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

Make that just under 6%... went back and looked at my 2014 numbers. So that's about $3,500.00 I didn't spend at the fuel island last year.

 

I installed FASS on a DD15 and it has a hard time keeping up with the flow from the OEM pump, so the return rate it pretty high, like more than 220 gph @1300 rpm. I believe in FASS, my last Cascadia with FASS was right at 8 mpg, all miles over 6 months, hauling dry box.

 

The benefit of being in direct is the power goes straight through from the input shaft to the output shaft. I believe that isn't really true by 13 or 18 speed transmission. I think, as he is saying it is 11th that is direct. The splitter has direct and over, which makes 11th 7th over, which is not the same as running the power straight through the shaft. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

I haven't been around a DD since the S60, but the Cummins barely warm the fuel. Really had to change our fuel treatment ideas in the winter with the tanks so much colder.

 

So what are your numbers ? You sure it wasn't the airtabs ?

 

you just refigured it and came up with 6%, I thought you'd have the numbers right in front of you. I was just curious to know, if it was me I would wonder if it was the FASS or airtabs or less wind, or how I was driving, different lanes, lighter loads, etc............

I wanna make sure I understand how you are certain it's the FASS, and how you came up with 6%, when you just said 3% a few minutes ago. Seems like a guy who keeps such close track of his fuel would know whether he's saving 3% or 6%.

 

Danny, at what percentage point would yOU install FASS?

 

You think a FASS is giving you 6% better mpg? This thread keeps getting better and better

 

I've never considered it before, I don't make quick decisions and I'm a tough sell. But if ironpony's numbers show 6% !!! and he has some idea it is the FASS to credit. Like he runs the same routes as the previous year, the FASS is the only change. Well, it would be pretty hard to ignore those numbers. That's why I am so anxious to see his numbers. The ones he just went back through. He came up with 6% so fast I figured he's post them right up for us.

 

Miles were the exact same, loads and roads too? 3% turned 6%, I'm throwing a red flag on the field.