I'm taking the L/P plunge

42K in the box, Ft. Worth to Flagstaff (uphill ALL the way), 7.0 MPG. I still made money AND it got me home.


With the right truck you'll still make money with heavy loads.

 

You don't know what you're talking about, have no desire to learn and that makes your comments as important and notable as a mosquito's momentarily irritating whine.

 

Oh really? My dad leased a truck for five years, not with Swift but I know first hand what poor fuel economy does. First hand, ask a lease op leasing one of those Columbias with a 07+ Series 60, they hurt for fuel mileage on a decent load, throw in rolling hills and a heavy load and you're looking at 5-6 MPG.

If you have a newer truck, maybe things have changed and you can get the fuel mileage. But the bottom line is, if you get 4 MPG, are you going to be profitable? 5 MPG? What about 6 MPG? Give me that fly swatter, I'll swat the mosquito off of your ear.

I should have reiterated, it may not be the hills or the heavy loads, but what you can get for MPG.

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx My 13 week rolling average hasn't been below 7.4 for over 2 years. ... 41K in the box, rolling hills, through Alabama, the tornado front and up through Missouri this week ... 7.2

Now give me a load under 20K and the wind blowing up my butt, like it was from California to Ohio, and I'll get 9.2

But, you're right ... it's hard to make money at 4 mpg. You can blame it on the wind, you can blame it on the hills, you can blame it on the truck. But, drive your truck like an idiot and don't properly maintain it, that's what you get ... Sounds to me like your daddy didn't know what he was doing.

 

freightliner man is correct to note that mpg is critical to an O/O's success or lack thereof. Mystic is correct that the trucks in the Swift fleet have very good fuel efficiency. Since joining Swift I've been in 4 different Cascadias, with mileage varying from 6.0 to 9.8, depending on weight of load, route, and wind. Overall average is about 8.0. I also drove a KW T660 with mileage around 6.2 for the two weeks I had it, but it was in dire need of repair and I was able to turn it in for another Cascadia.

Bottom line IMHO is that any O/O should really know HOW to drive in a fuel efficient manner, as noted by Mystic. Before Swift I drove team with my brother, an O/O with another company running a '03 KW T2000. My first thread on TTR was regarding how to find the "sweet spot" for gear and speed for best fuel mileage, and I learned quite a bit from feedback in that thread, boosting my own performance from the 5.7 to 5.9 mpg range with that old engine to the 6.3 to 6.9 mpg range... quite a feat when you consider the engine went into the shop a couple weeks after I got off the truck (to join Swift) with a cracked head. Learn to be VERY light with the throttle, keep your turbo boost below 50%, and accelerate slowly and leave plenty of room in front for a steadier ride.

Another bottom line IMHO is that no matter how well you perform with fuel efficient driving, your profit will be maximized even more by pulling higher paying freight. For example, my brother hauled this load 250 miles and it paid $700 to the truck. Within the Swift system there isn't anything close to that payout.

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Maybe you got a good truck that gets good fuel economy. Apparently, you haven't experienced a truck that gets bad fuel economy for reasons BEYOND your control.

In 2003 when the new emissions standards came out, you had EGR arrive for Detroit, Volvo, Mack and Cummins. You also had ACERT for CAT. Fuel mileage tanked. It had nothing to do with how you drove it, it just sucked badly. 5-6 MPG for a 14.0 ltr Series 60 in a Century Class pulling a reefer with 80k was the norm. Add hills and winds, you're looking at 4-5 MPG.

As far as not maintaining it? Are you serious? We're talking about a truck with 200k miles on it with regular PM intervals. Air pressure was kept up, air filters were changed when needed, over heads were done, fuel additives were used, etc. Again, nothing to do with maintenance. When it comes to speed, 55, 65, or 75 MPH, the faster you went the better fuel mileage you got, all this with a 13 speed. The Series 60 is a picky engine, it does not perform well in low RPM's. At 55 MPH in 8 direct, you got better fuel mileage that being in 8 over.

The new 2007+ Series 60s with the DPF were an improvement over the 2003-2006 EPA spec series 60, but nothing in comparison to a PRE-EGR 2002 Series 60.

Apparently, you've been driving all these new trucks and just know everything there is about fuel mileage. Every truck is not the same. Even on a Cummins ISX, a 2008 model in a Volvo, it was a company truck but lacked fuel mileage big time. The engine needed some work done as there was problems within the EGR and DPF system that built up over time. I remember pulling a 200 mile short haul in Arizona, nothing but hills and I got a whopping 4.5 MPG average. On an average run, 5.5-7 was about what I got, 6.3 MPG was the average.

Compare that now to my new Volvo pulling a dry van with 80k pounds, I can pull 7.5 MPG going from Denver to Roswell. On a light load, I've exceeded 10 MPG and came out with an average of 9.5 MPG with a ISX and a 10 speed in a new 2014 Volvo.

The big variable in a lease is what you get for fuel mileage. Poor fuel mileage, small paychecks. Let's not forget about break downs, or weeks with bad mileage. I don't care if you've had none, or just one. The point is, they can happen and eventually will. Any more comments about me not knowing what I'm talking about?

 

Most assuredly ... you keep wanting to come back to 8 year old trucks to defend your original snarky statement ... exactly what does that have to do with proposition of running a lease in today's environment ... nothing!

I could take 3 weeks off and I would still break even on my first week back.

 

That is the first time I've talked about 8 year old trucks. Margins are tight, and if your MPG's aren't there, your profit's aren't there. Sure, you can make a little money but is it worth it? I talked to one lease OP who brought home $1,000.00 a week after taxes, BUT he took $200.00 out to put in his maintenance account. So in reality, he only made $800.00 bucks, the maintenance reserve will eventually go to maintenance/repairs/tires. With my tenure in trucking, I make less than what that lease op does with out the head ache. This is with a good week. Throw in bad fuel mileage, or low miles, break downs and it isn't going to be so pretty.

So, if you want to lease a truck, go lease it. But, find out as much as you can, crunch the numbers. But don't get upset because someone doesn't share the same view point as you and throw insults about. My original comment could have been much more informative.

All you've responded to is that I keep coming back to "8 year old trucks." What is the difference between a truck of today and 8 years ago? DPF, SCR and fuel economy. You may get better MPG's, but you have some very sophisticated equipment too.

What's the bottom line? it doesn't matter if it was 8 years ago or today. IF you don't get the miles, if you don't get the fuel economy, if you're in the shop, what will the end result be? Those variables don't change because you're truck is over 8 years old. Please, calm down.

 

Let's keep it civil! You all can discuss without the mud!

 

Another sad story in the making. There's 500 hundred of them on here just like it.