Mileage change with smaller lighter trailer

My real world testing proves otherwise! Like I said I saved around $200 on my round trip to MB from Chicago. and the truck didn`t work as hard. just to test it on that trip I lowered the wing for 1 tank and my mileage dropped back to the 6.8mpg I was getting without it, and you could feel the wind drag much more. The wings work if set up properly. the key is placement and angle. I have it so the air is up and over the trailer before it curls back in front of it.

I have a friend that swears he gets 50% better fuel mileage with HHO he put on his car. Physics proves him wrong but he still swears that it works.

If this worked as good as you say it does almost every TV with a TT on the tail would have one on it. Spoilers and wings are nothing new or mysterious and neither are wind tunnels. If these things worked as well as you say yours does the spoiler market would be exploding and they would show wind tunnel tests of an independent tester. It's not, and they don't.

Just look at a few wind tunnel tests to see why they don't work as good as you say. Or you can go talk to a few people that own V nose trailers (way less head-on air than a conventional trailer and spoiler) and see what they say. Almost all will say they were disappointed with no mileage gain.

On a side note; those that own an Airstream trailer will pick up a bit of mileage over a conventional box TT. This makes sense because they are aerodynamic in both the front and rear of the trailer.

Lastly, Kenworth can only pick up 1 to 2% with their most advanced aero package. Look at the chart at 3:11. You claim what; 15% or so? Maybe they should put the brand spoiler you have on there rigs to pick up another 13% or so? :W