I have a Pete 386. I am toying with the idea of getting a W9 glider with a pre-emission engine. Getting on in years and might get what I really want for my last truck. If I were to slow down from say 65 or so to about 60, would you expect the difference in MPG to be about 1 mile less? Some of that difference would be off set with lower maint. on the new truck. Just thinking things over. Thoughts?
Your thoughts on MPG spread
Discussion in 'Ask An Owner Operator' started by oicu812, Oct 22, 2014.
Page 1 of 2
-
-
Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds
Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.
-
Spec it to do your specific job at 65 mph and it should get 6.5+ mpg without even trying. If it's getting under 6mpg then I'd worry.
-
Do some checking around, there are a few engine, gearing packages that are getting into the 7.5+ mpg range.
-
i have a newer truck but if i slow from 67 to 61 i can get a 1 mpg increase in most situations up to 8.6-8.8
-
I doubt you will see a 1 mpg increase, but you should see better fuel savings by slowing down. Most W900's don't get the best fuel mileage. I have a friend who owns a 379 Pete and he did see about a 1 mpg increase when he slowed to 55-60 mph. Terrain and what you pull will also have an impact. There may be some different gearing you could order on your glider that might also help. Most people I know who own a W900 get around 4.5-5 mpg.
-
Thanks for the good info. I think I didn't do a good job of explaining what I was asking. What I am wondering is should I expect about a 1MPG drop between the two trucks, given the pre-emission engine and maybe slowing down slightly. Just trying to figure out aproximately the fuel cost difference. I can come pretty close with an estimate of the difference in maint. costs from what I am seeing now and then have an idea of a cost to run differince.
-
I think the most mpg that I can recall anyone getting with a pre emissions on a W900 is around 5.5 mpg. As I previously stated, most seem to get around 5 mpg or a little less. I don't know what you are getting on your current truck, but if you can live with 5 mpg, then I would probably go for it. You might check with Fitzgerald or where you plan on buying your glider kit and ask them if they have any data from customers on any of their trucks.
-
I think KR says to plan for 7mpg on a Fitzgerald out of the gate - though I think he's referring to an aerodynamic style.
His calculation is 1/10th mpg for every 1mpg drop in speed, and reckons you drop around 1 mpg with the classic shape.
Only way to apple to apple it is to get it, and run a 30 day average at 75mph, 30 at 70 mph, and 30 at 65mph - and track the difference.
Just parroting here - no real world experience. -
I've got a buddy with a W900 that has 12.7L Detroit, 3:55 rears, 10 sp, 11R24.5, roof fairing, pulls 53' dry van mostly light weight loads southeast, midwest regions. He does 6.5mpg without hardly trying cruising around 70mph. It'll get closer to 7mpg when he runs steady 65mph or slower. It just depends on how you keep it maintained and if you keep that boost needle pegged out everywhere you go if you do poorly or badly with a hood. Most drivers just have poor habits.
chachar Thanks this. -
I have an '03 Pete 379. Cat C-15 6nz pre-emmision. Running nc-ca-nc across I-40. Gross weight 76,000 lbs. 58-62 mph.I was averaging 6.5 mpg. Dry van . Small roof fairing on tractor. A Detroit could do better if you're willing to drive it right.
Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds
Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.
Page 1 of 2