Where is Mike? Where is he going? Don't ask him, he's probably lost.

[Ontario Outlaw]

I know it's all fun and games, which is why I take none of it seriously.

As for the game, we simply play different games at this point of our lives. I had no kids until the age of 40, and acquired 3 of them through a marriage. My view on trucking changed at that point. There was a time where I posted a pic of my GPS here doing 104 on 40 in Cali pulling a tanker. Yes, it was empty.

I've owned, not lease purchased, three trucks in my life. a w900, a t600, and a t660. W900 was used when I got it, bought a new T600. I made bank in that truck and paid it off 6 months after I bought it. All Detroit powered.

Honeslty, I still wrestle around with the decision when looking at a new truck. Fact is, the profit margins are just too tight these days for me to justify the loss of up to 1mpg when my true enjoyment come with my time off with family now.

I've led my share of trucks from Barstow into Texas, nonstop. Stopped an had coffee with the guys and a few gals along the way, usually leaving the final few behind by the time we hit somewhere in West Texas. I would continue on in to DFW because that was home. Those days are behind me now, I think. I could still do it, but have no plans to.

I largely, reluctantly, agree. Fuel mileage is a concern as an O/O.

I cannot stand following a van tanker or container yanker or reefer yanker. Drives me ballistic I like following room.

ELDs have changed the game. I’m not gonna pout it is what it is.

The game was more fun before ELDs.

3 mpg sucks but it’s winter time

 

[mndriver]

I enjoy watching all them fancy lit up hoods fall behind as we go uphills. Jeez would they get pissed. Pull out to pass. Get even with my trailer and then start to fade back.

Yell at me on the radio for not holding a steady speed ...

Uh, my cruise is set for 67 mph. I haven't slowed or speed up.

You may want to check your engine over if you can't pull these Iowa hills.

Then to watch them on a road like I68 or I64. Get into the mountains out west

The truck is under that lit up body.

Jeez was it fun to mess with guys with a power house "sleeper" truck.

 

[Mike]

3 mpg sucks but it’s winter time

Joking, I hope.

I'm bitching about seeing 7 or just below on some days with heavy loads. And this is running 67-70 lately. I could still be well over 7, probably over 7.5 if running a bit slower.

 

[Electric Chicken]

Heck my Schneider day cab can out pull some of those old hoods. Come across 64 with a paper load out of Covington. Nobody is fast but some of us are faster.

 

[ironpony]

I'm thinking about outfitting it either with skirts or the complete smart truck system. Haven't decided which yet, and haven't decided 100% that I will do either.

My fleet air filter should be here any day now, gonna see what fuel economy does once that is installed and go from there.

Skirts aren't what their supposed to be cracked up for. No real testing has ever been done in most cases. It was something that CARB came up with, and put into place by fiat.

Smart Truck on the other hand, has put their product through wind tunnel testing.

 

[Mike]

Skirts aren't what their supposed to be cracked up for. No real testing has ever been done in most cases. It was something that CARB came up with, and put into place by fiat.

Smart Truck on the other hand, has put their product through wind tunnel testing.

I have found testing with skirts, but not the smart truck. Got anything that backs this up?

 

[ironpony]

I have found testing with skirts, but not the smart truck. Got anything that backs this up?

Their website, talking with their engineers at GATS, and listening to Rutherford talking them up. That enough? My choice would be Smart Truck.

My own numbers on skirts vs no skirts on the same series of trailers was maybe 3%. Maybe. Aero is finicky stuff, so a little change in configuration can yield large differences. Some of the junk being peddled might make that number -3%. If it were my money, I'd want to see real test results, not a glossy sales brochure and a salesman's assurances. JMHO.

 

[r3gulator3]

Skirts aren't what their supposed to be cracked up for. No real testing has ever been done in most cases. It was something that CARB came up with, and put into place by fiat.

Smart Truck on the other hand, has put their product through wind tunnel testing.

Carb didn’t creat skirts.

The fed as part of the emissions controls ramping up on Diesel engines that started in the 90s masa a mandatory minimum fuel mileage for 2020. I forget the number but Detroit has admitted they can’t build an engine with better efficiency. So several companies they started modifying the truck and the trailer to get there. Freightliner has also said to achieve the number. The optimal fuel efficient speed may be the locked top speed in the ECM to achieve that as well. So if that’s 57.2 it is what it is.

 

[ironpony]

Carb didn’t creat skirts.

The fed as part of the emissions controls ramping up on Diesel engines that started in the 90s masa a mandatory minimum fuel mileage for 2020. I forget the number but Detroit has admitted they can’t build an engine with better efficiency. So several companies they started modifying the truck and the trailer to get there. Freightliner has also said to achieve the number. The optimal fuel efficient speed may be the locked top speed in the ECM to achieve that as well. So if that’s 57.2 it is what it is.

That's not how I heard it. Nevertheless, they weren't on anyone's radar scope until CARB started requiring them.

I think you were still wrenching when this was foisted on the industry... it had nothing to do with 2020 fuel standards. We were still bitching about gremlins introduced by EPA2004.

 

[r3gulator3]

That's not how I heard it. Nevertheless, they weren't on anyone's radar scope until CARB started requiring them.

I think you were still wrenching when this was foisted on the industry... it had nothing to do 2020 fuel standards. We were still bitching about gremlins introduced by EPA2004.

Yes sir I was. And the point I was trying to make is since the 90s we have been moving toward the final step in emissions for diesels which is GHG2020. Started in 1992.

Carb and the north east states are the id10ts that started this crazy bs. And I’m not saying the skirts and tails are effective. But, example. Freightliner put in hard rubber to fill the gap between the hood and bumper. .1mpg. Made all radio and cb antennas shaved .1 removed drop visor and flush mount clearance lights .3mpg.

They trying to get all the little things to add up to the big number. Which is somewhere between 10-12. I’ll see if I can find my book from Freightliner next time I’m home if I remember.

 

[ironpony]

Yes sir I was. And the point I was trying to make is since the 90s we have been moving toward the final step in emissions for diesels which is GHG2020. Started in 1992.

Carb and the north east states are the id10ts that started this crazy bs. And I’m not saying the skirts and tails are effective. But, example. Freightliner put in hard rubber to fill the gap between the hood and bumper. .1mpg. Made all radio and cb antennas shaved .1 removed drop visor and flush mount clearance lights .3mpg.

They trying to get all the little things to add up to the big number. Which is somewhere between 10-12. I’ll see if I can find my book from Freightliner next time I’m home if I remember.

I'm not arguing, and I agree with you.

Notice what you just posted. REAL NUMBERS. I assume there was testing to support those numbers, yes? My educational background is in engineering, and in the product development process, I was never allowed to pass on to production anything that wasn't supported with real testing to support product performance claims.

Just about every skirt product out there has had no real performance testing done with it, and that's my point. No one tests these things, and anyone that claims "Energy Star" approval doesn't even have to show they even made the effort to document their claims to gain approval. Its just check a box on the form, and you're done. This is the case with CARB approval of skirts as well. It was all a paperwork exercise.

Maybe a given skirt product actually works. Maybe they don't. Since no manufacturers appear to be doing real world tests on their products, and since aerodynamic fuel savings devices are very finicky in their response to minor configuration changes, I wouldn't spend a cent on them without proof of performance.

Trailer tails do work. There was testing done on them, and a friend I know at Landstar who tracks her fuel economy said she got a solid 0.5 mpg boost.

Airtabs work. I got a 0.1 mpg boost, but would rather have had a longer test period to validate that claim.

Smart Truck says they have test data to support their claims.

Skirt manufacturers? Ask them for test results, and its deer in the headlights stares.

 

[r3gulator3]

I'm not arguing, and I agree with you.

Notice what you just posted. REAL NUMBERS. I assume there was testing to support those numbers, yes? My educational background is in engineering, and in the product development process, I was never allowed to pass on to production anything that wasn't supported with real testing to support product performance claims.

Just about every skirt product out there has had no real performance testing done with it, and that's my point. No one tests these things, and anyone that claims "Energy Star" approval doesn't even have to show they even made the effort to document their claims to gain approval. Its just check a box on the form, and you're done. This is the case with CARB approval of skirts as well. It was all a paperwork exercise.

Maybe a given skirt product actually works. Maybe they don't. Since no manufacturers appear to be doing real world tests on their products, and since aerodynamic fuel savings devices are very finicky in their response to minor configuration changes, I wouldn't spend a cent on them without proof of performance.

Trailer tails do work. There was testing done on them, and a friend I know at Landstar who tracks her fuel economy said she got a solid 0.5 mpg boost.

Airtabs work. I got a 0.1 mpg boost, but would rather have had a longer test period to validate that claim.

Smart Truck says they have test data to support their claims.

Skirt manufacturers? Ask them for test results, and its deer in the headlights stares.

Yes Freightliner has done testing. The evolution which was the first to sport wheel covers flared truck skirting and extended cab fairings to close the gap to the trailer was advertised at 10.5mpg @60 mph because they had real world data to support the claim. Freightliner has done testing on trailer skirts and if you ever see the Freightliner test truck out on the road you’ll notice their skirting is slightly modified moving it out the the edge of the trailer and further forward of the dolly legs than most skirting you’d buy today. It’s not wind drag on the duals your trying to eliminate its lift and turbulence drag caused by swirling air under the trailer.

I have a book somewhere that has a bunch of test data from GHG2017. Which was the 2nd Gen eveolution. But the ones I posted before were ones off the top of my head that I remember from the class.

 

[ironpony]

Yes Freightliner has done testing. The evolution which was the first to sport wheel covers flared truck skirting and extended cab fairings to close the gap to the trailer was advertised at 10.5mpg @60 mph because they had real world data to support the claim. Freightliner has done testing on trailer skirts and if you ever see the Freightliner test truck out on the road you’ll notice their skirting is slightly modified moving it out the the edge of the trailer and further forward of the dolly legs than most skirting you’d buy today. It’s not wind drag on the duals your trying to eliminate its lift and turbulence drag caused by swirling air under the trailer.

I have a book somewhere that has a bunch of test data from GHG2017. Which was the 2nd Gen eveolution. But the ones I posted before were ones off the top of my head that I remember from the class.

That's right. Why should @Mike pay good money for products that can't show any real documentation of their effectiveness?

 

[AK7]

Carb didn’t creat skirts.

Ya the fashion designers did.

 

[ironpony]

Yes Freightliner has done testing. The evolution which was the first to sport wheel covers flared truck skirting and extended cab fairings to close the UI gap to the trailer was advertised at 10.5mpg @60 mph because they had real world data to support the claim. Freightliner has done testing on trailer skirts and if you ever see the Freightliner test truck out on the road you’ll notice their skirting is slightly modified moving it out the the edge of the trailer and further forward of the dolly legs than most skirting you’d buy today. It’s not wind drag on the duals your trying to eliminate its lift and turbulence drag caused by swirling air under the trailer.

I have a book somewhere that has a bunch of test data from GHG2017. Which was the 2nd Gen eveolution. But the ones I posted before were ones off the top of my head that I remember from the class.

Here's an example of what you find:

Windyne Fairing Systems

Windyne

Lots of weasel words, claims of 8 to 14% fuel savings. That's far beyond anything I saw. So, where's the data to back up this claim? Nothing, nada, zilch. There are some "customer testimonials" - nothing else.

Other bogus products that provide similar claims, and no test data...

Slick 50

Hydrogen/propane injection

Fuel magnets

Turbo D

Unless there is hard data showing real improvement, this stuff is most likely a scam. Make sure you are provided from a real test regime, conducted by an impartial third party. Customer testimonials and "Energy Star" claims without test data are one of the first signs of a scam.

Buyer beware...

 

[Hanover Fist]

I recently read a blog where a driver determined that the skirts were actually a detriment to fuel economy (I don't recall what he was driving). He became suspicious when he was passing another truck on a wet road and noticed that he was sucking in the other truck's spray underneath his own skirts.
A slight modification in skirt placement fixed the issue...which would support the claim of inadeqate manufacturer testing.

 

[Hanover Fist]

Found it

The uphill slog to 10 mpg

 

[Nomad1]

From riding a motorcycle on the interstate around trucks I can tell you that skirts can help smooth out the airflow. I can also tell you that some skirts make it worse and busted up zip tied skirts are shit that should just be taken off instead of being rigged back together. Trailer tails make a big difference too. There is another add on that smooths it out a lot but I don't know it is called. It looks like a plastic bump added on the sides of the trailer near the hinges.

 

[ironpony]

There is another add on that smooths it out a lot but I don't know it is called. It looks like a plastic bump added on the sides of the trailer near the hinges.

That's part of the SmartTruck product.

SmartTruck

 

[Nomad1]

That's part of the SmartTruck product.

SmartTruck

Thanks. I didn't know the name. I can't say how much anyone will gain in fuel economy but they definitely smooth out the turbulence.