Waiting on New Trucks thread.

Keep cycling into a 579 type aero truck every 300k and the fuel savings snowball versus driving that non-aero and counting on resale.

 

So in your application a 389 gets above average fuel economy but a 579 would get below average fuel economy. Makes sense.

 

I have a 379 with a B model that gets nearly 6 running around locally. I would hope a 389 would do better than that, so I doubt 6 is above average, but they are your facts, so must be correct.

 

Ok, he has a 389 that gets average economy then. What is it about pulling a flatbed, hopper, or cattle trailer that would make a 579 get below average economy? It’s difficult to wrap my head around why a brick would be average or above average, but then he says a 579 would be below average.

The best mileage I got with my old truck was pulling a pneumatic. I was consistently above 6.4, the guys with hoods were less than that. Even if they weren’t tracking it tank to tank we all got to see the IFTA report. Then it dropped when I started pulling my hopper and running around at 90k with a triple. The guys who had a hood but didn’t have much sleeper gap did better than I did, the ones with flattops or a lot of gap did worse. The worst mileage I got was when I switched to a van. The gap killed me. I was at 5.3 when I got out of that truck but I had about 10 foot of gap.

So back to my original thought. I don’t know his wheelbase but explain to me why a 579 with the same bunk and same gap wouldn’t be able to achieve average fuel economy if the 389 can.

 

I'd have to see a 379 or 389 that consistently cracked low 6's that could run 75mph speed limits or better. Most times when you pass somebody in a hood trying to eek out mpg's they're running about 65mph and barely getting close to 6 mpg if they're lucky. If they idle at all or have an apu burning fuel 5.5 is more realistic.

 

If you’re going to quote me, then, be accurate. I said “roughly 30% better fuel economy”. I wasn’t being exact, because obviously there are differences in people’s fuel mileages. And, there are a LOT of liars in this industry, when it comes to fuel mileage. 2/10ths isn’t worth noting, in this casual discussion.

You’re saying a 389 is worth “greater” than $46,000 over a 579? OK. Haha.

I used 600K as an arbitrary trade mileage, because a large number do trade at that mileage and it’s easily divisible by both mpg’s. I tried to keep it simple FOR the simple.

You are still driving 600K miles. It’s just over two truck cycles. It doesn’t change the fuel mileage numbers or the $100K fuel savings. You keep acting like you’re saving/making money on truck trades. You’re not.

You’re not considering other expenses that come with running a hood, as I mentioned the first time. You’ve chosen to leave out those details, for the sake of trying to be right. You’re paying more fuel tax, which you have nothing to show for. Because you’re using more fuel, that equates to more fuel flow, which means more fuel filters. You’ll have increased drive tire wear, because of pushing a less aero truck through the wind. You’re working the engine harder, 100% of the time, which equates to more oil usage, def usage, wear on the engine, etc.

After a few decades of playing this game, I’d think you’d realize what really makes the most business sense, without emotional involvement. Math doesn’t lie; people do.

 

I get 6.9 pretty consistent doing pretty much local/ about 11’ of gap. W900L



i think yall are trying to apples to apples a apples to oranges conversation

 

If you’re not in the “9+ MPG” FB group, you should join. The upper drivers are strolling along at 70-85mpg, hovering around 10mpg. They use the same fuel mileage app and are diligent about keeping it updated, so there’s consistency among them. Pretty incredible.

 

Great Dane is about to have two more rejected orders the way things are going lately. If the salesman gets his feelings hurt about it, I'll remind him how their years of production delay has screwed me hard on both the new unit price, and the value of my old ones. He can go pound sand. Had the deal closed 12-18 months ago, the value would not have been lost.