California is also banning reefers that do not have particulate filters on them! That's why the big companies are scrambling to put them on.

 

Wonder if anyone gave give me some infomatin. I am inline to purchase a unit from the company i work for. with all things equal i could get a 2003 with a c12 cat and 279 rears or a 2006 detroit with 264 rears. They are both set to 370horse. I haul glass and i wonder which would be the better pick in the long run.

 

Mr. Griffin,

I dont know if your an owner operator or not, but judging from your response that the faster you go the more revenue is made, I would say that your not. And if you are I imagine you'll be selling your rig before too long with the ever increasing prices of fuel.

Furthermore, the majority of drivers out there who consistantly speed in my observations are also the ones who follow other drivers and four wheelers way too close, and who are more frequently "forgetting" that they are suppose to be professionals.

I am seeing more and more so called "professional" drivers out here who are not using turn signals when they pass another vehicle, tailgating, and jumping in front of other vehicles before it is safe. I consistantly drive at 57 to 60 miles an hour and drive just as far as anyone else out here, (approximately 3000 miles a week) but I believe I am safer because I follow a little rule that seems to have been forgotten. That rule is: Do unto others, as you would them do unto you. Otherwise known as the GOLDEN RULE!

You know a little courtesy goes a long way.

Mr. Griffin, Please dont think I am accusing you of being unsafe. I dont know you, and you may very well be a very safe driver. The above commentary are just my observations.

 

for 5 years i would drive the speed limit or just over.. 72mph & 1850 is top end. ave m.p.g was 6.2 one day i decided to go slower. 60 mph & 53 mph in mi. yes it was painful :cry: but i did it. 7.8 mpg. all flat roads & approx 450 mi done twice same results. since then i keep cruise at 58-60 ave 7.2 hill, no hill, heavy light e.t.c. i had no idea the m.p.g would increase that much. & i dont use a/c/ or idle at all. unless bitter cold. i calculated if every trip was like the flat lander one's i would save over $600 a month in fuel cost alone. however if i have to get a load off to get another one on & can only do by driving the peed limit i'm hammer down. i'm not going to lose a $900 load to save $ 50 in fuel. but if i'm in no hurry it's right lane for me & i have plenty of company from scheider,swift, jb, & the others. :lol: by the way i have been driving the same truck for over 8 years. a 95 cabover wich just hit 1 mil miles months ago & still going with same engine, rears, & clutch. all original. nothing replaced. except one injector after it hit one mil miles..

 

The cost to run 70 vs. 60 is fairly easy to determine, just crunch the mpg numbers, toss in the improved maintenance costs, and it looks like a slam dunk, "run slow and more money flow"...

but...

What is the opportunity cost? The counter argument is moving faster means that you can turn more loads. More loads means more money. Hypothetically, that's true. In the real world though, the way that you'll run, is it? On a 2100 mile run, is 6 hours going to make a difference? Theoretically, do that 10 times and you've got another run in? Are you actually going to pack another run in?

 

exactly, it all depends on if you're on a tight schedule or not.

 

When your paying 550 to 650 every other day in fuel, I dropped my speed from 70 -75 mph and my fuel mpg was around 5.5, to 65 and my fuel went up to 6 - 6.5. Over the cost of the year, that amount adds up.

As far as wear and trear on the engine....sounds like the same to me unless your hammer down doing triple digits.

 

Maximum fuel economy (& minimal engine wear) for automobiles is 30 to 35 MPH (obviously there are exemptions with exceptional vehicles).

All things considered, higher speeds equal GREATER engine wear, SOCIALLY-IRRESPONSIBLE polutants *and* LOWER fuel mileage.

This is a no-brainer.

God Bless all

 

I don't think so..... speed has absolutely nothing to do with MPG or engine wear. But has everything to do with the type and setup of your engine, transmision and rear-end ratio's.

For instance in my 2003 Jetta it is a 2.0 5spd. 30-35 means I'm over revving 3rd gear or lugging 4th gear and both are hard on your engine and both waste fuel.

 

Uh yes it does, speed increases the horsepower requirement of your engine. It also increases how much horsepower you're wasting. Both equate to less MPG and increased engine wear since you're working the engine harder.

If this wasn't true, 60 mph and 70 mph would both require the exact same throttle, and we all know that isn't true.

While you can get better mileage with your specs, your speed makes a bigger difference. For example, going from 1600 to 1400 rpms increases mpg about 3-4% according to an article I read a while back. Going from 70-60 mph will increase it 10-15% easily.