[Rocketman]

Team Caffee,

Since you have a seperate tank for your apu fuel, I'm guessing you have tracked the apu fuel usage? I would be curious as to the manufacturer and size of apu you have also.


Thanks, Rocketman

[sullivandave]

It is very hard sometimes to slow down when dispatch calls, we have a pickup from your 20 at 65 mph you can make it in 40 min buuuuut it must be picked up in the hour. and working where i am (Boston) traffic may be two hours so when I got a new van It was gas and i am very glad i did,as it turns out everything is cheaper,the last van i got 300k out of slow down when you can run when you have to

[cheri1122]

It IS hard to slow down, conditioned as we are to the need to hurry, but it does no one any good to go so fast that we make mistakes, or have an accident. No matter when the load 'must' be picked up, we need to proceed at a speed that is both safe and smart, ie: fuel efficient. Dispatch won't take the blame for accidents, errors, or excess fuel usage, so the driver should never let Dispatch dictate our speed.
After all, if you can't get there 'on time' for whatever reason, (accident, breakdown, unavoidable delay due to road /traffic conditions), what happens to the freight? It waits until someone can get there, because it won't move itself.
I just hope that the urgency communicated by a Dispatcher doesn't cause anyone to make a dumb mistake, because if you let it, sooner or later, it will.

[LDB]

In the usually fairly short distance to a shipper the difference between economical speed and wasteful speed is probably about 5-8 minutes different ETA at the shipper. I always set my status as out of truck on pager xx minutes to truck. That covers the time if I'm inside as far from the truck as I might possibly be plus the time for a proper truck inspection before rolling. If the pu time is marginal I'll tell them so when the load is offered and get them to put in the notes I'll do my best to make the pu time but will not incur a penalty if I don't. Delivery based on 47mph means 62mph is plenty fast enough giving a 1 hour cushion for every 3 hours of driving.

[TwoMotherTrkrs]

Great idea, Leo. I do wonder though, don't you miss out on lots of loads that are short time to shipper?

[LDB]

Once in a while 15min to trk might bite me but I get as many loads as I want so if it's hurting me I'm unaware of it. Sometimes it's longer if I want to be able to walk across the street to Cracker Barrel or something. It works for me.

[rdtrpn]

Originally Posted by D Team Brothers

OK people, diesel over $4.! What are your top suggestions for increasing your trucks MPG? Does anyone know of, or recommend a fuel additive which is designed to increase MPG? We're driving a 08 Western Star with a MBE4000-450 and a 13spd Ultrashift which on a good day gets 8.5MPG (usually 7.5).

Other than a strike lol, I recently heard about something called "air tabs". www.airtab.com - The smart way to cut the cost of your highway fuel costs

[gojack]

Airtabs...Hmmmm,

Cheap, easy install, Guaranteed 4% savings, that would save Schneider at least 5 BILLION ($5,000,000,000 ) a year, Now thats real money.

FedEx, UPS, Yellow... Any carriers using them?

Sum'ums fishy here...


Only independent test that I can find involving Vortex Generation on a truck is at:

http://www.todaystrucking.com/images/SAE_CVE_2006.pdf

And it's hurting fuel economy.

On cars there is:
http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/cor...004/16E_03.pdf

[gojack]

Originally Posted by Kyreax

What's all this I hear about "super-single" tires saving gas? Wouldn't that conversion be worth it right about now given the fuel prices?

Plus, better ride, quieter ride.

Are blowouts that more of a concern though?

The newest most fuel efficient duals save you 4%
Super-single's save 5%, so the cost to switch may not justify savings.
Fuel efficient Duals... The new Michelin XDA-Energy, Goodyear FuelMax etc.,

http://www.rmi.org/images/PDFs/Trans...anTruckEff.pdf

I run SS's, but installed on truck new from factory.

[LDB]

Originally Posted by gojack

Guaranteed 4% savings, that would save Schneider at least 5 BILLION ($5,000,000,000 ) a year, Now thats real money.

I think there's a decimal problem somewhere. To save $5B based on a 4% savings would mean the original expense was $125 Billion. I'm sure they spend quite a bit but don't think it's that much. Perhaps million is the scale.

[gojack]

Originally Posted by LDB

I think there's a decimal problem somewhere. To save $5B based on a 4% savings would mean the original expense was $125 Billion. I'm sure they spend quite a bit but don't think it's that much. Perhaps million is the scale.

I stand corrected,
I should have checked my math more carefully.

It should read 50 Million Dollars not 5 Billion dollars

Thanks LBD, glad someone is paying attention.


6 million miles a day x 365 days = 2.2 billion annual miles

(5+ million loaded miles per day from Schneiders web site and assuming a conservative 20% deadhead miles)

2,200,000,000 / 7.0 mpg = 312,857,143 annual gallons

312,857,143 gallons x $4.00 gallon = $1,251,428,572 annual fuel cost

$1,251,428,572 x .04% fuel savings = $ 50,057,143 annual savings... 50 Million Dollars

if AirTabs worked as promised.

If they worked...
They would test them in a way to PROVE IT.
Then they would sell them to every big carrier.

See : Information Bridge: DOE Scientific and Technical Information - Sponsored by OSTI

"We had originally planned on testing the fuel saving ability of the products with a fleet
partner. However, the fleets we talked to about design issues, as well as the Freightliner LLC
engineers that helped us with our first operations/road test, made it clear that SAE J1321 type II
standardized tests performed by a respected facility were absolutely necessary to gain market
acceptance. For example, a letter from Schneider National (Americas largest private carrier) is
attached (see supplemental information figure 11) which informed us that they do not consider
any product without SAE/TMC test results. Fleet owners are very skeptical of fuel savings
products because they are often approached by companies marketing ineffective products with
exaggerated claims and questionable “test results”."

[LDB]

I don't know if they save fuel but they do provide better airflow past the back of the truck. The benefits of that are better visibility to the rear on wet roads and less dirt on the back of the truck. I'll be adding them for that alone and if they accidentally save some fuel too then that's a bonus.

[TeamCaffee]

Rocketman,

We have a Rig Master built in 2005 and have had very good luck with it. If the temperature is really hot in the summer the Rig Master does struggle to keep the truck cool and will stay running constantly to keep up. In the winter though we have never had a problem with the Rig Master keeping us warm.

[terryandrene]

Any alleged fuel saving device will have it's skeptics. I'm no different, but when a T/T driving friend gave me enough of his leftover airtabs to apply to my Chevy cargo van, I had nothing to lose so I applied them. I then posted the following last year on EO.


My 2006 Chevrolet 3500 has gotten 17.9 miles per gallon during 3975 miles of a combination of highway, city, loaded, and empty miles recorded earlier this year. During the middle of May, I installed 34 airtabs on the rear of my van. I did so out of curiosity to determine if they were of value on a typical van.

My test period, which ended on June 1, occurred over 3176 miles where I used 168.834 gallons of fuel for an average MPG of 18.81. My driving style and combination of driving conditions were comparable during my before and after airtab test. Needless to say, I'm very pleased with the performance of these little plastic triangles. In addition to a 5% increase in mileage, I get a greatly reduced dirt buildup on the rear of the van. I also had better visibility, during rain, in the door mounted rearview mirrors because the modified airflow diminished the air turbulence behind the van.

[Broompilot]

Air tabs, slow down etc...

Bad news is the person who posted this stated a Western Star, bad news is that is about the biggest Brick ever made for Aerodynamics. Thats hurting you big time, Stacks? Thats about another half mpg drag.

I do not want to come accross wrong that you think I am picking on you. The fact is three four years ago the design in this truck had no consideration for great or greater mpg cause at $2.00 per gallon it was not a concern might of cost you another $2K more per year but for the comfort, style it was a small trade off. But where we are today every one tenth of a mile equals over a thousand dollars a year or more.

Two things that are free to help you save fuel, check the air pressure in the tires, slow down. Everything else is gona cost $ so one needs to consider pay back.

Good luck.