Truck firms spend hundreds of hours and thosands of pounds Streamlining there trucks,
Trying to get anouther .1 of a mile more out of a gallon of diesel.
Then some idiot comes allong and puts allsorts of cr-p allover the top and front.
Has anyone (with any sense) done a serios study of this
Who cares, a truck ain’t a truck if it hasn’t got a Michelin Man sitting on top of each mirror. 
Our company spends lot of money on new trucks and keeping them in tip top order and giving us fuel economy help etc etc and then employ planners who give us ridiculous runs and collections, we quite often criss cross each other in our working day. Sorry getting off subject a little there.
the law as it stands is one of the worst contributers to high fuel consumption.
what’s better for fuel consumption? a flat fronted cab? or a streamlined cab?
the law restricts overall length, rather than just trailer length. so until this changes, we will have to keep flat fronted cabs, rather than streamlined, ecconomical trucks.
Or carry a couple less pallets :X
I won’t pretend to have any great understanding of aerodynamics although I’ve often read that they aren’t a great factor until you start to exceed 50mph.
Harry Monk:
I won’t pretend to have any great understanding of aerodynamics although I’ve often read that they aren’t a great factor until you start to exceed 50mph.
that’s tesco out of the experiment then.
I’ve worked for at least two firms running motors with and without light bars etc, and the mpgs are no different. Mpg is all down to the driver and the load. Light bars don’t come into it
OVLOV JAY:
I’ve worked for at least two firms running motors with and without light bars etc, and the mpgs are no different. Mpg is all down to the driver and the load. Light bars don’t come into it
I’d agree driving style is the biggest factor.
Usually toddle along to work (in my car) sticking to limits not overrevving keeping momentum going etc, takes 40 minutes to get there. Forgot digi card and had to fly home to get it and get back quick as poss. Accelerating hard, wasting energy by braking, speeding, saved ten minutes on the trip time (big wow, a whole ten minutes) and used as much diesel as I would for two days worth of commuting in one round-trip.
I believe the two major factors are the weight of the load and the hilliness of the terrain. Coming back from Castellion with a full load of ceramics my Volvo dashboard display would often be showing fuel consumption of 1.2mpg for hill climbs of maybe 10-15 miles, and you don’t get it back on the downhill stretch.
I once had a conversation with an engineer from a car manufacturer, who despaired that the company spent millions on wind tunnel testing etc only for boy racers to stick massive spoilers on the back because they “improve performance”.
plannerman:
I once had a conversation with an engineer from a car manufacturer, who despaired that the company spent millions on wind tunnel testing etc only for boy racers to stick massive spoilers on the back because they “improve performance”.
Not sure the boy racers are really that botherd about the proformance of there 1.2 litre corsa , most just do it for the looks
I followed a trailer that was crabbing fairly well the other day, that can’t be doing anything for fuel consumption or tyre wear!.
Weather conditions also, especially high winds.
Trailers with all the extra bodywork seem to use the same fuel as the old ones, and the inept love to rip lumps out of them costing more in the long run.
i agree with the weather conditions being a major factor.
just think. you are driving through thick fog. you realise that you are using an unusual amount of fuel due to the friction created by the density of all this fog. you switch on your ten million candle power spot lamps, and hey presto, the fog starts to disipate due to the heat, and you save the company another 9p for the year. 
Don’t forget the extra load on the alternator to power those mega watt lights. Never mind I’ll ask the boss to fit a wind turbine on the roof to relieve the burden.
jaydee:
:?:
Trying to get anouther .1 of a mile more out of a gallon of diesel.
Then some idiot comes allong and puts allsorts of cr-p allover the top and front.
Has anyone (with any sense) done a serios study of this
Dont think there is much Fuel Savings,as you have to pull the more on weight,which affects your Fuel.consumtion
starfighter:
OVLOV JAY:
I’ve worked for at least two firms running motors with and without light bars etc, and the mpgs are no different. Mpg is all down to the driver and the load. Light bars don’t come into itI’d agree driving style is the biggest factor.
Usually toddle along to work (in my car) sticking to limits not overrevving keeping momentum going etc, takes 40 minutes to get there. Forgot digi card and had to fly home to get it and get back quick as poss. Accelerating hard, wasting energy by braking, speeding, saved ten minutes on the trip time (big wow, a whole ten minutes) and used as much diesel as I would for two days worth of commuting in one round-trip.
I don’t agree 
Pay is the Main Factor 
You have to Motivate the Driver doing hard Work.driving the Wagon with Fuel-saving driving style.
Best you do that with sharing the saving with him/her
I think the bottom line is all Trucks are as aero-dynamic as a house brick, tear drop trailers etc etc waste of money and they look ugly!!! All the “Aero-dynamics” in the world are not going to get you better fuel sitting on the M25. As a previous poster said in most cases it is down to the Driver
Yep.
i would open the Restriction of Lenght to larger Trailers and no restriction on the Unit.
I would let it decide the Company which trailer lenght,but would let the Company pay all Costs if Lorry get stuck,and no Fine to the Driver,as long as he didnt take by his decission a longer Trailer as possible.
A Streamline Conventional could help saving Fuel. Especially on long Distance.
Would also help Two-Man Crews with Space.
On the other Hand does it not make much Sence to invest lots of Money for staying at DC’s or Shops