Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum - EcoModder.com - View Single Post

slowmover · 02-07-2015, 11:50 AM

I understand you believe you have a point to make. And that skill somehow compensates. I agree that better aero helps. But doesn't overcome the deficiencies of a pickup truck. Cars will skid and spin around well above the point where trucks roll over. Which is why the DPS Tahoes are lowered so dramatically. And why the operators have to exert such care at high speeds. (Their words to me). Keeping risk to a minimum is the only avenue worth exploring, long term. All other approaches have a higher cost. Driving skill arguments are a dead end.

Pickup trucks are about payload. It is their reason for being. Towing an especially large load compared to a car is second. They are a failure for passenger transport unless we include vans as to seat mpg.

Questions about payload, axle and tire loads, etc may not be exactly to your vision, but they are nevertheless central to what is a pickup truck. On that, with your truck and with or without your trailer, are the trade offs understood by others to arrive at a more satisfactory average annual mpg. It isn't merely highway versus city (better said as steady state versus stop and go), but working versus empty. How well is it justified if only for fuel expense (becomes the question)?

Empty miles don't pay. The cheaper they are, the better, granted. Things tend to come down to the percent of each. One can read the experiments of others with this known. As with climate and terrain past truck spec. Comparisons. Your mpg appears to be just above mine at 55 and at 65. Today's turbodiesel 1T trucks are grossly overpowered with a stratospheric initial cost and no longer desirable from a mpg standpoint versus work performed. But my comparison is made to yours when my truck is solo and loaded to 87% of gross.

So, how to compare? Would a replacement gasser 1/2T truck with aero aids skew the empty miles high enough for me to warrant the change? Etc. My travel trailer is heavy, but aero. A half ton can do it. But how well becomes the salient point when all miles are considered. A grey area.

I'm not alone in approaching pickups from the standpoint of commercial considerations. It separates the wheat from the chaff. And it isn't meant to be a wet blanket. On the contrary, it -- your truck, solo and towing -- can be powerful evidence of how to make a particular kind of pickup truck work more favorably. Shining a light on the grey areas is what is being asked.

Weights, loads, and steady state mpg as you accumulate miles will be greatly appreciated. And skillful use of a certified Cat Scale is your friend as to reducing road horsepower as you iron things out.

Thanks for your consideration.

02-07-2015, 11:50 AM	#32 (permalink)
slowmover Banned Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Fort Worth, Texas Posts: 2,442 2004 CTD - '04 DODGE RAM 2500 SLT Team Cummins 90 day: 19.36 mpg (US) Thanks: 1,422 Thanked 737 Times in 557 Posts	I understand you believe you have a point to make. And that skill somehow compensates. I agree that better aero helps. But doesn't overcome the deficiencies of a pickup truck. Cars will skid and spin around well above the point where trucks roll over. Which is why the DPS Tahoes are lowered so dramatically. And why the operators have to exert such care at high speeds. (Their words to me). Keeping risk to a minimum is the only avenue worth exploring, long term. All other approaches have a higher cost. Driving skill arguments are a dead end. Pickup trucks are about payload. It is their reason for being. Towing an especially large load compared to a car is second. They are a failure for passenger transport unless we include vans as to seat mpg. Questions about payload, axle and tire loads, etc may not be exactly to your vision, but they are nevertheless central to what is a pickup truck. On that, with your truck and with or without your trailer, are the trade offs understood by others to arrive at a more satisfactory average annual mpg. It isn't merely highway versus city (better said as steady state versus stop and go), but working versus empty. How well is it justified if only for fuel expense (becomes the question)? Empty miles don't pay. The cheaper they are, the better, granted. Things tend to come down to the percent of each. One can read the experiments of others with this known. As with climate and terrain past truck spec. Comparisons. Your mpg appears to be just above mine at 55 and at 65. Today's turbodiesel 1T trucks are grossly overpowered with a stratospheric initial cost and no longer desirable from a mpg standpoint versus work performed. But my comparison is made to yours when my truck is solo and loaded to 87% of gross. So, how to compare? Would a replacement gasser 1/2T truck with aero aids skew the empty miles high enough for me to warrant the change? Etc. My travel trailer is heavy, but aero. A half ton can do it. But how well becomes the salient point when all miles are considered. A grey area. I'm not alone in approaching pickups from the standpoint of commercial considerations. It separates the wheat from the chaff. And it isn't meant to be a wet blanket. On the contrary, it -- your truck, solo and towing -- can be powerful evidence of how to make a particular kind of pickup truck work more favorably. Shining a light on the grey areas is what is being asked. Weights, loads, and steady state mpg as you accumulate miles will be greatly appreciated. And skillful use of a certified Cat Scale is your friend as to reducing road horsepower as you iron things out. Thanks for your consideration.