Flow Below Tractor Aero Kit

The site doesn't give much information. The only thing I noticed were wheel covers and spacers of some kind between the wheels, but there seems to be something else with the mudflaps. Based on the name of the company, I was hoping for a under the cab aero kit.

 

It doesn't say anywhere on the site how much, either a percent or a mpg figure of what to expect for gains. It could be worked backwards from the calculator, though.

It shouldn't be comparing itself to the side skirts. They are two totally different products. Side skirts are far more proven than this new device. I can see some savings to be there, but not enough to justify buying it. I don't think the ROI is there, quite honestly.

If you do decide to try it and test it, Dice1, I'm predicting it will be one of those things where the gain will be so insignificant it will be difficult to measure .....

 

I work with FlowBelow, so hopefully I can clear up a few things. Forgive me if this kind of thing is frowned upon here.

We are not trying to position ourselves as an alternative to side skirts. As you say, they are two totally different products. If you own your own trailer, then side skirts will provide a similar ROI to our product. If you pull someone else's trailers, or a flatbed, or a tank trailer, then side skirts are not even an option for you, but our product is. Side skirts are a great product that are saving a lot of people a lot of money. If it were up to me, every trailer would have side skirts and every tractor would have an AeroKit.

Much of our marketing at this point, including the image above, is directed towards fleets. The average fleet has several trailers for every tractor. If a large fleet were to retrofit all of their equipment, they would likely need to purchase two to five times as many side skirts compared to our product. This comparison is meant to show that for a fleet, ROI can be faster for a product that attaches to the tractor rather than the trailer. This chart is not very relevant for owner-operators.

We expect most trucks to see a 0.15-0.20 MPG pickup. This was the result of an independent test carried out by Texas A&M, and fleet and owner-operator customers have so far have reported savings in this range or higher.

 

I would agree.. targeted toward fleets. I prefer fenders over the drive tires like Minimizer makes. they may not offer much more in aerodynamics, but they do one thing that the product we are discussing here does not... keep rocks and mud off the back end of my sleeper when I do the drop and hook thing. They do help cut down spray like these would also.

Something like this seems more practical....

http://minimizer.com/min2260.html

 

Well, the marketing that was referenced in this thread was targeted towards fleets. The product itself is targeted to OTR trucks regardless of who owns them.

And Minimizer fenders are a completely different product. We are not selling fenders, we are selling an aerodynamic fairing system for increased fuel efficiency.

 

I'm considering this system. When I saw it at MATS I had concerns over the durability of the material, it looked a bit flimsy. I have already seen an MVT tractor with a split center panel. I disagree on the marketing strategy, I think the o/o are more interested in stuff like this, as generally we are more focused on fuel saving ideas. Being leased on with Landstar we have the option on keeping any trailer for long periods of time. I just got a newish trialer that has ATDynamic-Transtex Skirts and I think combining this trailer set up with FlowBelow and a Trailer Tail would yield outstanding mpg results. I just put new XDA Engery tires on my drives so the FlowBelow will have to wait a month or so but if I see good durability test results then I will probably buy the system.


i believe the price is $1800. An installment payment plan would make it easier for an o/o. It's worked for the by-pass oil filter guys in getting units on o/o trucks, so there is no reason why it couldn't work for FlowBelow.


hint!....