Condo vs mid roof mpg differnce

Have you contacted Freightliner? They're usually pretty good about sharing stuff like this with those who want to know. The condo Cascadia was originally designed to work best with a trailer (van). Also, as a flying and racing nerd, I can tell you that it's a fact that what looks most efficient to the eye sometimes is not the most aerodynamic solution, and sometimes a shape that seems horribly drag bound turns out to be the slipperiest (ask Pete Brock, who designed the Daytona Coupe for Carroll Shelby, and was told by "experts" everywhere that the Kammback shape would be an aerodynamic anchor and make the car undriveable at high speeds--we all know how that one turned out).

Guess what I'm saying is got can get all kinds of anecdotal and empirical information here, but unless you have access to a wind tunnel and time to experiment, you're gonna have to see if you can access the data gathered by the people who did. Could be the condo is your best choice. Then again, as mentioned above by a couple of people, your real world requirements could preclude lab results.

 

Respectfully, that isn't a source, but your own observations, unless you have the drag coefficient numbers for each unit. One cannot depend on the eye to determine the better aerodynamic shape; many times the sleeker shape does worse in the wind tunnel.

 

Function specific rules here. Personally, I think those engineer types handed in their common sense for a degree...

 

You misunderstood. Freightliner was at MATS answering questions and I posed the question which of their configurations would be the most aerodynamic for a van. They answered the new Evo MRXT for the aforementioned reasons.

 

Ah...I stand corrected. Thank you.

 

Did they mention % difference?

 

I like grapes... some grapes would be good right about now. With cheese. And some lemon Perrier.

 

Maybe some skilleg cheese with your grapes?

 

Hehehe..."Butter Nosing"