Just some of the stupid things I see

Sorry but I got to disagree. Any O/O who can't make it running legal deserves to go out of business. Slow down, if you're running faster then 65mph you're just throwing money out the window. Slow down, save some fuel AND some money and deliver it the next day. Then when you get some money saved up. Get rid of that fuel hog 379/w900 and get a more wind friendly truck. It may not be as "cool" looking. But are you doing it to be cool or make money?

 

You're kiddin right.. So the secret to success and survival in the truckin buisness is owning a plastic aero truck..If that's so then how come Freightliner alone has the majority of all truck reposessions and the by choice equipment of over 75 percent of bankrupt carriers is Freightliner??

Sloped hoods and side fairings just allow for building cheap trucks even cheaper and aerodynamics is the lame excuse for it..
The wind out on the highway don't always blow the same way like it does in those wind tunnels where their doin the research..

If aero's the way maybe they'll start building round trailers too..

 

Aero doesn't make a freakin bit of difference when you're running 62 anyway. I laugh when I see MVT trucks running down the road with those trailer skirts... plodding along at a blistering 60mph.

Jump on a motorcycle with no fancy fairings or any of that crap.

Go 45mph... note the wind resistance.

Go 55mph... note the wind resistance.

Go 60mph... starts to become noticeable.

65mph... more so.

70mph... now your hands become fatigued from hanging on.

Below 60 mph it is really hard to discern a noticeable difference in how much grip is required to hang on to the handlebars.

 

I guess science and physics are just so many words and have no value any more. In the REAL world the force of the wind (drag on your truck) increases as the square of the velocity. Actual drag (wind resistance) increases by 44% when your speed increases from 50 mph to 60 mph. The increase requires more hp to overcome and more fuel to produce the hp. Also consider that unless your backing up the wind you create always comes from the front.
ps: The extra fuel cost is not a straight line comparison to the drag coefficient on your truck.

 

In other words, wind resistance increases exponentially... which is what I was trying to demonstrate. Much below 55-60 mph, the wind resistance is not all that great. Above that, however, and the resistance builds quickly.

Fuel savings from aero modifications are not going to be significant unless you are driving at higher speeds. The moral of my story? Why bother with an aero truck if you're just going to drive slow anyway?

 

The benefits of an aero truck are noticeable when you can run 70-75 however.

Hey I'm all for plastic trucks, but not for aerodynamics. Shakers are cheaper to buy used and run to make money with for a few years then trade up. Plastic trucks are disposable.

 

i like my large unit!!!!!!!!!!!!! if i can't afford to haul the cheep ace freight ,,,,the freight will have to rot.... my large unit ain't getting worn out sitting the shed......

 

I see some companies that don't understand where gearing comes into play. They just think slower is cheaper, but if you drop below your trucks power band you won't get any kind of fuel mileage. I run a 4:33 rear gear and run 70mph @1800 RPMS, I get 6.25mpg, and with that set up I could probably get another .75-1mpg if I dropped to 60. But, I don't. LMAO

 

You guy are funny!


I make money and get good fuel mileage and look good doing it with my W900L!
If I had to drive one of those cheesey plastic throwaways to make money, I'd just hang it up!
I'll settle for the 6.85 MPG average that I get with my Kenworth rather than get 2/10ths more driving junk!

 

I'd like to think you joking, but unfortunately I know your not.