flatbed mpg classic or aero? does it matter

Keys are not getting a condo (don't need that extra amount in the wind), areo front AND most important is speed. If you are running open deck and running it right (at the right price) then you should never need to be in a hurry.

Sure, you will get all these guys running by the mile and grinding our a living. From most of what I have seen looking at real numbers, the better earners are driving less miles and rarely in a rush.

 

this is true. also if you know what freight you will bee hauling you should be speccing your truck for that freight and the lowest speed( I'd suggest an absolute hard line max of 62).

 

I'm in an 08 386 with the C15/13 spd pulling a 53' flatbed. I was shocked at how difficult it was to keep mpg above 5.5 compared to pulling reefer with a similarly equipped T660. Even with 'Lite' loads, depending on the size of whats back there the drag and aero seems to have a much more drastic effect on flat bed than pulling a box.

When I ran reefer I could run 67 - 70 mph and easily maintain 6 - 6.2 mpg (Same year C15 (And same regen DPF/ARD Head, Valve actuator issues) . Now I have to really pay attention to my boost gauge in order to save as much fuel as I can. Often I find myself running 62 - 63 mph just to keep it barely above 5 - 5.5 mpg.

I never knew just how much aerodynamics really effects mpg until I got in this truck. I can get 6.2 mpg pulling a tarped load of sheet rock or plywood,.. I even do ok pulling hay as long as its the square bails. But put machinery or anything oddly shaped that will catch the wind and watch the mpg drop. 386 nose is pretty aero compared to a 379,.. but it doesnt seem to make much difference with certain loads.

Hurst

 

Uh, I thought the question was about fuel mileage.

 

Wind resistance makes the biggest difference in my m.p.g. I get 6.0-6.7 running 65-68.m.p.h 1700 rpm.

 

Ditto for me. I fee like such a loser when I hear people getting 6-7 - just hard to believe. Although I rented a Volvo for 2 days and it was severely underpowered but it got 6.2 !!

 

Can you now understand why some prefer to buy the new engines and claim ,even with all the emissions stuff on then,that they run cheaper?

As to fuelsavings in regard with which hood to buy,there is not magic bullet.
Most who have had a big fuelsaving will admit that their big saving is actually a number off little savings which added together make a big saving.
While the square hood vs aero might not matter so much..........it does all add up.

 

It was a 2006 Vulva (Volvo) hee hee and all beat up.

 

Bite your tongue...
Red here '08 T660 c15 13spd aero with roof difuser is giving me 7+ mpg at 60mph