Cummins MPG Guide
06-02-2004, 07:33 PM
#16
Registered User
Originally posted by Haulin_in_Dixie
A 700 mile trip at 70 mph would take 10 hours. In the same ten hours at 55 mph you would only drive 550 miles. That's not significant?
Slow down to 45 and you will have gas running out of the tank
Big truck only gets six miles a gallon on a good day. On my truck, doing only 50 will give a mileage help of about 1 1/2 mpg as compared to 75. About the best I can do is just under 70, like you see most trucks driving, about 68.
If you are an independant, fuel is not necessarily the most cost driven consideration. Time usually wins out. Several hours difference to California generally means a day sooner for the reload and therefore much more money to pay the bills.
You said you don't see a difference, how bout this.... A driver can log a maximum of 770 miles in an 11 hour day. With the 55 he can only log 605 miles in the same eleven hour day. Here's the real numbers, within five days he gets another full day driving in at 70 mph. You don't think that affects rates?
If a driver drives 100,000 miles in a year, he is on the road at 55 mph, 390 hours more than at 70. Thats 7 1/2 hours a week more time spent on the highway, conjesting traffic. Thats over 35 more sleep times that must be taken with the fuel burned, expenses for stops and meals. Sounds like it is about a month of work lost per year.
"The argument about saving time is nonsense" yep, but only because it is not your money, but in the end it is, you just don't know it.
A 700 mile trip at 70 mph would take 10 hours. In the same ten hours at 55 mph you would only drive 550 miles. That's not significant?
Slow down to 45 and you will have gas running out of the tank
Big truck only gets six miles a gallon on a good day. On my truck, doing only 50 will give a mileage help of about 1 1/2 mpg as compared to 75. About the best I can do is just under 70, like you see most trucks driving, about 68.If you are an independant, fuel is not necessarily the most cost driven consideration. Time usually wins out. Several hours difference to California generally means a day sooner for the reload and therefore much more money to pay the bills.
You said you don't see a difference, how bout this.... A driver can log a maximum of 770 miles in an 11 hour day. With the 55 he can only log 605 miles in the same eleven hour day. Here's the real numbers, within five days he gets another full day driving in at 70 mph. You don't think that affects rates?
If a driver drives 100,000 miles in a year, he is on the road at 55 mph, 390 hours more than at 70. Thats 7 1/2 hours a week more time spent on the highway, conjesting traffic. Thats over 35 more sleep times that must be taken with the fuel burned, expenses for stops and meals. Sounds like it is about a month of work lost per year.
"The argument about saving time is nonsense" yep, but only because it is not your money, but in the end it is, you just don't know it.
So, how many times will you need to refuel at 70 mph vs me at 65 mph? Or at 55 mph?
At 65 my CTD gets 18.8 mpg and at 55 it gets 21.5 mpg. Pulling the horse trailer fully loaded (16000# max) I'd get 14.5 @ 65 and 17.0 @ 55. With a 110 gal combined tank, I stop on halfies. Let's see, with 55 gal x 14.5 mpg = 797.5 and that's being conservative about it. That's doing your 605 miles a day.
When I was running out west, the class 7 I drove at best got 6.8 mpg @ 55 mph. With 300 combined gallons of fuel, filling on halfies used to cost me $188. When our state bumped the speed limit to 75 mph, I got maybe 4.5 mpg. Today it would cost me $329. It just ain't worth it anymore!
06-02-2004, 07:59 PM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tidewater Virginia
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I may be an exception on MPG but I credit my great milage to (1) gentle driving - abundance of Virginia Troopers make this an incentive (2) driving a 2X4 instead of a 4X4 (3) not using big knobby off-the-road tires and (4) I have a tonneau cover over the short bed which reduces air drag. I routinely average 25 MPG on the highway.
06-02-2004, 08:08 PM
#20
Registered User
Interesting, I was not aware that there was a question. I reread it and got a headache. What is a halfie or whatever? No matter, the speed limits and EPA regulations have to be set to accomodate the commercial traffic. Casual traffic that does not have a destination time is irrevelant in that they can go as fast or slow as they want.
Again I don't know what your question was but I get 12 and sometimes better at 30,000 and 70 plus, generally 72 or 73. I can pick it up to 13 by slowing to 50 or 55, not worth it. I run on the stock tank and get around 360 miles at fill time.
Hope your satisfied, I have no more "insults" you called them, you are thin skinned. I explained in simple language how the lowering of the speed limit causes much lower pay and hence higher consumer products, you countered by saying that you did not need to get there fast. Oh well, Bad day on the computer, don't need it. Bill, hit the off switch, bye.
Again I don't know what your question was but I get 12 and sometimes better at 30,000 and 70 plus, generally 72 or 73. I can pick it up to 13 by slowing to 50 or 55, not worth it. I run on the stock tank and get around 360 miles at fill time.
Hope your satisfied, I have no more "insults" you called them, you are thin skinned. I explained in simple language how the lowering of the speed limit causes much lower pay and hence higher consumer products, you countered by saying that you did not need to get there fast. Oh well, Bad day on the computer, don't need it. Bill, hit the off switch, bye.
06-03-2004, 06:29 PM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lower MPH limits increase wrecks
When speed limits were raised from 55 to 70, the rush hour traffic jam on the freeways I travel shortened considerably. Traffic accidents were reduced also. Recently the speed limits were reduced to 55 again in the metro area and the traffic jams grew again. Now we have gone back up to 65 and things have improved a little again, but traffic seems heavier than when the limit was 70.
Most people didn't obey the 55 limits, but traffic increased anyway as some did and many people slowed slightly. Speed limits should be set for safety and not political or revenue reasons.
The EPA reasons for reduced limits are baloney also. So, I put out slightly less emissions at 55, my typical runs of 30 miles in town took 15 to 20 minutes longer one way. I was running my engine 30 to 40 minutes longer every trip I made.
Most people didn't obey the 55 limits, but traffic increased anyway as some did and many people slowed slightly. Speed limits should be set for safety and not political or revenue reasons.
The EPA reasons for reduced limits are baloney also. So, I put out slightly less emissions at 55, my typical runs of 30 miles in town took 15 to 20 minutes longer one way. I was running my engine 30 to 40 minutes longer every trip I made.
06-03-2004, 07:02 PM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason speed limits haven't been lowered again is that the last time that idea was tried it failed miserably. As has been mentioned, speed limits should be set based on safety and other sound traffic engineering principles, not politics, otherwise all you do is create scofflaws, burden the police with unnecessary enforcement, and ultimately reduce safety. If anyone wants to drive a little under the speed limit to save fuel then by all means feel free to do so... but also please try to stay the hell out of my way... 
06-23-2004, 09:52 PM
#24
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Grayslake, IL
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Googleing around for other stuff, I found this. FYI:
http://www.cumberland.cummins.com/na...e/vol4_no4.pdf
http://www.cumberland.cummins.com/na...e/vol4_no4.pdf
06-25-2004, 01:08 AM
#25
Registered User
Give me a break! WHAT A STUPID ARGUMENT! If you want to drive faster than another, who cares? As long as your not putting anyone else in danger and following the speed laws. As for the time issue, I'll drive a little faster to get home, or where else I have to go, if it gets me there quicker since anyway you look at its my money and what do you care how much money I dump in my tank? I really dont think anyone can argue the why waste gas/fuel issue! How many of you make sure you are using ONLY the light in the room your in at home? Why waste electricity? How many of your like your house warmer in the winter or cooler in the summer by running your heater/AC or burning more wood? Why waste more electricity or LP or NG or more trees? Does anyone actually know how they get electricity or for that matter how long the reserve is for natural gas is? Everyone on seems to care about the BIG CRUDE OIL issue. Why I think you all should not use your AC in your truck cause that uses around 1 MPG, too. LAME, LAME, LAME! Off to a better topic!
06-25-2004, 08:45 AM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: New Meadows, Idaho
Posts: 2,148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by induchman
SWIFT and Wally World trucks are already doing 65 and it doesn't seem to be affecting their deliveries. O'course SWIFT stands for Slowly Weaving in Fast Traffic.
The argument about saving time is nonsense. The difference 70 vs 65 is less than five minutes vs 55 which is more than five minutes. I used to have a comparison chart about this. It was hardly worth the effort to drive that fast. I once figured out that for every five miles over 55 I lost six miles per gallon.
SWIFT and Wally World trucks are already doing 65 and it doesn't seem to be affecting their deliveries. O'course SWIFT stands for Slowly Weaving in Fast Traffic.
The argument about saving time is nonsense. The difference 70 vs 65 is less than five minutes vs 55 which is more than five minutes. I used to have a comparison chart about this. It was hardly worth the effort to drive that fast. I once figured out that for every five miles over 55 I lost six miles per gallon.
06-25-2004, 01:37 PM
#27
Registered User
Originally posted by Mopar1973man
"Slow Woman In Fast Traffic" - I don't see a single swift truck out here running faster than 55-58 MPH somedays even slower...
"Slow Woman In Fast Traffic" - I don't see a single swift truck out here running faster than 55-58 MPH somedays even slower...
07-01-2004, 09:42 AM
#28
DTR's Night Watchman & Poet Laureate
At 65 my CTD gets 18.8 mpg and at 55 it gets 21.5 mpg. Pulling the horse trailer fully loaded (16000# max) I'd get 14.5 @ 65 and 17.0 @ 55.
Geez........ What kinda horses you haulin? Percherons?
With my 28 ft gooseneck with (4) 1200 lb Quarter horses and all associated gear, my 91 1ton single rear wheel 4X4 is averaging 23mpg hwy. Empty I am gettting about 25..........totaly unmodified...
Geez........ What kinda horses you haulin? Percherons?
With my 28 ft gooseneck with (4) 1200 lb Quarter horses and all associated gear, my 91 1ton single rear wheel 4X4 is averaging 23mpg hwy. Empty I am gettting about 25..........totaly unmodified...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
hellotbone
Suggestions, Comments and Site Questions
11
08-06-2003 05:29 PM