Kevin Rutherfrauds $200000 Signature glider truck has complete engine failure!!!

Kevin's "advice" that works for me is common sense and stuff you should be doing anyways if you own a truck. The one good thing that came from his show is I ended up meeting and using Chad in KC to keep my truck going straight down the road.

 

As pathetic as it is, the reason people like kr and dave ramsey are so successful is because that common sense ain't too common in this dumbed down society we have become.

 

I only mentioned cattle hauling as that's where i see drivers claiming the rates are highest. if you prefer, i will discuss something with which I am familiar, and that is hauling containers from Chicago to Cincinnati. It was 300 miles from the rail yard to receiver, which, driven at the speed limit, 65 can be done in 5 hours. With a 50 mile out of route reload, it can be done in 11 hours of driving, and 14 hours on duty, which means you can turn a load a day during the week. Slowing down to 60 means that you have to layover, and are only able to get 4 trips in a week. Revenue goes down from $5,000 to $4,000 per week. Due to the fact that I really didn't like to push, I slowed down to get better mileage, so I can't tell you if the cost of going 65 vs 60 would cost me more in fuel than I made in revenue. I know that at better than $2.00 a loaded mile the answer would be that you will make more profit by going faster, in a situation where you would lose complete legs by slowing down.

 

I still like to listen to Kevin, and he did help me save a LOT of money. Mostly on rolling resistance tires and a little with airo stuff. Going to low rolling resistance tires and adding a Nose Cone because of the large trailer gap saved me more than $10,000 over the years. I should also give him credit for keeping me out of an emissions truck. As a newby, I had never even heard of oil analysis. Pretty nifty tool to have in my arsenal. I guess I never was gullible enough to buy into the turbo3000d, FASS, Evans, etc, even as a rookie.

But I swear, if he bloviates one more time about how his BM was that morning, or converting to a 6 x 2, I might just rip the radio right out of the dash....

 

I wasn't picking out your post. I understand exactly what you're saying and in your situation you'd really have to look at the numbers to make your choice.

I work with guys that think they need to run 5 over the limit every place they go. I listen to them complain about how much they spend on fuel and I watch their tires develop funny wear. We haul heavy and run long miles and most still have that "gotta go" mentality. For example, on Friday we loaded 7 loads in UT. I was the second truck to load. I stopped for fuel and a quick shower at Little America and again at Sidney NE. 4 of the other trucks blew around me in WY but when I got to Imperial NE to unload only 2 trucks were there before me.

I'm not bragging, I just know what running 75+ across WY will cost me versus 70. And on a 900 mile load I can run slower by keeping the door shut and driving.

 

Ok, I picked up Movin' Out at Iowa 80. As usual, Bruce's article is in there, with the picture of this truck. He puts in his usual advise, with a story. His story this toime is about some guy who has a 1998 T600 with a 12.7, with the Bruce setup. He discussed all the things why running low rpm is a mph killer. He then wrote "According to the engineers at corporate Detroit, the 12.7 should NOT be operated below 1400 rpm..." Now this is funny, as the Detroit literature shows the peak torque of the 12.7, at any horsepower setting as being 1200 rpm! Are the engineers at "corporate" the same one who said running an engine over 180° will cause damage to the liners? Despite the fact that the factory sensor doesn't start the fan until 200°! Anything to save him tarnished reputation.

 

He's an Olympian in the 100 meter backpedal.

 

The only loser in that race is the spectator.

 

After owning a few mid 90's series 60's I can tell you for definite that those years of 12.7s and 11.1s will fall flat on their face under 1450 rpm with factory settings. I had the Detroit monitor in the dash that was calibrated to where it was always less than 1/10 of a mpg off from hand mileage calculation. Anything under or over 67 mph and 1550 rpm I started loosing fuel mileage. Across 12 & 10 in La was a good test. I ran that almost weekly with mostly the same freight, and I usually came through at night with little traffic.

That's just the way those engines were, all three of them. I hand calculated the fuel mileage every fuel up. In fact I still have the legal pads with all the calculations from 15 years ago. Back then Williams hadn't been bought out yet. Their fuel was around 5-7 cpg cheaper, but I would lose about 4-5 tenths per gallon if I remember correctly. I know I always lost mileage every time I got fuel at any of them.

 

That is hilarious! I used to be one the mindless minions that followed every word the guy had to say. I still read what he says, because some parts are actually valid, but I'm very leary and way more skeptical.

Seems like he's more interested in snowmobiling lately, anyways