AMSOIL Diesel Fleet Fuel economy Study
AMSOIL synthetic drivetrain lubricants increased fuel
economy in short- to medium-haul trucking applications by 6.54 percent.
   
Overview
The rising cost of fuel continues to challenge the profitability of
delivery services, beverage companies, energy providers and similar
fleet operations. Administrators often must raise prices or apply
surcharges to remain competitive, resulting in strained customer
relations at best, lost business at worst.
Fleet managers have responded with
interest in products capable of increasing fuel economy. Even slight
increases result in significant cost reductions for fleets accumulating
tens of thousands of miles annually. Synthetic lubricants continue
gaining popularity due to their all-around increased performance
compared to conventional lubricants. They are recognized as a
cost-effective and legitimate contributor to increased fuel economy.
Objective
Determine, using
the SAE J1321 In-Service Fuel Consumption Test Procedure, whether or not
AMSOIL synthetic lubricants provide increased fuel economy compared to
conventional lubricants in short- to medium-haul diesel trucks.
Method
AMSOIL INC.
simultaneously compared fuel consumption in two short- to medium-haul
diesel trucks owned by Ford Motor Company and operated out of
Ford's Rawsonville, Mich. fleet maintenance facility. Testing
conducted in accordance with the SAE J1321 In-Service
Fuel Consumption Test Procedure. The procedure’s primary goal is to
eliminate all operating and environmental variables that may influence
fuel economy. One truck, designated the control vehicle, operated on
conventional lubricants throughout the procedure. The remaining truck,
designated the test vehicle, was tested using AMSOIL synthetic
lubricants.
The SAE J1321 test consist of a baseline segment and a test segment.
The baseline segment required five complete test runs
on a predetermined route representative of real-world driving
conditions. Following each run, the total fuel consumed in the test
vehicle was divided by the total fuel consumed in the control vehicle to
produce a Test/Control (T/C) ratio. The average of three T/C ratios
within a 2 percent range was used in calculating the final fuel
economy results. The baseline segment's main purpose was to determine
the baseline rate of fuel consumption in both the
test and control vehicles while operating with conventional lubricants.
The test segment was conducted according to the same
procedures, with the lone difference being installation of AMSOIL
synthetic lubricants in the test vehicle’s engine, transmission and
front and rear differentials. Test runs were again executed until
achieving three T/C ratios within a 2 percent range, with the average of
the three T/C ratios used in determining the final results of the study.
The average baseline and test segment T/C ratios were computed to
determine the percentage of fuel economy improvement.
Note: The Participation of the Ford Fleet does
not reflect an endorsement of AMSOIL INC. or of AMSOIL Products.
Study Vehicles
In a study of this kind, it
is critical the control and test vehicles exhibit specifications as
close to identical as possible. AMSOIL selected two vehicles from Ford's
Rawsonville fleet with the following specifications:
| |
Control & Test vehicle |
| Year |
2001 |
| make |
Kenworth |
| Model |
T800B |
| Engine
Make/Model |
Cummins N14 |
| Rated Power, hp |
370 |
| Rated Speed, rpm |
1,800 |
| Peak Torque,
lb. ft. |
1,450 |
| Peak Torque
Speed, rpm |
1,200 |
| Transmission
Make/Model |
Eaton Fuller
10-peed/Concept 2000 |
| Differential
Make/Model |
Meritor/RT-40-145 |
| Differential
Ratio |
3.73 |
| Tire Make/Model |
Goodyear/G316
LHT |
| Tire Size |
285/75R/24.5 |
| Tire Pressure,
psi |
100 |
The control vehicle’s gross vehicle weight (truck and
trailer) was 47,360 lbs., while the test vehicle weighed 47,200 lbs.
Both had approximately 750,000 miles on their odometers. Thorough
maintenance further equalized tire condition, brake condition and the
overall mechanical integrity of each truck. To further limit variables
that might affect fuel economy, each vehicle received new air and fuel
filters, equalized accessory settings and grease throughout their
chassis and driveshafts.
The trailers pulled by each vehicle demonstrated equally similar
specifications:
| |
Control & Test Trailers |
| Year |
2002 |
| Make |
Wabash |
| Model |
DX253 |
| Type |
Van |
| Height |
13’ 6” |
| Length |
53’ |
| Width |
102” |
| No. Axles |
2 |
| Tire Size |
295/75R/22.5 |
| Tire Pressure, psi |
100 |
| Empty Weight, lbs. |
16,200 |
Baseline Segment
Lubricant Selection
Prior to
initiating the baseline segment, both the control and test vehicles
underwent a thorough lubricant flushing procedure to remove the old
engine oil, transmission fluid and front and rear differential fluid.
The vehicles were first brought to normal operating temperatures via
on-road operation. After draining the fluids, the following Texaco-brand
conventional lubricants were installed due to their prevalence in the
industry and their use in Ford's fleet:
Engine: Texaco® URSA® Super Plus 15W-40
Transmission: Texaco Multigear EP 80W-90
Front and Rear Differentials: Texaco Multigear EP 80W-90
After installing the new lubricants, both vehicles were
brought to normal operating temperature and immediately drained of their
lubricants to ensure a complete flush. The same Texaco lubricants were
again installed. Finally, the transmission alone was drained and
refilled a third time following the same procedure to ensure a complete
fluid exchange. With both vehicles suitably prepared, the baseline
segment was initiated.
Driving
Conditions
To ensure
consistency, the control and test vehicles followed identical procedures
throughout the test. Each driver became familiar with the route and
demonstrated methodical driving habits. During the procedure, both
drivers achieved similar rpm prior to shifting and similar throttle
positioning during acceleration. Each travelled within two mph of the
posted speed limit at all times, engaged the cruise control at the same
position along the test route, braked appropriately and maintained an
appropriate following distance to eliminate aerodynamic interaction.
Test Route
A route
representative of real-world, short- to medium-haul operations beginning
and ending at Ford’s Rawsonville, Mich. fleet maintenance facility was
selected. The 40-mile route included approximately 3.4 miles of city
driving and 36.6 miles of highway driving, with vehicle test speeds of
30 mph in the city and 60 mph on the highway. The route was designed to
limit the instances of interrupted test speeds due to local traffic.
The first baseline test run began with an appropriate
warm-up period, after which both trucks were refueled from the same pump
to ensure fuel consistency. The trucks immediately proceeded to the
test’s starting point and, once cued, began navigating the route. Upon
completion, each truck was refueled to the bottom of its filler neck
flange. Temperature, humidity, barometric pressure and other weather
conditions were recorded, as well as fuel temperature, odometer mileage
and data from each truck’s engine control module (ECM). Fuel consumption
measured by the ECM was recorded and used to calculate the T/C ratio for
run number one. The trucks were then positioned at the starting point in
preparation for run number two, and repeated the process until three T/C
ratios within the acceptable 2 percent range were collected.

Test Segment Lubricant
Selection
Upon completion
of the baseline segment, both the test vehicle and the control vehicle
executed a complete test run to reach normal operating temperature. The
engine, transmission and front and rear differentials in the test
vehicle were immediately flushed following the same guidelines followed
prior to the baseline segment. The lone difference, however, was
installation of the following AMSOIL synthetic lubricants:
Engine:
Premium API CJ-4 5W-40 Synthetic Diesel Oil
Transmission:
SAE
50 Long-Life Synthetic Transmission Oil
Front and Rear Differentials:
75W-90 Long-Life Synthetic Gear Lube
The test segment then began following the same route and
procedures used during the baseline segment. Consecutive runs were
completed until three T/C ratios within the acceptable 2 percent range
were collected.
Results
Baseline
Segment
Fully grasping
how fuel economy results are calculated using the SAE J1321 In-Service
Fuel Consumption Test Procedure requires an understanding of how T/C
ratios are calculated. Using Run 5 from Table 1 below as an example,
dividing 5.90 (gallons of fuel consumed in the test vehicle) by 5.50
(gallons of fuel consumed in the control vehicle) produces the T/C ratio
(1.07).
SAE J1321 requires conducting runs until three T/C
ratios within a 2 percent range are achieved. This requirement helps
eliminate statistical anomalies that skew final results. The baseline
segment required five test runs to produce three T/C ratios within a 2
percent range. Those T/C ratios were averaged using rules for
significant digits to produce the Average Baseline T/C Ratio (1.07). The
ratio indicates for every 1.00 gallon of fuel consumed by the control
vehicle (using conventional lubricants), the test vehicle (also using
conventional lubricants) consumed 1.07 gallons of fuel. It is
immediately evident the test vehicle displayed worse fuel economy during
the baseline segment compared to the control vehicle despite both
operating with the identical conventional lubricants under the same
operating procedures. This portion of the test procedure identifies the
natural differences in fuel consumption between identically equipped
vehicles.
Table 1 Baseline Segment Results
Run1 Run2 Run3 Run4 Run5
|
Control Vehicle (gal. consumed) |
5.90 |
5.60 |
5.50 |
5.70 |
5.50 |
| Test Vehicle (gal. consumed) |
6.00 |
6.00 |
5.80 |
6.30 |
5.90 |
| T/C Ratio |
1.02 |
1.07 |
1.05 |
1.11 |
1.07 |
^ ^
^
Avg. Baseline T/C Ratio 1.07*
Acceptable 2 percent range
*Calculated
using rules for significant digits
Test Segment
Immediately
following the Baseline Segment, the test vehicle underwent the
previously described flushing procedure prior to installation of AMSOIL
synthetic lubricants. The control vehicle continued to operate with its
original Texaco conventional lubricants installed. Test segment results
are calculated in identical fashion. Because the first test run was
completed only to allow each vehicle to reach normal operating
temperature, the results were eliminated from consideration. Six
subsequent test runs were conducted to achieve the three required T/C
ratios. Run 6 was eliminated from consideration due to heavy traffic and
stop-and-go conditions. Table 2 displays the results.
Averaging the three T/C ratios that fall within the
acceptable 2 percent range produces an Average Test T/C Ratio of 1.00.
This ratio indicates that for every 1.00 gallon of fuel consumed by the
control vehicle (with conventional lubricants), the test vehicle (with
AMSOIL synthetic lubricants) also consumed 1.00 gallon of fuel. Applying
the natural differences identified in the baseline segment between the
control vehicle and the test vehicle (which demonstrated worse fuel
economy despite both having operated with conventional lubricants), the
switch to AMSOIL synthetic lubricants resulted in increased fuel
economy. Determining the exact percentage of improvement requires
completing the equation shown below.
Table 2 Test Segment Results
Run1 Run2 Run3 Run4 Run5 Run6 Run7
|
Control Vehicle (gal. consumed) |
5.70 |
5.70 |
5.50 |
5.50 |
5.70 |
5.50 |
5.80 |
| Test Vehicle (gal. consumed) |
6.00 |
5.70 |
5.80 |
5.70 |
5.70 |
5.70 |
5.80 |
| T/C Ratio |
1.05 |
1.00 |
1.05 |
1.04 |
1.00 |
1.04 |
1.00 |
^
^
^
Avg. Test T/C Ratio 1.00*
Acceptable 2 percent range
**1.07 - 1.00 / 1.07 x
100% = 6.54% Improved Fuel Economy using AMSOIL Synthetic
Lubricants
*Calculated using rules for
significant digits
**(Avg. Baseline T/C Ratio) -
(Avg. Test T/C Ratio) /
(Avg. Baseline
T/C Ratio) x 100%
Reduced Emissions
A reduction in
fuel consumption directly correlates to a reduction in exhaust
emissions. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) establishes limits
for diesel exhaust emissions, and the calculations below are derived
from the 2010 limits that apply to model-year (MY) 2010 and newer
vehicles. Many state and local governments have adopted these standards
for older MY engines as well, which to meet require aftermarket
exhaust-treatment devices, such as diesel particulate filters. table 3
compares emissions levels from a single truck operating with
conventional lubricants and the same truck realizing a 6.54 percent
reduction in emissions operating with AMSOIL synthetic lubricants.
Table 3 Emissions Reductions
|
|
2010 EPA Limits |
Annual Emissions Operating with Conventional
Oil*
|
Annual Emissions Operating with Conventional
Oil*
|
|
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) |
0.2 g/bhp-hr |
228.8 kg/yr** |
503.4 lb/yr |
14.9 kg/yr† |
32.7 lb/yr |
| Particulate
Matter (PM) |
0.01 g/bhp-hr |
11.4 kg/yr |
25.1 lb/yr |
0.7 kg/yr |
1.6lb/yr |
|
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) |
10.1 kg/gal |
202.0 kg/yr |
444.4 lb/yr |
13.1 kg/yr |
28.9 lb/yr |
| Carbon Monoxide
(CO) |
15.5 g/bhp-hr |
17,732.0 kg/yr |
39,010.4 lb/yr |
1,152.6 kg/yr |
2,535.7 lb/yr |
* Based on 400 hp truck averaging 120,000 annual
miles; achieving 6 mpg; and operating 11 hours/day, 5 days/week, 52
weeks/year
** Sample Calculation: NOx = 0.2/bhp-hr x 400hp = 80g/hr
x 11hr x 5days x 52 weeks = 228.8kg/yr
† AMSOIL reduction: NOx = 228.8kg/yr x 0.065 = 14.9kg/yr (reduction)
Conclusion
Testing
completed in compliance with the industry-standard SAE J1321 In-Service
Fuel Consumption Test Procedure demonstrates use of AMSOIL synthetic
lubricants can increase fuel economy in short- to- medium- haul diesel
applications and, in this case, did by 6.54 percent. The study was
designed to eliminate environmental and operating variables as much as
possible by using two nearly identical trucks and operating them in a
consistent and methodical fashion throughout the same test route.
Following the baseline segment, data indicate the test vehicle operating
with conventional lubricants in its engine, transmission and front and
rear differentials consumed more fuel than the control vehicle operating
with the same lubricants. After a thorough lubricant flush and
installation of AMSOIL synthetic Lubricants, data collected during the
the test segment indicated the test vehicle consumed less fuel than it
did during the baseline segment. Calculations derived from the data sets
confirm a 6.54 percent fuel economy improvement provided by AMSOIL
synthetic lubricants. The fuel economy improvement directly correlates
to reduced fuel costs and reduced exhaust emissions as well.
Although this study was completed using full-sized semi
trucks and 53’ closed-box trailers, these results can be extrapolated to
conclude that the fuel economy benefits extend to all types of fleet
applications and can reduce costs in a variety of scenarios, including
small fleets accumulating relatively few daily miles per vehicle and
larger fleets accumulating significantly more.
T's Advanced Synthetics
Greg and Marcy Thurman
Your Nationwide
AMSOIL
Authorized Independent
Dealer
Nationwide US Warehouses,
Canada and Palm Harbor, FL
727-798-8552
E-Mail:
greg@tsadvancedsynthetics.com
If you
experience problems or have questions or comments about
our website please email us at
greg@tsadvancedsynthetics.com
Home
|
T's Privacy Policy
|
Links |
Contact Us
|