Classic Trucks

I think you misunderstood my post. I never said that I was relying on fuel prices to change, I said I was looking forward to it happening.

 

What engine is in that 2014 Cascadia?

 

Was talking to a fella last week with an '011 Paccar in a 379......or maybe it was a '013. Whatever. He said the same thing happen to him. He said "There is one DEF sensor that goes bad and then your dead."

 

DD13

 

Then you are in fact relying on a paid fuel surcharge to increase your revenue. What Rollin said is accurate to your position.

Fuel cost isn't especially relevant to my operation. That said my W9L avg'd 6-6.5 most of the last 4 years with a few exceptions. The Pete I bought over winter is setup as a straight flat and has averaged 9.9 for all miles thus far.

I'm sitting in my pickup now, it avg'd 14 mpg on gas.

I charge about the same $$ for a run regardless of what vehicle I take.

If fuel doubled I'd change my rates accordingly.

 

This truck will be paid for in cash. So if by relying you mean that my ability to make a decent profit depends on it then no what Rollin said is not accurate. Though it will increase profit. I'm wondering if your thinking my overhead will be high due to high truck payments.

 

I'm making no reference to truck payments.

If you're working on the justification that a better mpg truck is going to be more profitable enough to justify buying a new one vs a good runner then you're stuck on a contract with subpar rates I expect.

Not saying you won't make money with your plan, just that you'll have more potential with a better rate structure vs a more efficient truck.

More efficient mpg adds up with the more miles you run.

For example: you run 3,000 miles a week vs 1,800. 8mpg vs 6mpg @ 3,000 is 125 gallons a week. At 1,800 a week it's 75 gallon ish difference (this is pocket math while I'm doing other things feel free to correct my math if I'm wrong)

@$3.00 a gallon player 1 saved $475 on fuel, bravo. But if he ran 3,000 miles a week @$1.80 all miles is he ahead of the guy running 6mpg for 1,800 miles avg'ing $3.50 all miles: player 2 bought 300 total gallons vs the 375 total of player 1. So player 2 just bought $900 of fuel, player 1 bought $1125.

Player 1 grossed $900 (again pocket math) less for all miles as well.

If you make more $$ running less miles, that will overcome the differential of the lower mpg rather quickly.

Again I'm not saying money can't be made by player 1: but I'm happier being player 2.

 

Happened to me on a Columbia with 119k miles. 430 Detroit blew a head. I was a company driver. Everything was covered under warrantee. I sat in a motel in Dallas Texas for 3.5 weeks. I have nothing against Freightliners as trucks, but the service centers I've seen made me swear never to buy a Shaker.

 

TripleSix, I always love reading your posts. You know by now that I am not a trucker.....yet, so could you please help me understand the 55 mph (fuel savings) vs. the 7 hours time loss/gain. I personally love the look of the classic trucks, but as a non driver and being business minded, I can only assume that the aero trucks are more fuel efficient which only puts more money in the O/O pocket......right........

 

Out of all the KW's you have owned, which one did you like the best and why? I LOVE the look of the KW's, but they don't seem to have much room in them. However, I still like the look of the new Volvo's and they have a ton of room. Thoughts???