Jump to content

Fuel milage


Recommended Posts

I agree, what you're pulling and where you run.

If all things were equal I personally think the mileage difference would be negligible.

"OPERTUNITY IS MISSED BY MOST PEOPLE BECAUSE IT IS DRESSED IN OVERALLS AND LOOKS LIKE WORK"  Thomas Edison

 “Life’s journey is not to arrive at the grave safely, in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting ‘Holy shit, what a ride!’

P.T.CHESHIRE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you were pulling the same load, on the same terrain, in the same climate.....

The difference would be in the decimals of fuel mileage loss. CHU would be less efficient by design but barely noticeable in the grand scheme of things. The CXU and CHU have a slightly different Tare weight and the sleekness of the CXU gives it a slight advantage in cutting through the wind. I will throw a bullshit number out there of .2 to.3 mpg loss on a CHU. We were actually looking into the same thing months ago as we like the classic look of the CHN and so do our drivers. It's a small difference you may not even notice. An inexperienced driver can cost you more then that in fuel mileage just shifting wrong or idling too much.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgot to add 2 things...

1- the CHU is $4500 (CDN) more then the standard spec CXU.

This could be because the standard engine in the CHU is an MP8 and the CXU is an MP7.

2- the 22" of set forward wheelbase means 22" more frame needed to accomodate the set forward axle. Which is more Tare weight then a CXU.

Just thought I would add these points to the debate. I'm still torn over which one we would order next. We like to keep our cross border trucks at about 222" wheelbase. The CHU can't be any shorter then a 230". Which means more weight. With twin 142 gallon tanks on our CXU's and being already maxed on our tare with full tanks, I suspect a CHU would push us over.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ran our Mdrive last Thursday 280 miles grossing 79K# pulling a flat hauling block then shingles, with about 100 total miles empty 5.25 mpg have to admit I had my foot in it unintentionally. Damn things is so quiet and smooth you just don't notice that you are cooking along pretty good.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what I wad thinking. Less then .5 mpg. I see guys post on here that they are hearing guys pulling van trailers with MP8 and Mdrive getting 8mpg. I figure they are the full aero package, but I still don't believe it.

I would think you would get better Storkmack pulling a skateboard. I was getting high 5's to low 6's pulling the tank in the fall with the new truck. Which I still can't believe my old CH with 4.17's got better mpg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should ask if the 8mpg is in US Gallons or Imperial Gallons as are used in Canada.

We get 8.5Mpg imperial gallons. Keep in mind 1 US gallon is 0.8 imperial gallons so it may be where you see a difference. If our Pinnacles are getting 8mpg (imperial) they are getting roughly 7mpg (US). Maybe that helps?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ran our Mdrive last Thursday 280 miles grossing 79K# pulling a flat hauling block then shingles, with about 100 total miles empty 5.25 mpg have to admit I had my foot in it unintentionally. Damn things is so quiet and smooth you just don't notice that you are cooking along pretty good.

Finally somebody that is honest about fuel mileage and not just bragging that they get 6-7 mpg hauling rock at quarries with stop and go traffic.

Slow and Steady Wins the Race!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should ask if the 8mpg is in US Gallons or Imperial Gallons as are used in Canada.

We get 8.5Mpg imperial gallons. Keep in mind 1 US gallon is 0.8 imperial gallons so it may be where you see a difference. If our Pinnacles are getting 8mpg (imperial) they are getting roughly 7mpg (US). Maybe that helps?

I'm guessing it's US gallons, cause I know they were talking about Tyson Foods trucks on the one thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We haul right to the 80,000lbs gros max and cant even fill the fuel tanks half the time running into the US for our tandem/tandem units.

If they are getting those kind of US fuel mileage numbers they are hauling loads of sailboat fuel. (AIR) or something close to it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you can get a chu little under 230 wb if you play with tank size and sleeper size. Canada has weird wb laws for sure those Pete 379 and 389 up there set up on 244" wb look terrible

Engineering at Macungie sent up warning flags when we discussed shorter then 230" wheelbase. We can order it but Mack has already deemed it as abnormal. LOL.

If we go with a CHU in the future we have come down to about a 227" wheelbase for our needs and spreads required.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had the pleasure of working for a company where fuel milage was nothing more than a game of who could put the most amount of $$ into the tanks.

The "best" I ever did was just over $1400. That was with a truck that could carry 300 usable gallons on the tractor and 35 for the trailer. This was back in 2007? when fuel was at $5 a gallon. We fuled up in northern Cal or Southern Oragon. The 5 of us pulled up and dropped about 7 grand at a little ma and pop gas station. the owner was smiling and We all got a free soda and sandwich for the road... LOL

That being said we were sponcered by Texaco, and they paid the fuel bills no questions asked. Those trucks had 550 cats and good tires. They had a lifetime avg of 5.0 MPG (good times)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fuel report for today for me too : 95 Rd688s, E7 350, pump turned wide up, bigger injectors, 460 turbo, 4.42 rears 9 speed, getting to 40 pounds of boost at times but holding it around 30-35 all day. Getting on it after 35-40mph wide open when empty.

6 loads of gravel. 172 miles and 31.9 gallons used. =5.44 MPG

  • Like 1

Slow and Steady Wins the Race!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well, I actually had the truck out today. Hauled a dry van load from Sycamore IL to Woodridge IL. Was mostly on the highway and had cruise set at 58mph. I was about 76,000-77,00 gross. Then returned empty.

113 miles 21.85 gal for 5.17mpg.

It was a little windy and I still had winter blend #2 diesel in the tanks.

And I just got the truck back from the shop and had the rack run so it should be at its prime efficiency.

Was hoping for a little better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5.17 is not that great for mostly highway.

I was getting 5.5-6.25 with a e7 350 in a CH pulling lowboy. Days I was doing all highway I was at 6.0 easy.

I know. My old '98 would have done much better. I know the new emmisions trucks got worse MPG then the old ones, but I thought when they added the SCR it was suppose to bring up. And I was driving at a decent speed. Now I have hard some people deleting the EGR, DPF and SCR and getting 1-1.5MPG better. I might be thinking about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

01 cx613 pulling gas can. ran down in Tn lots of 2 lane winding hilly rd then came back empty to In reloaded and delivered in IL rural 2 and four lanes and lots of stop lights bounced 45 mile back home and made 7.5 mpg that's grossed out + with Rochester stage 2 and their turbo kit. That's about its best average but always will make 7 no matter where I run.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...