Quote:
Originally Posted by MazdaMatt
I think it would be VERY difficult to mass produce a truck or trailer who's additional cost due to engineering offset fuel cost by enough to make people's heads turn. The construction of a brick-like trailer is just so simple compared to something more aero. That simplicity likely also makes it less weight and more durable/repairable. Every time I'm in dad's shop there is a trailer there with a bent bumper or scrapes down the sides, or a gash in the roof. If it was made of some wavey-shaped fiberglass it would be more expensive to repair.
|
Seems like all the engineering is behind us.Hucho's extensible boat tail image from the 1930s would get us most of the way there.In my photo album there's an article about the Fruehauf/International combo from the 1980s,which got 10-mpg.Sure,you might have to pay a royalty to the first guy out of the chute.But that didn't keep people from building electric light bulbs and paying Edison for the privilege.And yes,OTR operators would have something else to deal with,but the Waggoners are already dealing with it,and may be in business long after others have fallen by the wayside,because they could not compete against the increased mpg of the competition.My aunt and uncle were one of the first husband/wife OTR teams in the US,and my uncle was also a pilot,had been a flight instructor during WW-II,and he definitely new the connection between aero and 18-wheeler mpg.Beyond driving an "ant-eater" and installing "Nosecone" on all the trailers,there wasn't muchin the marketplace for him.I was too young and cash-poor to make a difference.Now I'm older and still cash poor! Frustrating! We lose billions each year.We just pile 'em up into mounds and set fire to them.Computers vs typewriters.Everybody seems to understand that one.But when you put wheels on something,people go immediately stupid.Shame.