Just some of the stupid things I see

I have driven many classics, I have never had the kind of problems you have. I did have one that got crappy gas mileage, but most got better than 6, some even in the 7's. I really like my Freightshakers.

 

Of COURSE it was your fault. You were drivin' it, weren't ya?

Rule # 1 in trucking: If the truck breaks, it is because the driver screwed up. Any other explanation, alibi or excuse, see rule # 1.

But other than the minor problems you mention, isn't it a really great truck?

 

I realize that many drivers don't care what the truck they're driving looks like..
Alot of times o/o's will trade in after payoff on the latest model aero pile they can afford, thinkin it'll pay for itself with money saved on fuel and maintenance..
That's where they mess up.. Nothing is ever a given when figurin mileage from a gallon of diesel{ or oil if it's a detroit}.. That and many other expenses vary alot in a fleet of identical trucks..
Plastic trucks with arodynamics aren't saving anymore fuel than any other model does.. They are more popular with the steerin wheel holders because of the birds eye view you get and they have interior that
reminds them of their minivans..

I get what you were tryin to say, but I don't agree with any of it..
Drag and wind resistance are two seperate things.. Drag is never at the front unless you're backin up, and wind resistance doesn't always come from the front or any created wind either.. Tell that to the guy who had his 53' van blown over in the median.. The reason Pete and KW maintain their classic style is not only for looks.. Since they offer bigger h/p engines and options there is a need for a big hood and grill to accomodate it.. Not to mention the poor guy that has to work on your aero trucks doin a piss poor job most of the time because he 's always standin on his head..

 

i wasnt driving it! lol...i was outside the truck droppin a trailer.

Gosh..I wonder why you didn't have any of the problems I have...WITH MY CASCADIA....with your CLASSICS...

Cause the classic is actually a TRUCK. not a pile of plastic ####.

 

just go get the big w9 and get in the left lane.... and TRUCK

 

bust the mirrors out,,,,,and don't look back ....

 

All I know is I dropped my speed from 67 mph down to 62, dropped my shift point RPM and that cut my fuel bill by about 11 %.That is pure money in my O/O pocket. Better tire wear, fewer close calls, but still almost as many miles a day.
I see too many large cars going way too fast for traffic conditions.Slow down just a little, it pays in the long run.

 

I'd say you're right.....But you're not. Both Pete and KW have very good aero trucks. The 387 and 386 are built with the same engine and tran's on the same frame as the 379/389. They get much better MPG, look just as good and the 387 has much more room inside. The same is true of the T660 and T2000 vs the W900. The facts speak for them self. Everything else being equal, If you're not pushing the wind you get better MPG and that means you are making more money.
Even if you have the same truck slowing down fro 75 to 65 will save you .6-1 MPG. Which equals more money in your pocket. Try it for a month, Don't drive over 65 for 30 days and see if your MPG doesn't improve.

 

Unfortunately for my boss, if I slow down, it cuts my hourly rate and dips into my sleep time. I run as fast as the law will allow. There is no incentive for me to slow down.

 

Simply slowing down may or may not change your fuel mileage for the better. It depends on how the truck is setup and what the "sweet spot" is on the particular truck. My truck will get better fuel mileage between 68 -70 than it does running 60, especially in hilly terrain or mountains because it maintains speed better going up the hills at the higher speed than at the lower speed.