 9-5 gets 30 plus mpg highway and 22 city, but the 2.0 EcoBoost makes more torque and more HP than the Saab. My guess is the Escape is just too heavy, though I haven't even looked at the weights.

I have also heard great things about the Mazda's, I actually considered a CX5 for my family, but our cars are working well so no need to buy.
 

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
Sav0r said:
My company had some where around 33 vehicles, mostly pickups, but we are reducing our fleet now for various reasons.

I am the fleet manager among other things. We have five Ecoboost F150s. None of them get above 20mpg. More like 16. We were very excited when we bought them, being in construction we spend a lot of money of fuel each year. It's not panned out. Especially in that one of the trucks is an absolute lemon. It's got a motor and a transmission about 5k after the warranty expired.

We also have three Dodge Diesel 2500's. They get decent mileage but Chrysler products bring an entirely different set of problems. They go through control arms like crazy. The ball joints are terrible.

I can't speak to the other ones, though I have heard great things about the Toyota. My EcoBoost Escape (a company vehicle) gets around 22 on mid grade fuel with ample highway driving. With more city it's closer to 21. If I run cheap fuel it gets 19 mpg. My 9-5 gets 30 plus mpg highway and 22 city, but the 2.0 EcoBoost makes more torque and more HP than the Saab. My guess is the Escape is just too heavy, though I haven't even looked at the weights.

I have also heard great things about the Mazda's, I actually considered a CX5 for my family, but our cars are working well so no need to buy.
Are your EcoBoost trucks first gen 2.7L, or the latest engines? I had several friends complain that the first gen engines got no where near the advertised mileage. Haven't heard as many complaints on the 3.5L. The 5.0 gets roughly the same mileage, which is comparable to the 6.2 from GM.
 

farmer92

Member
Re: "the Mooch"

Sav0r said:
My company had some where around 33 vehicles, mostly pickups, but we are reducing our fleet now for various reasons.

I am the fleet manager among other things. We have five Ecoboost F150s. None of them get above 20mpg. More like 16. We were very excited when we bought them, being in construction we spend a lot of money of fuel each year. It's not panned out. Especially in that one of the trucks is an absolute lemon. It's got a motor and a transmission about 5k after the warranty expired.

We also have three Dodge Diesel 2500's. They get decent mileage but Chrysler products bring an entirely different set of problems. They go through control arms like crazy. The ball joints are terrible.

I can't speak to the other ones, though I have heard great things about the Toyota. My EcoBoost Escape (a company vehicle) gets around 22 on mid grade fuel with ample highway driving. With more city it's closer to 21. If I run cheap fuel it gets 19 mpg. My 9-5 gets 30 plus mpg highway and 22 city, but the 2.0 EcoBoost makes more torque and more HP than the Saab. My guess is the Escape is just too heavy, though I haven't even looked at the weights.

I have also heard great things about the Mazda's, I actually considered a CX5 for my family, but our cars are working well so no need to buy.
Cx5 and escapes are pretty much the same vehicle shell.

My 2.0t escape got around 25mpg,
My parents bought an equinox, it has a puny 1.6l turbo diesel, it gets around 40mpg combined. Not a sporty vehicle for sure, but surprisingly no slouch either.

As with any turbo engine, fuel economy drops like a rock as soon as you need to really work it. Those eco-boost trucks are great when empty, but as soon as you need to haul shit, forget it.
 

carnivorous chicken

Active Member
Regarding the GM mass layoffs -- doesn't anyone remember when Trump specifically promised that GM would be hiring more people and building new factories?
 

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
The government should have let GM fail, and hopefully they will let them this time around. They have ran themselves into the ground. A good reorganization is needed.
 

irk miller

You've been mostly-dead all day.
DTT BOTM WINNER
J-Rod10 said:
The government should have let GM fail, and hopefully they will let them this time around. They have ran themselves into the ground. A good reorganization is needed.
GM is in no way failing. These were one-shift plants, which are unsustainable for any automaker. They're plants that produce cars out of favor with most Americans, ie. sedans, and it allows GM to restructure half their division in order to move towards electric. This is similar to Ford moving mostly to their trucks. It's a plan that's a long time in the making.
 

carnivorous chicken

Active Member
irk miller said:
GM is in no way failing. These were one-shift plants, which are unsustainable for any automaker. They're plants that produce cars out of favor with most Americans, ie. sedans, and it allows GM to restructure half their division in order to move towards electric. This is similar to Ford moving mostly to their trucks. It's a plan that's a long time in the making.
Although it's cancelling the Volt. Maybe they'll come up with something better that will sell.
 

teazer

Well-Known Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
irk miller said:
GM is in no way failing. These were one-shift plants, which are unsustainable for any automaker. They're plants that produce cars out of favor with most Americans, ie. sedans, and it allows GM to restructure half their division in order to move towards electric. This is similar to Ford moving mostly to their trucks. It's a plan that's a long time in the making.
GM has issues, as do all US Auto manufacturers in one way or another. After the bailout, which saved GM and thousands of workers, they had quite an extensive reorganization and now have a narrow focus on adding shareholder value. To that end they have bought back around $10bn of shares and that has probably helped the share value to remain static while Ford shares have dropped a long way in the same time.

The GM approach now is to say screw having the greatest volumes hoping that would create more sales and more profits and now focus only on profit. They sold off European operations that were not making a positive contribution and now are down sizing ahead of losing money. That's smart business if the only stakeholders are shareholders, but tends to screw workers. They do have to make a profit if they want to stay in business but profits for shareholders ahead of all else is a symptom of capitalism's bad side.

Seems to me that GM deserves all the good and bad press it will get, but the real villain is cadet bone spurs who made outrageous promises that he has no ability to deliver on. His tariffs increase raw material costs and his huge tax cut for companies encourages outsourcing overseas. In other words, his policies made things worse and that effect will hit harder in 2019. And trickle down economics doesn't exist as a real world effect. All that did was to give working stiffs a few extra bucks that are more than eaten up by inflation and tariffs are big part of that.
 

carnivorous chicken

Active Member
teazer said:
the real villain is cadet bone spurs who made outrageous promises that he has no ability to deliver on.
Wait, are you somehow implying that the president doesn't have a deep understanding of international trade relations and macroeconomics?
 

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
Canada, Mexico, and the US leaders have all signed on for the new NAFTA deal. We'll see if the Dems do the right thing and ratify it next year.

Read a story yesterday, Ford is retooling its US factories for more SUV production, rather than shutting down the plants like GM is. Good on them.
 

canyoncarver

'hacking is learning'
DTT BOTM WINNER
J-Rod10 said:
Canada, Mexico, and the US leaders have all signed on for the new NAFTA deal. We'll see if the Dems do the right thing and ratify it next year.

Read a story yesterday, Ford is retooling its US factories for more SUV production, rather than shutting down the plants like GM is. Good on them.
Ford is also considering monetizing customer private data. That is not cool.
 

carnivorous chicken

Active Member
For those who thought Trump was at least accomplishing something with N Korea:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/06/world/asia/north-korea-missile-bases.html?action=click&module=News&pgtype=Homepage

Presumably Kim Jong Un knows that we know (or knows that we can know), and just doesn't give AF. Trump continues to emphasize his great relationship with the dictator.

Dunning-Kruger Effect, anyone?
 

sav0r

Member
I saw that yesterday and and I actually thought of you... hahaha.

Yeah, he's an idiot. Yeah, he doesn't know what he's talking about. Yeah, he will tell you otherwise.
 

DTT Bike Of The Month Gallery

DTT Light or Dark

www.cognitomoto.com
https://www.townmoto.com
www.speedmotoco.com
www.jadusmotorcycleparts.com
www.lostapostle.ca/
www.sparckmoto.com
Top Bottom