air tabs

I installed them on our T28 Bounder. Was able to match the tan paint of the basement with a good spray paint.

Truck passing impact was an improvement. Still got shoved around, but much less white knuckle.

Strong shifting direction winds was even more of an improvement of more comfortable driving.

Toad, rear of coach, including rear camera stay cleaner. (In rain, the camera used to be next to useless, Airtabs helped that quite a bit.)

I did not buy it for MPG improvement. But, our MPG did go up just about a 1/2 MPG over several thousand miles. Could have just been the luck of the draw. But I went back and checked three trips to the same location before, against two trips after the Airtabs installed. The first three were with a 1/4 MPG of each other average. The last two were almost exactly the same, and showed just under 1/2 MPG improvement. Not a controlled test.

This handling improvement was the cheapest one that I made for the F53 chassis. I think it really helps for those with long overhang rear ends.

Our new coach is 40' with tags, and I do not feel the trucks and so far the winds do not disturb it like the smaller T28 Bounder. But, for just the cleaner rear end and toad, I believe when we have some scars touched up on this coach, I'll have some airtabs painted to match the side. I have some left over from the Bounder install, and I did not think about just trying them on the roof until then like Brett did. Will see if I have enough to do so.

Airtabs threads always seem to be the same. People who have had them, seem to see the positives associated to using them. Then there always seems to be posters that have never used them - that say they do not good. (Not this thread, but others over the years have claimed they are snake oil, and questioned the intelligence of us weaker minded members that have tried them with positive results:)!)

IMO - If all you want is a cleaner back end and toad, Airtabs will help. If you have a coach that is impacted by passing trucks and shifting winds, Airtabs will help. And if you really do get a bit better MPG, great. If not, still OK.

Last thought, is they are so inexpensive - put them on and try them. If you don't see a benefit for your rig, take a plastic putty knife and remove them. A bit of adhesive remover and you have zero remaining Airtabs:)!

Best to all, be safe, have fun,
Smitty

I have read the NASA document and I am saddened.

"Smoothing the airflow results in markedly improved fuel economy without compromise to design utility, ..."

a small percentage is "markedly improved fuel economy" :h

"Perhaps most importantly, drivers of vehicles fitted with Airtabs have reported improved stability and handling and dramatically reduced fishtailing of trailers..."

NASA's wording here is very tricky. NASA does not say air tabs improves stability they simply regurgitate claims by unknown drivers with no proof or even logic IMO.

Coaches are blown side ways by winds acting on the entire side of the coach yet air tabs are only on a small portion of the rear of the coach. Air tabs do not even have a marked effect on airflow and fuel economy as the air leaves the back end of the rig, although they do seem to improve fuel economy by some small percentage.

I find it rather funny that a small positive change in air flow as the air leaves the tail end of the rig is being attributed for reducing the effect of side winds that blow our rigs around. :h

wny_pat wrote:
My favorite quote:

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation."

Herbert Spencer - (27 April 1820 – 8 December 1903) was an English philosopher, biologist, sociologist, and prominent classical liberal political theorist of the Victorian era. We would still be living in the dark ages were it not for thinkers like him.

Of course, he installed them on his carriage and it eliminated the push from passing wagons.LOL

tony lee wrote:

I also am familiar with vortex generators since they were installed on two of the planes that I owned and are present on most commercial planes in service toady. Now I'm not sure that any student in a high school class has my flying experience, or racing various vehicles at high speed, but knock yourself out finding one that does. In the meantime, hang on to your pennies.

Ah yes, the vortex generators on planes argument. Coming from a plane owner and car racer no less. If VGs placed in critical areas of the high speed airflow over smoothly contoured surfaces make an improvement because it stops the airflow separating from the wing or flap surface, then of course sticking dozens of them on the extreme back end of a slow moving box will do wonders.
Show me a plane that has them plastered all over the extreme trailing edges of the wing or empennage structure and then maybe we can extend that reasoning to sticking them on the extreme rear of a 60' vehicle

The main thrust of the marketing hype remains vastly improved fuel consumption (yes 4% (if what is being reported is correct) IS a vast improvement) and when you look at what has been done on trucks to improve the aspect ratio - much more aerodynamic fronts, Overcab structures, very small gaps between tractor and trailers and the huge air walls fitted under trailers - and then get told that a few bits of plastic stuck right on the back are going to add another dramatic improvement in fuel use. Sure.

Still, despite a lot of effort put in to debunking such claims, the world is still full of all sorts of imaginative ways to separate people from their money and one constantly-booming sector is 1001 ways to improve your fuel economy and boost the power level, or more usually both economy and power at the same time - or your money back (less P&H) within 14 days.

By that companys own admission they have no way to ACTUALLY determine that the tabs do anything for a motorhome in the handling category...NOR in the fuel economy category. Its all in the warm and fussy feeling is where they excel to whatever extent they might.

And if such devices assist aircraft so well...why havent I seen them on the wings of F16's and F18's...etc.???

Buy and install what you want because I sure wont put the stupid looking things on my own RV...but you're free to slap any amount on your own you wish!

My favorite quote:

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation."

Herbert Spencer - (27 April 1820 – 8 December 1903) was an English philosopher, biologist, sociologist, and prominent classical liberal political theorist of the Victorian era. We would still be living in the dark ages were it not for thinkers like him.

tony lee wrote:

I also am familiar with vortex generators since they were installed on two of the planes that I owned and are present on most commercial planes in service toady. Now I'm not sure that any student in a high school class has my flying experience, or racing various vehicles at high speed, but knock yourself out finding one that does. In the meantime, hang on to your pennies.

Ah yes, the vortex generators on planes argument. Coming from a plane owner and car racer no less. If VGs placed in critical areas of the high speed airflow over smoothly contoured surfaces make an improvement because it stops the airflow separating from the wing or flap surface, then of course sticking dozens of them on the extreme back end of a slow moving box will do wonders.
Show me a plane that has them plastered all over the extreme trailing edges of the wing or empennage structure and then maybe we can extend that reasoning to sticking them on the extreme rear of a 60' vehicle

The main thrust of the marketing hype remains vastly improved fuel consumption (yes 4% (if what is being reported is correct) IS a vast improvement) and when you look at what has been done on trucks to improve the aspect ratio - much more aerodynamic fronts, Overcab structures, very small gaps between tractor and trailers and the huge air walls fitted under trailers - and then get told that a few bits of plastic stuck right on the back are going to add another dramatic improvement in fuel use. Sure.

Still, despite a lot of effort put in to debunking such claims, the world is still full of all sorts of imaginative ways to separate people from their money and one constantly-booming sector is 1001 ways to improve your fuel economy and boost the power level, or more usually both economy and power at the same time - or your money back (less P&H) within 14 days.

If I were you, I wouldn't buy them.
Sorry to pop your bubble, but if you look at my very first post, I said I DO NOT care about fuel economy and I made no claims as to whether or not AirTabs improve the mileage. :B

I also am familiar with vortex generators since they were installed on two of the planes that I owned and are present on most commercial planes in service toady. Now I'm not sure that any student in a high school class has my flying experience, or racing various vehicles at high speed, but knock yourself out finding one that does. In the meantime, hang on to your pennies.

Ah yes, the vortex generators on planes argument. Coming from a plane owner and car racer no less. If VGs placed in critical areas of the high speed airflow over smoothly contoured surfaces make an improvement because it stops the airflow separating from the wing or flap surface, then of course sticking dozens of them on the extreme back end of a slow moving box will do wonders.
Show me a plane that has them plastered all over the extreme trailing edges of the wing or empennage structure and then maybe we can extend that reasoning to sticking them on the extreme rear of a 60' vehicle

The main thrust of the marketing hype remains vastly improved fuel consumption (yes 4% (if what is being reported is correct) IS a vast improvement) and when you look at what has been done on trucks to improve the aspect ratio - much more aerodynamic fronts, Overcab structures, very small gaps between tractor and trailers and the huge air walls fitted under trailers - and then get told that a few bits of plastic stuck right on the back are going to add another dramatic improvement in fuel use. Sure.

Still, despite a lot of effort put in to debunking such claims, the world is still full of all sorts of imaginative ways to separate people from their money and one constantly-booming sector is 1001 ways to improve your fuel economy and boost the power level, or more usually both economy and power at the same time - or your money back (less P&H) within 14 days.

We installed Air Tabs several years ago and they did as advertised. The rig is more stable in gusting side winds and almost no buffeting from trucks.

I did notice a reduction in the cloud of spray generated in wet conditions and a cleaner toad as a result. It is apparent that there was a reduction in the turbulent air behind the rig. There was a down side for us, the rear view camera is now in a smother air flow area so the camera lens now quickly becomes wet during the rain.

Quantifying the mpg gains is difficult, however there does seem to be an improvement of 1/2 mpg or less.

We installed the Air Tabs for improved stability, so any fuel improvement issues are appreciated but secondary.

rgatijnet1 wrote:

I guess you really haven't gone to their website and see that these have undergone wind tunnel tests and you have not read the scientific study done by NASA. NASA

You are right, there may be some bias but for a product that is so cheap, there is not much reason for any bias. I spent hundreds of dollars on Bilstein shocks for my coach, If you read any of my posts, you would have known that I said that I yanked them off in a few weeks and replaced them with Koni FSD shocks. I showed no bias towards Bilstein shocks, even tho they cost four times as much as the AirTabs. I also yanked out my Flexsteel Captains seats, because I felt they were garbage. To replace them, I spent close to $2000 for a different brand. Yep, I could have shown bias and raved about the Flexsteel seats and the Bilstein shocks, but I did not. The facts are that I can afford to try something, and trash it if it doesn't work. I do not hang on to something that does not suit my needs. As the persons on this forum, that I gave my "new" Bilstein shocks, or my Flexsteel seats can attest, I just gave away those failed products for free. Some people may hang on to something and rave about it because they are financially stuck with your choice, but I am not. I can afford to replace anything that doesn't suit my needs and will let others know why I got rid of a product, or why I kept a product.
I would not have put them on the second coach if they did not work on the first coach. I also am familiar with vortex generators since they were installed on two of the planes that I owned and are present on most commercial planes in service toady. Now I'm not sure that any student in a high school class has my flying experience, or racing various vehicles at high speed, but knock yourself out finding one that does. In the meantime, hang on to your pennies.

As far as why EVERYONE doesn't use them......why doesn't everyone have a DP, or a Prevost? Some people are always skeptical of something they do not understand and rather than spend a few bucks to find out, they remain ignorant and afraid to try something new. Their favorite saying is "but we have always done it that way". :B

Good post. The quoted article is long and it shows that the theory about vortex generators is valid, but it does not provide numbers for fuel saving of air tabs. Here is an article from the air tab website showing controlled experiments to determine fuel savings for air tabs. There are some savings, about 1.6%. The handling is another thing and it is qualitative and subjective. If your rig handles well already as mine did then air tabs may not help much. I felt that there was some improvement in stability. The argument that air tabs would be universal if their claims are true should be viewed in the perspective of how long it took the trucking industry to introduce the streamlining that you now see. In 1970 you might argue that truck streamlining doesn't matter and if it did matter all the trucks would have it.

CLefor wrote:

rgatijnet1 wrote:

DanTheRVMan wrote:
Air tabs is now claiming 4% better fuel economy. If my memory serves me correctly they use to claim 2%.

I have friends I worked with in aerospace that are aerodynamic experts running fluid dynamic programs and wind tunnel tests regularly so I spoke with them.

Their opinion was there were various ways to aerodynamically gain a small 1 to 3% improvement in fuel economy so maybe airtabs did or maybe they did not. They thought this was plausible.

Dirt accumulating would be affected by airflow and could be better or worse and they had no comment on these claims.




Improved handling due to winds, passing trucks, etc. seemed like people were imagining an improvement in their opinion. Various devices that had minor improvement in fuel economy would have no perceptible improvement in handling in their opinion. They basically attributed these claims to the placebo affect it had on the driver making them believe things were better.

Any opinion by someone that has not used the product is worthless. Kinda makes you wonder why they would even give their analysis on something they have no personal knowledge of, but they always do.

WOW!! In your 4,387 post you have never commented on a post that you. "give their analysis on something they have no personal knowledge of" That pretty good.

I have not used them, But if they were so good wouldn't ALL over the road truck have them on?

No, because those companies have "bean counters", much like you, who know nothing about that kind of stuff, let alone trucking. And they don't want to "waste" money to find out if it works. Often companies like Air Tab will come in and set up one or two trailers for those over the highway companies. But if those companies don't keep track of what those trailers are doing, it does not accomplish anything; and they don't have the manpower or time to keep track of those trailers with the Air Tabs. And that is why you don't see them on all the commercial van and reefer trailers out there.

And stop and think about this - a 3% increase in fuel mileage on a rig that only gets 7 mpg to begin with. And that mpg already varies with weight, wind resistance, tire types, road pavement and hills. It will be darn hard to determine a 3% increase in overall fuel mileage because of those factors. You will not see it overnight, but if it is there it will come out in the long run.