U-haul has eco modder friendly trucks!

[2007 ion2]

I was unsure what section to put this in, so I put it here. I rented a 10 foot truck, and when I climbed into it, much to my surprise, it was not only a new, more efficient GM cab truck, but it had a fuel consumption gauge (fuel real pressure drop gauge, calibrated in gph, I believe, much like those used in planes). Now, this combination pleased me for a couple reasons, gm's go into a lean cruise mode under certain conditions, and unlike driving to load, you can find and stay in lean cruise longer, making my moving cost almost nothing compared to what I thought it would be. I had to drive through the entirety of very hilly wisconsin, followed by mostly flat illinois, then into st. louis, and learning curve has to be considered, as it took me about half the trip to find and confirm I could stay in lean cruise. I still managed to get 15.5mpg average over 550 or so miles, 14.5 through wisconsin, then it picked up a bit in illinois. I did have to stay above 45mph, as that is the minimum speed, but otherwise, I drive to consumption, keeping it as low as possible, trying to maintain 55 whenever efficiently possible.

[JasonG]

Which engine? Gas or diesel?

[2007 ion2]

sadly, u haul only rents gas trucks. It would have been higher had I driven one of these trucks before, probably more like 16mpg or higher.

[slowmover]

This sort of mpg claim (and a very good one, too) is better substantiated by running the truck over a certified scale

http://catscale.findlocation.com/

both empty and full to achieve payload carried (it's a moving truck after all), and an estimate of cubic foot capacity actually used versus U-Haul published figures.

I could tell you that I rented a U-Haul trailer and achieved 19 mpg (on two occasions; roundtrip same road over 1,200-miles) but it may mean more than I was grossing 12k with 350 c/f capacity filled and a payload of over 3k where the trailer weighed above 2k and the truck above 7k when both were empty.

Or, that it cost me W-dollars to move X-cubic feet of goods at Y-weight . . and that my fuel savings reduced the cost per pound or c/f move by Z-percent.

Changes in travel speed have to be factored against an overnight stay for slower travel (and safety, not factorable in $$ is in driving daylight hours only, with stops every 2-hours, with extended breaks every 4-hours, etc), so is fuel savings offsetting.

And, as the IRS allows 24-cpm deductible moving costs, how is the fuel cost savings represented against the actual per-mile cost of the truck?

.

[2007 ion2]

I was in a 10 ft truck, filled to the top. Not sure the weight. Keeping it under 55 was a big part of the high mileage.

[slowmover]

Prevailing wind direction, topography, altitudes, and ambient temps are the other considerations.

Did you use the CC? I would have had it on by the end of the Interstate entrance ramp and simply run somewhere between 55-58 mph if not too hilly. Big truck studies show an advantage for CC over any other method.

Forgot to add that U-Haul is notorious for not checking tire pressures and lug nut torque values. I've learned to do my own full inspections which include getting underneath the vehicle. Respect their pressure values as the tires are designed for that (cold, early a.m. reading).

15 in a box van is sweet. Did you happen to note the model year and drivetrain?

.

[MorphDaCivic]

I had a bad experience with U-Haul in 2003. I reserved a "Diesel" truck for a 2000 mile move. When I went to pick it up they claimed the were all out of "Diesel" trucks. Since I was all set for the moving day I had no choice but to take the gas engine truck. I think this truck had 300,000 hard miles on the odometer.
What a dog to drive and barely got 10 MPG.

Good to see they have changed thier ways.

[2007 ion2]

I it was a new truck with about 30k miles. It did not have cruise, and I also had to check you're pressures after dispatch.