Aero Truck Fever to make the most profit in trucking per mile!

Yeah, flat land too. But Jfaulk, I have an Aero hood!!! The guys in the white coats say I should be getting more! Lol

THATS what's missing!

Ethan

 

I would love to see Dice go into the coal hills of KY and preach to a guy pulling a set of doubles @ 170,000 how much an aero truck will increase his profits! Lol

 

Most who do heavy haul will have lower gearing than anyone who pulls boxes. There is little you can do when you have something on the trailer that is really heavy and bulky. Even a light weight load that is tall and wide can kill your mpg, no matter how slow or the type of hood you drive. I can usually get almost 7 mpg on my truck, but when I am hauling a heavy excavator in high winds, I may do good to get 5. I pulled an oversized last winter that only weighed about 25,000 pounds, but it was 13' wide and tall. Pulling in the Colorado mountains in heavy winds killed my mpg. Even going across Texas and Oklahoma where roads were flat didn't really help much. I still had a lot of wind. I could hardly get my truck up to 60 mph at one point due to the heavy wind.

 

Everyone can come up with some situation that wouldn't apply to what Dice is saying. I could use situations I experienced in Alaska, but that wouldn't be what 90% of what goes on out on the highways here. Dice makes some good points, and given that most of trucking is vans, flats, and refers, most could benefit. I am just amazed at how many will go out of their way to naysay anything that is different than what they are doing. There are many that are doing similar things that Dice is, including doing it with a more aerodynamic truck. Many of those are in 8 mpg territory on a regular basis. Myself, I am in the high 7's territory all the time. Even my last load of steel coils, I pulled off a 7.46 mpg pump to pump.

I get the feeling sometimes, that many will attack something said by someone like Dice, only because they are envious of what a person like him is doing and instead of finding out ways to improve themselves, they decide it is easier to brow beat people like him. I may not agree with everything Dice and others throw out there, but at least I will take a look at new ideas and see what I can apply to my operation.

And I have been sold on aero trucks since I crawled out a hood and into the first aero truck I drove back in '92.... a T600 "anteater" I like the better visibility and set back steers for backing and such. May not be the best ride in each situation, but I have no desire to ever drive a hood again. Just like doing things easier.

 

Well my question is, if an aero truck is so much better on MPG, then why is his buddy Bruce at PP building 389 gliders that get over 8mpg?????

Just because it's an aero doesn't mean it will get better MPG or make you anymore money. Common sense, good work ethic and proper technique is what will get you more $$$

 

Bruce is building those 389's to do what you stated for mpg. But he also had a hand in building the FL Columbia Signature truck as well, and those are getting into 9 mpg territory. Bruce is proving that even a brick can get better mpg than most have thought. But that is no way suggests that Bruce is trying to prove aerodynamics are not a factor in good fuel mileage. Not disputing that a good work ethic and other things do not go into the mix, but there is no reason to throw out what is known to give one an advantage just because it doesn't appeal to that person. I still think those that have fits over ideas that have been proven in the real world, but goes against the world they would like it to be, are still just suffering from "MPG Envy".

Bruce has also shown that getting an 18 speed and tying it to 2.64 or 2.79 rears and running in direct drive (16th) is more efficient and will do the most any job needed. I even ordered my recent glider with those specs. But this is one area that Bruce's idea is being chastised. Yet, many of those Pete 389's getting into 8 mpg territory like you mentioned SHC, are spec'd with 18's and 2.64 or 2.79 rears.

 

From a business standpoint, it makes more sense to buy an aero truck for most applications, due to the usually higher mpg. For some, it makes little difference. I rarely see aero trucks pulling open deck trailers, other than something such as a T600 or T800. I buy equipment based on value and functionality for my purposes. Most aero trucks are not designed for pulling open deck or heavy haul. An aero truck will work much better pulling a box around. There are those who would rather drive a hood than an aero truck, even if they got half the mpg. Many still prefer the classic look of the hoods, such as 379 Pete or W900 KW. Some of the new trucks with all the EPA garbage on them won't get decent fuel mileage no matter what you try to do. It is still mostly the driver and gearing that determines your mpg. Where you drive will also greatly impact your mpg. If you mostly drive in mountains and the windy western states, your mpg may be less than if you primarily run the Midwest and southern states. Those who constantly speed up and slow down rather than keeping a steady pace will not do as well as someone who drives more slowly and at a steady pace. I no longer own the hoods. I may buy another one day. I know that my mpg will most likely not be as high as it is now, but I am more interested is making money than driving a hood. And even 1/2 mpg more is a lot of money over the course of a year.

 

My problem with people like Dice is they say aero trucks "always" make more money. So people like me point out how ignorant that statement is. Most of these guys only see the part of the industry that's on the 4 lane highways. They totally forget about the millions of trucks NOT pulling a white van from dock to dock. You know those of us that don't wear sweat pants and flip flops to work. You know those of us that need HP and rugged HD trucks that aren't made from recycled McDonalds toys. Do you think the log trucks in northern Maine give a #### about side skirts when they're tearing through the woods? How much of an impact do you think a sloped hood would make on a 7 axle dump truck hauling gravel to job sites in Ohio running city streets and county roads? I know Dice would say it would but since there is ZERO trucks around here like that the market proves otherwise.

 

Exactly !! I see Dice comparing his super modified areo truck running 57 mph to a hood with no mods running 65 mph plus alot. I'm not disputing that a areo in 90% of the operations out here would do better with the right set up and driver than a hood. I just ask that he compair apples to apples so to say, like a stock hood vs a stock areo with the same drive train and than lets talk about numbers. He has done alot to his truck and spent alot of money to get it that way and has alot of good ideas that would apply to a hood and work also. I had a areo truck before the one I have now that had some mods on it and I did lose about .4 mpg but I will gladly give that up for the few miles I drive a year. Now when I do those same mods to this one I might be close to where I was maybe even ahead of the game due to the way this truck is set up.

 

I know what you are saying. I drove in Alaska year round for 10 years and what goes on the super slab down here does not compare to up there. But that being said, the majority of what goes on in trucking is done on the super slab. And a large percentage of those who own class 8 trucks, are of the van and reefer variety. For those, Dice would be pretty much spot on. For those outside this "norm", then, of course, you take what is being said with a grain of salt. Some new ideas might work, some won't. It is not a bad idea to keep an open mind about new ideas that might benefit one's operation. But, of course, there are some that are so open minded that their brains fall out. Obviously, if one is pulling wind towers, aero really doesn't mean much, or likewise, if they are pulling B-trains out of some mine or quarry, the same would apply.

I guess if it doesn't apply to your operation, then move on. Not sure why those that the aero thing doesn't apply are wasting time going after Dice. I don't do livestock, and don't waste any of my time trying to tell those that do how to run their operation or spec their trucks, nor do I tell those that are doing very serious heavy haul how to spec their trucks. I figure they know what is best. Why can't those that are not doing van or reefer just leave it alone for those that do? I do van. I know what I need in a truck for what I am doing. Aero works best for me and means something to the bottom line. I don't pee and mark someone else's territory. Wish they would learn to do the same.

But it is comical to see how some react to aero trucks, like calling them recycled McDonald's toys and what not. You don't want to do a serious comparison on the issue without talking down to others. i guess you need that to boost what ego you have. I like aero because I like the better visibility, and the set back steer axles make what I have to do easier in tight fitting areas. The less I have to fiddle around trying to get a trailer where it needs to be, the better. And since most of what I do is on the super slab and maneuvering thru congested traffic and small towns, I like the extra visibility that sloped hoods offer. I have ever since I that first aero truck I climbed into in '92. Was a weird experience at first, but I came to appreciate the advantages. The fact that an aero will give me an edge in mpg, is just extra gravy for me.