this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2024
706 points (95.1% liked)

People Twitter

5268 readers
782 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a tweet or similar
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cRazi_man@lemm.ee 32 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Fuel efficiency will even be better in the slip stream.

[–] PrimeErective@startrek.website 75 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Unfortunately, to get the benefit of the slip steam, you gotta be pretty close to the back of the truck. If you have space for good reaction time, you're probably too far back

[–] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 26 points 4 months ago (1 children)

This is correct, especially at lower speeds. Greater fuel efficiency would come from lower wind and drivetrain resistance and use of a more efficient range of the motor’s powerband.

Most vehicles are geared for optimal speed to fuel consumption around 55-65 mph (90-100 kph) not 70+ mph (110+ kph). So just going a bit under the speed limit can have a significant impact on fuel consumption.

[–] pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Also, truckers drive efficiently, so just following what they do will save gas.

But yeah, I don't go over 65mph and I end up with 7-10mpg over my highway rating.

[–] psud@aussie.zone 1 points 4 months ago

This has been tested. You still get a reasonable benefit 3 seconds behind; you get practically nothing 6 seconds behind