"SuperTruck" demonstrates 54% improvement in FE, 61% in freight efficiency

[Diesel_Dave]

Green Car Congress: Cummins/Peterbilt SuperTruck shows 54% improvement in fuel economy, 61% improvement in freight efficiency

?SuperTruck? Yields 54 Percent Increase in Fuel Economy - New York Times

[Vekke]

Nice try but if big oems cannot push more MPG they will be in trouble... Is that truly their best shot and techology level?

[Diesel_Dave]

Originally Posted by Vekke

Nice try but if big oems cannot push more MPG they will be in trouble... Is that truly their best shot and techology level?

9.9 mpg (23.8 L/100 km) may not sound like much, but remember that this is with a combined vehicle weight of 65,000 lbs.

In frieght efficiency terms that's 321.8 ton-miles/gal. By comparison, you and your Lupo (which is very impressive at 79.9 mpg) are at 72.2 ton-miles/gal.

[mechman600]

That is impressive. Check out the aero on that truck:

[Vekke]

I am not comparing my lupo fuel consumption to that truck because they are totally different setups.

Aero might be nice conserning what you have at the moment but nothing new means zero innovations...

Airflowtruck gets 13+ MPG in real world driving. He is shooting for 20 MPG

World premiere: Mercedes-Benz Aerodynamics Truck & Trailer: saving fuel, cutting emissions | Daimler Global Media Site > Daimler Trucks > Mercedes-Benz CVs > Special Topics > Concept Vehicles

MB test truck 25,9 l/100km 9,08 US MPG with 40 tonn (if I understant that correctly) weight gives 0,6475 l/100km/tonn
"supertruck" 23,8 l/100km 9,9 US MPG with 29483 kg gives 0,807 l/100km/tonn. It is easier to get better fuel consumption with higher weights but still that is not something to shout about. Also if I have understood correctly the Us truck average is more close to 7-8 MPG. You could calculate the average in US and not say typically between. That is no 50% improvement if some of the trucks get close. you need to compare the results to what is best out there...

IMO MB truck is also very lame piece.

That was US goverment test rig and that is best they can do with "unlimited" budget. Same **** happens also in Finland. Finnish VTT build a truck trailer combination which Cd was 0.58.

Check page 36.

http://www.transeco.fi/files/626/Tra...ortti_2011.pdf

I have seen so many similar test reports that I cannot figure out how they can call a truck which has that kind of aerodynamic package something new and innovative etc. Also I cannot figure out why they build similar trucks which can be read from already done aerodynamic test reports that they achieve about 10 US MPG. That is just some waste of money and resourses. There are people around this planed who can double those numbers but they dont have the resources do build their plans into reality because the money goes to those OEMs etc which dont know nothing new and cannot bring nothing new to the table.

So its almost same thing to just burn your millions in a fireplace because by doing that kind of research seen above you will not learn or create anything new. You will not create any new technological edge over your competitors which is the ultimate goal of these studies.

[oil pan 4]

Wonder how they got the waste heat recovery up almost 3%?