Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Aerodynamics
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-30-2015, 04:37 AM   #21 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,735

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,571
Thanked 3,508 Times in 2,195 Posts
Sure- if that's legal.

__________________


  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 03-30-2015, 01:56 PM   #22 (permalink)
.........................
 
darcane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Buckley, WA
Posts: 1,586

Ninja 650R - '06 Kawasaki Ninja 650R
90 day: 52.02 mpg (US)

B*tch - '01 Honda Civic HX
Team Honda
90 day: 38.09 mpg (US)

Ms. Hyde - '06 Cadillac CTS V
Sports Cars
90 day: 16.93 mpg (US)
Thanks: 375
Thanked 480 Times in 311 Posts
Heavily modding the trailer seems like cheating to me. Unless the truck is always going to be paired to that trailer, you won't be getting that benefit.

I wonder what it gets for mileage with a conventional box trailer. That's far more "real world" in my book.

Also, how much cost is added to build a truck like this?
__________________
2001 Civic HX Mods


Past Cars:
CTS-V

2003 Silverado Mods
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to darcane For This Useful Post:
Frank Lee (03-30-2015)
Old 03-30-2015, 02:08 PM   #23 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 907
Thanks: 196
Thanked 320 Times in 225 Posts
This SuperTruck is more than a quick aero workover.

Quote:
Originally Posted by spacemanspif View Post
Looks EXECTLY like shepherd's rig that he built without $115 million. Glad truck companies are trying though, definitely a step in the right direction.
The performance results are due to a combination of improvements with the integration of a forward looking GPS as a most interesting and important point.

As we all know, the modification of driver technique bears heavily on the economy of a vehicle. Many of us who drive the same route on a daily basis become intimate with the upcoming terrain and this allows us to consciously modify our driving to fit the upcoming terrain. You can call it a type of Ecomodder "nap of the earth". This truck does this automatically and does so without the driver having to turn off fuel, up shift or coast. It's economy should be available no matter who is driving.

The rest of the truck is impressive when matched against the fact that the improvements made to the truck have to fit into a highly regulated and economically competitive industry. As Frank Lee pointed out, even the idea of side-view cameras would have to face the safety oriented regulations.

The extent of the work is even more impressive when the price of 115 million ,with government matching funds, is compared to the hundreds of millions needed to launch a new heavy duty line. Yes, it is a prototype, but outside of the waste heat recycling, most of the modifications could be integrated into existing production lines with little fuss.

Last edited by RustyLugNut; 03-30-2015 at 02:23 PM.. Reason: Additional.
  Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to RustyLugNut For This Useful Post:
aerohead (03-31-2015), The donkey CRX (03-31-2015), user removed (03-31-2015)
Old 03-30-2015, 02:10 PM   #24 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: mn
Posts: 237

Vader - '15 Dodge Grand Caravan
90 day: 23.13 mpg (US)

Cmax - '13 Ford Cmax SEL
90 day: 40.92 mpg (US)
Thanks: 10
Thanked 19 Times in 16 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by darcane View Post

Also, how much cost is added to build a truck like this?
I'd imagine quite a bit.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2015, 02:21 PM   #25 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 907
Thanks: 196
Thanked 320 Times in 225 Posts
Many trucking firms own their trailers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by darcane View Post
Heavily modding the trailer seems like cheating to me. Unless the truck is always going to be paired to that trailer, you won't be getting that benefit.

I wonder what it gets for mileage with a conventional box trailer. That's far more "real world" in my book.

Also, how much cost is added to build a truck like this?
The costs could be prohibitive as firms often have 50 to 100% more trailers on hand than tractors to move them. Trucking firms here in California fought the regulation to move to "Smartway" trailers with improved aero and low rolling resistance tires. But once firms could see the 1500 dollars cost per trailer could be recouped in relatively short order, it became an easier sell. The same could be said of the tractors. Natural Gas Tractors have a price penalty of roughly 30-50K dollars over a standard clean tech diesel. But, for many operators, the tremendous savings in fuel costs means a quick payback. I foresee these mods costing roughly the same $50K USD to implement on the production lines. The fuel cost improvements will make these costs acceptable to many firms.
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to RustyLugNut For This Useful Post:
aerohead (03-31-2015), darcane (03-30-2015)
Old 03-30-2015, 03:42 PM   #26 (permalink)
Grand Imperial Poobah
 
Shepherd777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Newington, CT USA
Posts: 241
Thanks: 31
Thanked 477 Times in 140 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xist View Post
So, we do not have anything else to say about the truck? My first thought was exactly what Spacemanspiff wrote.

13.4 MPG
9.8% better.


12.2 MPG.


Do the images appear squished to anyone else?
Thanks for the reference to my BulletTruck Xist,and for correcting the MPG numbers on each truck.
__________________
Bob Sliwa
"Like a Midget at a Urinal, I knew I was gonna have to stay on my toes......."

http://www.airflowtruck.com

Last edited by Shepherd777; 03-31-2015 at 12:52 PM..
  Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Shepherd777 For This Useful Post:
aerohead (03-31-2015), BamZipPow (03-31-2015), elhigh (03-30-2015), Hersbird (03-31-2015), mcrews (03-31-2015)
Old 03-30-2015, 04:15 PM   #27 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 560
Thanks: 1
Thanked 67 Times in 53 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shepherd777 View Post
Thanks for the reference to my BulletTruck Xist, but you have the numbers bass-ackwards. The BulletTruck did 13.4 MPG coast-to-coast @ 65,000 GVW and the Freightliner did 12.2 MPG in Texas.
And you managed this without megabucks from the feds. You've done a very good thing.

I suggest parking your truck at the front door of DOT with a big sign displaying its actual fuel economy numbers and your costs of modification. Then call the newspapers and TV networks to come and see what a properly done project can be. Lord knows, they need some help.
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Otto For This Useful Post:
aerohead (03-31-2015), Flakbadger (04-02-2015)
Old 03-30-2015, 04:56 PM   #28 (permalink)
Master Novice
 
elhigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SE USA - East Tennessee
Posts: 2,293

Josie - '87 Toyota Pickup
90 day: 30.49 mpg (US)

Felicia - '09 Toyota Prius Base
90 day: 50.67 mpg (US)
Thanks: 409
Thanked 598 Times in 438 Posts
I was hoping you'd show up, Shepherd. I didn't think that 12.2 number was right for the Bullet.

Frankly any improvement on those fuel suckers is good, since they rack up more miles in a month than some cars do all year. Modest savings on big trucks means a huge reduction in fuel usage, period.

It's worth pointing out that the costs associated with modifying the Bullet are for MODIFYING. That's starting with a truck that was already built and then dropping more money into it. That cost is completely out of line with what it would take to build the truck more in line with aerodynamic and efficiency ideals on the assembly line, there are enormous economies of scale to be realized which aren't present in the Bullet.

$115M, really? Somebody got jobbed. Seriously, if we, the taxpayers, are paying for this research, $115M is pretty damned expensive considering a lot of the data already existed and a perfectly viable example had already been built by independent research and then posted on an open forum.

I look forward to seeing more about the Starship! Great things coming down the pike - literally.

Thanks, Shepherd.
__________________




Lead or follow. Either is fine.
  Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to elhigh For This Useful Post:
aerohead (03-31-2015), Hersbird (03-31-2015), mcrews (03-31-2015)
Old 03-31-2015, 02:03 AM   #29 (permalink)
Not Doug
 
Xist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Show Low, AZ
Posts: 9,793

Chorizo - '00 Honda Civic HX, baby! :D
90 day: 35.35 mpg (US)

Mid-Life Crisis Fighter - '99 Honda Accord LX
90 day: 31.32 mpg (US)
Thanks: 6,594
Thanked 1,874 Times in 1,424 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shepherd777 View Post
Thanks for the reference to my BulletTruck Xist, but you have the numbers bass-ackwards.
Nope, but you are welcome anyway!
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2015, 08:35 AM   #30 (permalink)
Master Novice
 
elhigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SE USA - East Tennessee
Posts: 2,293

Josie - '87 Toyota Pickup
90 day: 30.49 mpg (US)

Felicia - '09 Toyota Prius Base
90 day: 50.67 mpg (US)
Thanks: 409
Thanked 598 Times in 438 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xist View Post
Nope, but you are welcome anyway!
Please observe the photo in this post.

Are you saying that Shepherd's stated numbers are wrong? The Bulletruck got better fuel economy in the field under actual use conditions than the so-called "SuperTruck." Shepherd's numbers were established by him, driving the truck and hauling goods. He's the one reporting the numbers, not a company.

Or are you just a Freightliner fan? I can understand having a preference that your fave be on top. I know Mustang fans, too.

Mind you, 12.2 is damned good. Don't get me wrong.

__________________




Lead or follow. Either is fine.

Last edited by elhigh; 03-31-2015 at 08:40 AM..
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com