Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It varies greatly from truck to truck depending on the load weight hauled and terrain operated on.

You are listing a B 67 as your truck.. Bob-tailing to shows I would hazard a guess of 10 to  12 MPG????

In ANY situation your fuel mileage will depend a lot on how heavy your right toe is!!!!!  Be EASY AND GENTLE!!!!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Brocky

I know your asking about a B model but I found this in an article about the Mh cabover 

5C02ADEB-772A-4D32-9699-81AD752BA838.jpeg.a3bb37f5e412945e65114ce0e7679071.jpeg

7.7 Is great by todays standards, but in an 80s cabover it is incredible! A pyrometer is a big help when learning how to drive efficiently if your truck has one. 

  • Like 1

Probably doesn’t answer(YOUR) question , but I thought I’d throw this out there my Peterbilt with triple trailers flat ground it gets between six and seven pull a hill it goes right down to 2.6 ha ha at least that’s what the dashboard says 

if you’re looking for an average on the job, it’s usually between five and six… like these guys said, and all the depends on what you’re doing with it pretty much. Bob

320 coolpower, even pulling a road train at max load it is never worse tuan 4.5 MPG

Running along empty with the float on is 7 plus, single trailer fully loaded is 6 - 6.5 MPG

Speed and wind resistance are the killers, no faster than 60 MPH for good economy, thats why in the fuel crisis days of the 70s the limit in the U.S. was 55 MPH I believe and a little bit slower here

 

Paul 

  • Like 1
  • Like 1

glad it's posted as a "fun question" ! no offence can't see an acuate answer without more specifics.  same as a question of "how drunk can I get with only half bottle of bourbon ?? 😱😂

  • Haha 1

Jim Beam??  Kentucky  Bourbon from the State's, Paul???    You make me proud...  I know Jim Beam personally.  :) 

  • Like 1

I dunno if the same research was done in the fuel crisis of the 70's in the U.S. as was done in Australia 

But with out a doubt the single biggest factor for fuel economy was speed

There were graphs and charts and all types of things

To go from 55 - 65 took nearly twice the power just to overcome wind resistance 

So I wonder just how fuel efficient trucks of today would be driven at 55

50 - 55 was little change

Under 50 wind resistance made little difference 

Personally I find it much easier on me to drive a little slower, a lot more time to react to things and Im not on edge watching the speed and the cops and well trying to pass people all the time

And I always see the same vehicle's along the road that broke sound barrier passing me

 

Paul

  • Like 2
7 hours ago, JoeH said:

+1 on 55 mph. If you've ever ridden a motorcycle on the highway then you know this first hand. Wind resistance on your body is negligible up to 55 mph, start getting above that and your arms start getting a workout to keep you in the saddle.

I used to ride. We had to stay overnight halfway through day. The wind was blowing too hard going from San Diego to Reno.

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...