AirFlow BulletTruck Project (aerodynamic, modified Class 8 transport doubles MPG)

[Galane]

Turbo Encabulator? Should use two because in logarithmic synchronicity mode the proton throughput is equal to the linear square of the distance traveled.

[EchoTech]

Use two in parallel or series?

[Galane]

It depends on whether you want series cascade bucket overflow dependency or parallel di-synchronous counter-reverse continuity.

[Shepherd777]

Originally Posted by Galane

Turbo Encabulator? Should use two because in logarithmic synchronicity mode the proton throughput is equal to the linear square of the distance traveled.

Originally Posted by EchoTech

Use two in parallel or series?

Originally Posted by Galane

It depends on whether you want series cascade bucket overflow dependency or parallel di-synchronous counter-reverse continuity.

Gentlemen, I applaud you both for your high-level, out-of-the-box thinking on this very impotent issue.

Now who could argue with that???

Thank you for both for clearly stating what needed to be said.

[skyking]

The best would be a combination parallel-series quadralogical encabulator array.

[pete c]

Originally Posted by Shepherd777

Of course, an even better option than a CVT would be a Turbo Encabulator.

I was thinking of offering these on the new trucks.

Has anyone tried a lighter girdle spring? I'll bet it would result in a measurable fuel saving.

[Blue Angel]

Originally Posted by pete c

Has anyone tried a lighter girdle spring?

Girdle springs have been beaten to death already... check the stickies in the varitron forum.

Moving on...

[EchoTech]

So if I used a relay energised on/off by my 3.4 ghz cpu to switch the Turbo Encrapulator between parallel and series mode I would get the benefits of both modes?

[DIMS]

Pertbilts cannot even match the Bullet Truck Multi-millions spent
Peterbilt's New "Super Truck" Gets 10 MPG—Double the National Big Rig Average

[Shepherd777]

Originally Posted by DIMS

Peterbilts cannot even match the Bullet Truck Multi-millions spent
Peterbilt's New "Super Truck" Gets 10 MPG—Double the National Big Rig Average

To be completely fair, I believe Peterbilt and Cummins are on "Phase 2" of their project. I don't recall how many phases there are until completion of the government Super Truck project. And hopefully, they did not blow the entire $39M of our hard-earned tax dollars that the current adminstration gave them, by doing only 9.9 mpg.

First off, AFAIK, the national average for Class 8 trucks is 6.5 mpg. So at 9.9 mpg, they did not "Double the National Big Rig Average." They improved it by very slightly more than 50%, by my math. We more than doubled it with the BulletTruck at 13.4 mpg. And I spent a ship-load less then $39M.

Secondly, does anyone here at the ecomodder forum doubt that even the most-junior ecomodder member here could not do better than this 9.9 mpg effort by these two multi-zillion dollar corporations??? It boggles my mind that they have all of those resources and ca$h and they only do 9.9 mpg in 2013.

They had a 65,000 lb. GVW on a route in ironing-board flat Texas, and they got only 9.9 mpg??? The BulletTruck does 17.5-18 mpg on a level grade at 65,000 GVW. Honest. It does 2-3 mpg climbing grades up to 6% on the interstate highway system. So with all of those 2-3 mpg legs, and all of those 17.5-18 mpg legs, we average 13.4 mpg with the BulletTruck. When we got 13.4 mpg coast-to-coast we did it after climbing a little thing that they call the Rocky Mountains, and after hitting 35 mph 3/4 headwinds. Not in ironing-board flat Texas.

I am sincerely grateful for all the help that Cummins provided on the BulletTruck. They helped us re-engineer the accessory drive belt system, and provided a very small amount of off the shelf components. And I am very grateful for them diagnosing and replacing our bum ECM last spring. They were a bunch of nice folks when we were there in person at the Technical Center in Columbus.

But everyone there has a CYA attitude and goes waaaaaaaaaaaaay out of their way not to commit to anything. Or volunteer to be helpful. One would think that they would love us to get the extreme mpg we were getting with their Cummins diesel engine and let the whole world know. You would have thought they would of published press releases on our accomplishments to highlight their engines. I asked my high-level contact if I could meet the marketing folks while we were there at the Tech Center. He told me he had to catch an airplane. That may be true, but if it was you that had to catch an airplane, would you not contact the marketing folks via e-mail or phone while we were still there? I could not even get a reply to a simple e-mail at times.

We will not be using a Cummins diesel engines in the new truck. I still think that Cummins makes excellent, durable, fuel-efficient diesel engines. Their lack of communication is the deal-breaker.

I can call the President of the company that will build the diesel engines for our new trucks directly. He is on a speed dial on my cell phone. We talked on the phone for over an hour a couple of weeks ago. And 1/2 hour last week. I talked with him in person last week. Try doing that with the President of Cummins. Or even a low-level manager there.

Paccar, parent of Peterbilt, has visited my web site dozens of times in the past. They were there 14 times yesterday and once so far today. And their latest visit was referred to by this site.
You would think they would have learned something by now.

Our tax dollars at work.