Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 05-19-2020, 09:58 PM   #21
Bus Crazy
 
CHEESE_WAGON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,152
Year: None
Coachwork: None
Chassis: None
Engine: None
Rated Cap: None
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazdconfsd View Post
In that bus it was ~65 was most of the time because the fuel savings wasn't worth the time savings. Did go up a bit if I kept it more 55mph, which makes sense with the wind resistance.

My parents went across country with my current one last year and it has cruise along with being diesel, but my dad said when it was ~45 on back roads he was getting a couple mpg more.
General rule, every one mile per hour over 55 is going to affect fuel economy by approximately 2%, especially with a flying brick, even with a diesel. Example, at 67 mph governed speeds pulling 45,000 lbs of freight, I got around 6.4 mpg with a 15-liter Detroit. Same truck, same load, same conditions, mpg increased to 6.9 by dropping speed to 63.

6.4 6.9 = 0.928, or, 6.4 1.08 = 6.9.

4 mph difference in speed = 8 % improvement in economy, thus proving the 1 mph = 2% rule.

Keep in mind, this is in reference to 80,000-lb trailer trucks with 15-liter engines, not a 12,000 pound school bus with a 6-liter engine. But I have noticed similar or better results even in my personal vehicle. At 68 mph, my 2.5-liter Camry averages 38.4 mpg. At 63, it averages 43.3. Roughly 12% better mpg, for 5 mph difference.

38.4 43.3 = 0.886, or 38.4 x 1.12 = 43.1 (43.08 rounded)

The same change makes 4% more of an improvement in a smaller vehicle with a smaller gasoline engine. I imagine this change would work out to about 3-4% increase in the right conditions, as school buses are characteristically geared lower to help the reduced power pull increased weight.

So a bus that gets 8-9 mpg at 65 mph, would likely get 9-10 mpg at 60 mph. I calculate this based on the 429 Ford gasser I previously owned getting about 6.5 at its governed speed of 68. A similar diesel rig would likely have gotten about 7.5 - 8.0 at the same governed speed. Your results may vary. But remember, the vast majority of skoolies were never meant for highway use.

3-4% may not seem like enough of a benefit for most people. But if you're driving across country, it adds up. For example:

Today's average US price for diesel was $2.41 / gallon.

2000 mile round trip at 8.5 mpg = 235.3 gallons.
At 9.5 mpg, the same 2000 miles uses 210.5 gallons.
That's 24.8 gallons less.
24.8 x 2.41 = $59.77 savings.

This is, of course, assuming that my 3-4% is uncannily accurate, which it may not be. It may well get 9% better, or 15% better. Smaller engines tend to use less fuel than larger ones highway cruising, while larger ones outshine smaller ones on back roads and hills.

While $60 may not seem like much for 2000 miles, this will likely translate to savings down the road through fewer and less expensive repairs from not stressing the engine as much. More speed translates to more heat generated, especially with turbo diesels, and automatic transmissions do NOT like heat. It kills them quicker. And for those with rear-engine pushers, keeping your rig running cool is already a challenge.

One of the major factors here is that running the speed limit with a larger, heavier vehicle such as a bus or a truck, you are more likely to have to make frequent adjustments to speed for traffic conditions and errant drivers to maintain a safe following distance (15 seconds for 18-wheelers, and I would say a solid 10-13 seconds for a school bus, maybe closer to the 15-seconds, as weight helps braking to a degree, and they aren't as heavy as an 18-wheeler).

But overall, I found that driving a few mph slower made a world of difference, because I could just set the cruise and let it eat. And steady cruising speed is critical to fuel economy, likely the major factor. But a lower cruising RPM is a good start. This, and driving conditions, driving habits, load, hills, even weather can affect fuel economy.

Also, diesels will generally do better than gassers on back roads and such because they have more torque at lower RPM. This means they don't have to work as hard as a comprable gas engine, therefore they are more efficient. You'll notice that a gas engine will run up a hill a lot easier with a comparable and doable load than a diesel will, but you'll notice also that they have to rev themselves silly to do it, burning more fuel.

This is primarily because diesels are big on torque in comparison to a gas engine being big on horsepower at a given RPM with comparable displacement and load. But while a gas engine has to rev up to make that horsepower, a diesel doesn't have to make the same RPM to make peak torque. Remember, torque is what does you're pulling, horsepower is simply how fast it falls. And these two factors, in comparison, factor greatly into fuel economy, as well as how you drive it.
__________________
"Cheese Wagon" <anomaly.va@gmail.com>

Former owner - 1989 Ford B700 64-pass Blue Bird (Rest In Peace, Cheese Wagon)
CHEESE_WAGON is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2020, 11:20 AM   #22
Almost There
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 95
Year: 2006
Coachwork: Collins
Chassis: Chevrolet Express 3500
Engine: Duramax
I get the math you're talking about, but also my ownership experience showed the difference being ~1mpg for every 10mph. Being that the 6L gas motor is known as fairly reliable, the trade offs didn't matter for a vehicle being driven a limited amount.
dazdconfsd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2020, 01:27 PM   #23
Bus Nut
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Greater Houston, Tx.
Posts: 587
For what it's worth, I seem to recall that after 2010, the 6.0 GM gasser, got better mpg than the earlier ones. Also remember that GM has/had a 6.2, (gas) which drinks a bit more than the 6.0
1olfart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2020, 02:58 PM   #24
Almost There
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 95
Year: 2006
Coachwork: Collins
Chassis: Chevrolet Express 3500
Engine: Duramax
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1olfart View Post
For what it's worth, I seem to recall that after 2010, the 6.0 GM gasser, got better mpg than the earlier ones. Also remember that GM has/had a 6.2, (gas) which drinks a bit more than the 6.0
6 speed transmission replaced the 4l80E in the gas cutaways for 2010 iirc
dazdconfsd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2020, 06:45 PM   #25
Bus Crazy
 
CHEESE_WAGON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,152
Year: None
Coachwork: None
Chassis: None
Engine: None
Rated Cap: None
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazdconfsd View Post
I get the math you're talking about, but also my ownership experience showed the difference being ~1mpg for every 10mph. Being that the 6L gas motor is known as fairly reliable, the trade offs didn't matter for a vehicle being driven a limited amount.
I get what you're saying, but every vehicle is different. Gas engine vs diesel is a different ball of wax. Making the same changes on a gas vehicle vs a diesel vehicle is going to be an apples-to-oranges comparison.
__________________
"Cheese Wagon" <anomaly.va@gmail.com>

Former owner - 1989 Ford B700 64-pass Blue Bird (Rest In Peace, Cheese Wagon)
CHEESE_WAGON is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
chevy, gas engine, gas vs diesel, short bus

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


» Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
×