Aerodynamics is a huge deal in vehicle manufacturing today. Slipping through the air as easily as possible helps EVs attain high range and aids small cars in helping score incredible fuel economy numbers. Aero is also critically important in the trucking industry, where even small gains make a huge difference. Back in the 1980s, one semi-truck manufacturer placed an insane focus on aero. The Kenworth T600 was built from the ground up to slice through the atmosphere, and as a result, this classic semi ended up doing to the trucking industry what the Ford Taurus did to the car industry.
The original Ford Taurus was a huge deal when it launched in 1985 for the 1986 model year. The Taurus had been born in an era when most cars looked like blocks or wedges and had the coefficient of drag to show for it. However, as the world transitioned into the fuel economy-conscious 1980s, it was time to take radical steps to improve efficiency and style.


The Ford Taurus was a gamble. It was a futuristic car with computer-assisted design, a body shaped by wind tunnel testing, and an interior that matched the forward thinking that propelled the vehicle’s entire design. The soap bar-shaped Taurus was such a departure from what any of its competition was doing that, as the book Taurus: The Making Of The Car That Saved Ford by Eric Taub noted, people within Ford itself had doubts that the public would buy it. The fear was that Ford might have built a car too far ahead into the future. Apparently, Chrysler felt similarly.

Instead, the Taurus changed the game. The press couldn’t get enough of the Taurus. Car and Driver once said that the Taurus “Shapes the Future of the Family Sedan” and countless more recent retrospectives claim that the Taurus “revolutionized American car design” and saved Ford. These headlines aren’t wrong. Ford invested so much money into the Taurus that, had it failed, bankruptcy was a real possibility. Instead, the Taurus was such a sensation that those same skeptical automakers suddenly had to rush to put their own potato-shaped designs into production.
The Taurus was not the first car shaped by the wind. It even had contemporaries in the form of rounded Audis. Yet, its impact was huge. One could even argue that the effects of the original Taurus are still being felt today as the automotive industry continues to optimize its cars to an obsessive degree.
What’s not often told is that while the Ford Taurus was bringing aero to Detroit, a similar revolution was also happening in the trucking industry. Launched only a year before the Ford Taurus was the Kenworth T600.

On the surface, this conventional semi-truck doesn’t look all that impressive. We’ve had semis that looked like this for decades! But have you ever thought about when more aerodynamic designs became more popular? Trucking’s “Ford Taurus” moment is often regarded to be when the Kenworth T600 hit the road, promising to make trucking more efficient and futuristic.
Truckers Battle The Oil Crisis
This story takes us back to the 1970s, a decade that car enthusiasts identify with monumental change in the auto industry. The Oil Crisis of 1973 brought on a greater focus on fuel economy and downsizing. This was the era that is remembered for the infamous “double nickel” 55 mph national speed limit. At the same time, Americans were getting serious about car safety and pollution from vehicle emissions. All of these and more began reshaping the cars that we drove. Add in a poor economy and fading confidence in the government because of war and scandals, and you have what we now call the Malaise Era.
Trucking was facing some of the same issues that cars were. As Today’s Trucking wrote in 2005, diesel prices skyrocketed in the wake of the oil crisis. This threw a wrench into the works of the trucking industry. The shipping of so many critical goods depends on trucking, and rising fuel prices can kneecap the industry.

Today’s Trucking reminds us that in 1976, Kenworth engineer Larry Orr sought to bring the trucking industry into the future. If fuel prices couldn’t be lowered, maybe the truck itself could be the solution to high operating costs. For reference, according to a 2008 U.S. Energy Information Administration report, the price of diesel was $0.36 per gallon in 1978, skyrocketing to $0.97 by 1981, or a 170 percent increase.
Aerodynamics weren’t exactly the main focus of truck design at the time. The 1970s were at the tail end of the cabover semi era, where truck cabs were situated over the engines and front axles. Cabover semis remain some of the coolest big rigs in American trucking history. They also complied with the length restrictions of the era. However, cabovers were basically bricks pushing a load through the wind.

Meanwhile, conventional semis, or trucks with a front axle and engine ahead of the driver, with a corresponding “long nose,” were also a popular option. One of Kenworth’s most iconic designs, the W900 (above), was introduced in 1963. Here’s a little bit of history about that truck from Kenworth:
The W900 is one of the most iconic trucks in North America’s trucking history, known for its classic long hood, conventional design, rugged durability, and driver-focused comfort and style. Since the W900’s introduction in 1963, it quickly became a favorite among owner operators and fleet drivers. The W900’s versatility and customizable platform made it a reliable choice for long-haul, heavy-haul, logging, dump, and other vocational and on-highway applications. Since the W900’s inception, Kenworth has incorporated advancements in technology, styling, and performance into four iterations that have proven essential for different jobs while maintaining the iconic look. The W900A provided improved cooling for optimal engine operation, the W900B debuted with a cab update and additional cooling innovations, the W900S was designed for ready mixed concrete-specific applications, and W900L brought a long-hood variation for performance and appearance.
“The W900 is truly historic in that it’s helped shape North American trucking culture and tradition as we know it today,” said [Kevin Haygood, Kenworth’s assistant general manager for sales and marketing.] “Often seen at truck shows, featured in movies and on TV, and shown at other events, it’s an iconic truck that’s cherished for its classic styling by our customers and truck aficionados. While production of these trucks is coming to an end, we look forward to seeing them on our roads and at truck shows for many years to come.”
Yes, incredibly, the W900 is still in production today and will finally haul into the sunset in 2026. The W900 has been in production for so long that its last generational overhaul was in 1982. Because of the insane longevity of a Class 8 truck, it’s possible we’ll still see W900s on the road for decades to come.
The inclusion of the W900 into this story is important because this truck would form the platform of Kenworth’s moonshot aero truck.
The Kenworth T600

As Today’s Trucking reported, Kenworth’s solution to high fuel prices was a dramatic increase in semi-tractor efficiency. That meant finally doing something about aero. At the time, Kenworth claimed that 75 percent of a semi-truck’s aerodynamic drag was caused by the tractor’s front profile alone. Weirdly, the T600 project started off by trying to make a smooth cabover truck. This might sound silly, but 55-foot overall length restrictions were still in place when development began, so it made sense to make the aero truck out of a popular cabover.
The Motor Carrier Act of 1980 helped advance a process of trucking deregulation, which resulted in more trucking companies entering the market. Then, the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 helped establish national standards for semi-tractor lengths. As Today’s Trucking notes, deregulation in the early 1980s marked the end of the cabover semi-tractor’s reign in America. Previously, the cabover was dominant, but that was largely due to length regulations. Now, more comfortable conventional tractors were poised to take over.

This also meant that Kenworth had to shift gears to keep up with the times. The great thing was that Kenworth already had a dependable and popular convention in production with the W900, so Kenworth engineers turned their eyes to that rig.
Today’s Trucking notes that, early on, Kenworth engineers tested their aero theories out by building wood and clay models and taking them into the wind tunnel at the University of Washington. There, these models proved their idea to be sound. If you make a truck that’s a lot less of a brick, you can get notable gains in fuel efficiency, which can help a trucker deal with high fuel prices.
By the early 1980s, Trucknews.com writes, the engineers at Kenworth graduated from the models to a full-size working prototype. This truck validated the engineers’ theory about aero, and now it was time to make the truck a reality.

Kenworth notes that while the T600 is based on the W900’s architecture, the rest of the truck was built from the ground up around aerodynamics. There had been other trucks with some form of aerodynamic smoothing, but nobody had gone to the obsessive level that Kenworth engineers were going through on the T600. One prominent feature of the T600 design is its sloped and rounded hood, itself a massive departure from the flat and blocky hoods of the past. Another easy change to point out is the flush headlights and swept integrated fenders. The cab is also smoothed out as much as possible.
But there’s way more going on under the skin. The truck’s diesel tanks, air filter, and batteries, which are normally proudly on display on a typical conventional truck, were placed behind body panels for further streamlining. Even the front bumper has some trickery going on with a polyurethane air dam to help redirect the air that goes under the chassis. Further changes come in the form of a spoiler on the truck’s roof that adjusts to different trailer heights and cab extensions that close the open gap between the cab and trailer. Finally, Kenworth engineers also added low-profile tires and an efficient drivetrain.

Kenworth figured an aerodynamic truck didn’t need as much power to haul, and the powertrain reflected this. There were a ton of drivetrain configurations sold, so I’ll just give a couple. I’ve seen some old T600s equipped with 300 HP Cummins L10 10-liter straight-six diesels. I’ve also seen older T600s with 365 HP Cummins Big Cam IV 14-liter straight-sixes. I’ve also seen T600s with 9-speed and 13-speed manuals.
There were platform improvements, too. T600s have a front axle that’s set further back than the typical conventional. The change to the axle, with its accompanying change to longer 64-inch taper-leaf front springs, improved both ride quality and axle weight distribution. Other improvements to be seen and felt behind the wheel were better visibility from the low hood and better maneuverability from a turn radius that was 23 percent sharper than other conventionals of the era.

All of this added up to a truck that proved to be phenomenal in real-life usage. Kenworth found out that its drastic streamlining and efficient drivetrains resulted in a 22 percent increase in fuel efficiency. That’s incredible! In practice, this meant that a T600 truck got around 9 mpg in an era when other conventionals might have gotten 7 mpg or 7.5 mpg. A whopping 2 mpg doesn’t sound like much, but you have to consider that these trucks are putting down hundreds of thousands of miles, so a change of even 1.5 mpg makes a huge difference.
Kenworth was smart with the T600’s marketing. The company knew that the T600 wasn’t exactly a looker. Truckers were used to huge engines, miles of chrome, and tall stacks. Kenworth was now asking them to buy a truck that, to some, looked like an anteater.

Today’s Trucking notes how some reacted upon seeing the new truck:
Most of this was lost on the old-school crowd at the Fifth Wheel, who, as intrigued as they were, thought hoods should be straight and broad and the longer the better. In fact, 38-year Kenworth veteran Wayne Simons, who was engineering manager at the time and much involved in the T600 project, remembers those comments only too well. Even some KW insiders weren’t terribly sure about its looks, he says. On a fuel-test run in 1985, he remembers so many insults that he had to turn the CB off.
“We heard comments on the CB all the way from Arizona to Florida,” he says.
But no one inside Kenworth doubted the new truck’s ability to save fuel, so the company was pretty sure it had a winner on its hands.
Ouch. You can only imagine the insults thrown through the CB. Kenworth knew it couldn’t just show a truck off to truckers and expect it to sell. Instead, it put those skeptical truckers behind the wheel. Sure, they might not have liked how it looked, but could they resist the fuel economy?
The Ford Taurus Of Big Rigs

The answer was a resounding no, because when the T600A launched in 1984, truckers and fleets began scooping them up en masse. By 1985, Kenworth says, the T600 accounted for a full 50 percent of Kenworth’s sales. The anteater was a winner. By the 1990s, Kenworth gave the T600 a streamlined sibling with the T800, and together, the trucks dominated Kenworth’s sales charts.
Then, something interesting happened. It’s hard to ignore when a single model is so popular that it accounts for half of a manufacturer’s sales. Other truck manufacturers took note, and just like with the Ford Taurus, they also responded by building newer, sleeker rigs with greater efficiency.

You can see this influence even in rigs like the Freightliner FLD120 and others. The old and blocky trucks still remain legends, but truck manufacturers also offer futuristic, slick big rigs.
By 1994, the impact of the T600 on the trucking industry became clear, and in response, Kenworth won the U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Award for the Advancement of Motor Vehicle Research and Development. Even the government thought the truck was that much of a leap forward. By 2005, the T600 was such a huge success that Kenworth sold over 108,000 units over 20 years.
The T600 Lives On

The T600 bowed out in 2007, but its legacy can be found everywhere. Kenworth followed the T600 up with the even sleeker T660, and as I noted earlier, aerodynamics have become a big deal in the trucking industry. Now, you can see all kinds of neat aero tricks out there from smooth wheel covers to weird trailer tails. I mean, just look at the Tesla Semi’s entire front profile.
For many, a lot of this aero obsession can trace back to the T600. As I said earlier, it was far from the first aero truck–the trucks and buses of decades prior also experimented with streamlining–but Kenworth took it to a new level.
So, the next time you see an old Kenworth that looks like an anteater, now you know that weird-looking truck is way more important than it seems. What’s the value of 1.5 mpg? Apparently, the answer can be the development of an entirely new vehicle.
I hate that we use mpg instead of fuel needed to cover x distance. Here’s some examples:
5mpg == 20g for 100 miles
6mpg == 16.6
7mpg == 14.3
8mpg == 12.5
20mpg == 5
25mpg == 4
30mpg == 3.3
A 1mpg difference is Not Linear yet most people seem to think that way. Most people think a 1mpg improvement to a prius means you save the same amount of fuel as if a Ram 3500 also increased by 1mpg, however that 1mpg improvement actually more than makes up for 3 prii existing over their entire usable life.
Depends on the roads and hills and wind and weather. You can fix performance to mask issues or increase pretend performance
No, I think you’re missing the point I wanted to try to make. My 2001 Yukon XL 2500 got 8mpg when towing a trailer and 10mpg when used as a daily. If it increased to 9mpg that would save me much more fuel than if my 2002 is300 that gets 20mpg increased to 25mpg by a lot. A 5mpg increase is far inferior to a 1mpg increase if you’re starting from a bad baseline.
(that Yukon was actually a very efficient tow rig. Using the same trailer and driving from Chicago to Denver it always got 8mpg and a 2014 Silverado that normally gets 24 as a daily got 4.3 and a new transmission under warranty, and a F150 from the 2010’s got 5.1, but I don’t really know much else about that truck.)
For reference as I also just replied to you in the comments of another article, here’s a pic of where the truck driver finally found a place to park, the yukon in question, the is300 that just got delivered, my rx8, and our lemons rx8 that has since been totaled by two angry miata’s in two separate races t-boning the car right in the rear drivers wheel. Oh, forgot to add, having it dropped off the trailer was the first time I ever saw that car in person, and at the track was the first time I ever got to drive it other than the .75 miles back home. It was a sight unseen dumb internet purchase that went wildly better than expected. As it lived exclusively in Chicago and Denver it’s 170K miles I figured I’d get good parts, a rusty frame, and maybe eventually turn it into a race car after I repurposed the 2JZ into some other project, instead I got a car California people would be jealous of as not only doesn’t it have rust it also has no UV damage. Worst project car ever… it’s now 5 years using it as a daily / hotel at race tracks, it fits a twin size bed in the back and is flat! and only things I’ve had to deal with is dead batteries and an o2 sensor that I can reach even without jacking up the car.)
https://discord.com/channels/1111431722442170408/1111659759918133298/1390473040076476416
In high rust areas, I’ve found ultra protected cars and even a pair bought together, one being more babied.
Even on a highly efficient car I found 2 mpg better in city driving more than covered the mandatory premium fuel.
Since these have been on the road for most of my life, it’s funny to hear that the design was so controversial. In my mind, this is just default semi!
I suppose that reinforces how inlfuential it was.
Yeah, I can’t imagine a semi looking like anything else except in Europe and Japan, but they have reasons to be different. Tbh the trucks I saw in Japan in 2005 were soo cool with their side loading doors and everything I’m still not sure it couldn’t reconfigure itself into a helicopter or a transformer.
Ooh just for fun, remember that the standardized shipping container wasn’t widely used til the 70’s.
You need to go full bore with this and talk about the T2000…I hated those trucks. If you want to say the T600 is like the gen 1 taurus the T2000 was a lot like the carp faced version of the Taurus.
Ugh. That’s the perfect analogy, too. The T2000 was just… too much blobby aero in all the wrong places, exactly like the 3rd-gen Taurus.
Pictures can’t fully display in 2-D all that’s wrong going on around the rear of the fenders and the wavy door profile on those things. You had to see one in-person to get the full impression of how awkward they actually looked.
The T600 was startling when new, but it has aged really well as a re-work of the classic conventional cab for aero efficiency.
Or Prius but they weren’t out yet maybe Prius was the t6000 design of EVs
The T2000 was the one modified for the TV series 18 Wheels of Justice.
I hear there is a film coming with some serious semi stunt driving.
I vividly remember the first time I saw one of these. It was parked in a shopping center parking lot in Warwick, RI, and I made my father turn around so we could go look at it. It was amazing compared to what I knew trucks to be.
The Taurus wasn’t the first “Aero” Ford, the T-Bird and Tempo got there first in the US. No they did not have the not legal at the time composite headlamps, though the T-Bird’s cousin the Mark VII did and was the first car in the US with them.
So Ford did have some indication of whether or not the public would accept “Aero” cars. Of course the Taurus was still a big gamble since it was an entirely new platform while the ‘Bird and Tempaz were on existing platforms with a little slicing and dicing as Ford became adept at with the Falcon’s platform.
Since KW is based in my area I do occasionally see some of their engineering test vehicles out on the roads, though that is usually up by their technical center where they do have a ~1.5mi test track. https://www.google.com/maps/place/PACCAR+Technical+Center/@48.4646044,-122.4464692,1590m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x548571d7bfaa689d:0x2ffd9055e210f3bb!8m2!3d48.4652822!4d-122.4418791!16s%2Fg%2F11cnxr2wzy?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDYzMC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
Hey, thanks for the map! I didn’t know of your military aircraft museum nearby. That is so cool.
heritageflight.org
The aero Tbird was most slippery from the windshield back, especially the rear.
Which of course is why it did so good in NASCAR and why GM rushed the Monte Carlo and Grand Prix Aerocoupes into (Limited) production.
This reminds me being a kid in the 80’s and getting a diecast of one these aero trucks. It was my favorite! Looking back it’s no surprise that I fell in love with the Ford Taurus. Twice I tried buying one at a dealership, and twice I was shut down. Oh well.
Boxy trucks with the chrome are ok but there’s something that’s so cool about a modern over the road semi with plastic covering the fuel tanks flapping in the wind about to fly off on the highway that gets me giddy. I really wish I was a truck driver.
Former truck driver here.
It’s fun for a minute but gets old fast.
Yeah sleeping on off-ramps, dealing with rude warehouse personnel, weird-ass other truck drivers, and using piss jugs get old after a while. I still never want to look at another truck stop hotdog or pizza slice again, and it’s been 10 years.
Aero trucks are doing 11 mpg today – on real roads – loaded.
There is lots of cool technology in current trucks.
That’s amazing. I got less than that in my 3.5 Ecoboost F-150 pulling a 6,000 pound camper 🙂
MS got 13 hauling a 2k lbs trailer and a honda Beat with the F350DRW, so don’t feel bad
Today they are idling in parking lots getting 0 miles per gallon and stinking up the air all around for everyone .
Nobody figured out how to cool the cabs so drivers can sleep all day in the sun
We figured out how to cool cabs for hotel loads without idling the engine decades ago. They are called APU (Auxiliary Power Units) and provide power, heat, and cooling while the main diesel is off.
Just one example: Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) | Semi-Truck APU | Thermo King
I loved the T600 from the moment I first saw one in the 80s. It seemed like America finally had a truck that didn’t look like an antique. On that note, I only recently learned that the W900 is still in production. I always assumed that the ones I had been seeing on the road every day were just lovingly-maintained relics. But in fact, they are new trucks being driven by relics.
I’m serious — when you compare what American truckers live with to what the rest of the world has available from primarily European manufacturers, it’s like night & day. American truckers seem to consider it a proud hallmark of their profession to drive noisy, uncomfortable, underpowered rigs, while the rest of the world can choose capable trucks that actually make their jobs easier.
I’m not a truck guy, but for some reason I get a bunch of social media stuff about a Scania making a US marketing tour. Honest question – how many truckers actually own their rigs vs drive what’s provided?
I don’t know the percentage, but I can say that the vast majority of fleets use more modern, streamlined trucks like the Volvo VNL, whereas the old-school W900 and Peterbilts,etc. are more likely to be owned by independents.
I know the YouTube channel you’re talking about, and half of the comments are from foreign truckers saying, “I can’t believe what you poor bastards are forced to live with in the USA.”
Independents may be more likely to do local high value loads than over the road.
They are very aware of repair and actual. maintenance costs.
My Tier Zero diesel pickup is highly sought after for ease of repair.
Same for a Tier One epa large truck.
If it’s unhappy, even that bricks itself though.
The W900 is going out of production, unfortunately.
I worked on these trucks. Every switch in the dashboard of a PACCAR truck for the last decade is using my product. I worked at a tier 1 supplier for a while and handled that program. We produced over a million switches a year with over a hundred variations at a time. A decade of trucks are inconspicuously sporting my engineering legacy lol.
Very cool.
Good God, articles like this are why I’m a subscriber.
Let’s math:
1000 miles at 7.5 mpg is 133 gallons burned.
1000 miles at 9 mpg is 111 gallons burned.
That’s a 17% savings in fuel burned! Just from making it slicker!
That’s for a single truck. Now add that up across a fleet and it makes sense that these trucks were so popular.
Yep worked for a company and they spent 250k on aero wheel discs they figured they made that up in one year on fuel savings
I’m glad to see the math laid out like this. MPG is a weird metric because it’s nonlinear; the lower the MPG number the more gains you realize with each additional MPG.
And that’s fundamentally why large fleets are all-in on aero trucks, but individual owner-operators often prefer “traditional” non-aero ones for the style and customization. The MPG difference has a lesser impact for one driver in one truck. Owner-operators’ trucks are also their hobby to some extent, for them the slightly lower fuel economy is an acceptable trade-off.
For a fleet though, every penny saved is multiplied by the number of trucks in the fleet and the combined number of trips they make — and the math is undeniably in favor of aero designs.
Agreed, I was about to post a similar comment about the nonlinearity of fuel economy vs fuel consumption.
Just to drive home that nonlinearity with some more math:
That 1.5 MPG improvement from 7.5 to 9 saved 22 gallons of fuel over a 1000 mile trip. In order to save the same amount of fuel in a car that gets ~25 MPG, you’d have to increase the fuel economy to >50 MPG!
How much fuel does it use to drive 1000 miles if it idles for 12 hour before leaving the dock?
That’s where auxiliary power units come in. Or shore power. Burning a quarter gallon an hour is better than burning half to one gallon per hour.
“The Motor Carrier Act of 1980 helped advance a process of trucking deregulation, which resulted in more trucking companies entering the market. Then, the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 helped establish national standards for semi-tractor lengths.”
Huh – it almost seems like you’re saying that government regulation, when done thoughtfully, can have good results! Are you sure you’re not some kinda communist, Mercedes? /s
You have to use the more sexy term of socialist
Kenworth as usual was slow to follow the aero trend that began inn the late 70s and took off with the STAA in 1982. Several manufacturers like Ford with the LA/LTA, White, and International were already offering set back axle conventionals with aero packages by then. In the real world the T600 was a disappointment- At Continental Baking our T600s had windshields popping out due to cab flex and the fancy aero panels were coming loose and flapping in the wind, yet they got the same 7 MPG as our flat front Freightliner cabovers with the same L10 engine. No surprise that Continental cancelled a 200 truck order and went back to Freightliner!
Maybe I’m in the minority, but I always thought these were really good looking trucks. I don’t think they’re weird or goofy at all.
But Billy Joe Jim Bob in 1985 thought they were.
Yeah, I guess so.
Agreed, they’re handsome yet practical. They were clearly the inspiration for Ram with the ’90s Ram.
Which was extremely good looking.
Meant to say Dodge with the ’90s Ram… Guess I’ve been brand-brainwashed.
And to think….Peterbilt, the Harley Davidson of trucks, didn’t follow suit for over a decade. The speed at which innovation moves through the industry really is glacial at times….
If I had to guess at an overrepresented brand involved in trucking protests during the pandemic.
Peterbilt is a brand of the same company, so they were crying all the way to the bank.
I was today days old when I found out Paccar owns Kenworth…..
And I’ve literally been in the industry my whole life…..
The wildest part is that Pacific Car started in the railroad car bizness.
Meh. Not that wild. Like the equivalent of saying BMW started out with plane engines…..
Peterbilt and Kenworth are owned by the same company – PACCAR. PACCAR bought Kenworth in 1945 and Peterbilt in 1958. They are also the only major Class 8 manufacturer that is still US owned.
Volvo owns Mack
Daimler owns Freightliner and Western Star
VW owns International.
PACCAR also owns the European brand DAF.
They own Leyland as well.
I was sticking to US brands in my original post.
And the little K-series cabover Kenworths you sometime see in urban environments as box trucks — the ones competing with the little Isuzus — are re-badged DAFs.
And today you can send those worn out trucks to ReVolt to be renewed into plug in hybrids/portable generator for an additional guesstimated 40% fuel savings:
https://www.cleantrucking.com/battery-electric/article/15742272/revolt-motors-signs-major-fleet-contract
Hahaha, good joke. That’s not 40 years old, haha, there’s no way…
…
…that’s 40 years old.
Fuuuuuhhhhhhh………
My first toy/scale-model semi truck and trailer uses this design.
As Ferris said, “Life moves pretty fast. If you don’t stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.”
I love how the early T600s retained the split windshield – some nice 1940s styling to go with the aerodynamics. You can see it in the photo of the Australian-made truck above.
nobody at Kenworth saw the dump truck decal giving the bird? or maybe that was the point
https://images-stag.jazelc.com/uploads/theautopian-m2en/photos_kenworth_t600_1985_1.jpg
Aussies FTW
I distinctly remember the first time I ever saw a T600, and it kind of blew my mind, to be honest. I was so excited I had to attempt to draw it in order to explain to people what I’d seen.
The amazing thing is aero wasn’t thought of more that it was, long before the T600. Wasn’t Penske transporting their race team around in fully-faired chrome trucks long before?
A few years ago, there was a Brit auto racing message board with pix of CART series transporters at the track in the 90s. I was able to tell the Brits that the tractors were all T600s except Penske’s Freightliner cabovers. The other trailers were typical low floor racing trailers with busy team and sponsor graphics. Penske’s trailers were polished aluminum.
To do a little maths:
Many semi trucks do over a million miles in a couple years. Let’s calculate the fuel savings:
1 million miles at 3.00 a gallon.
7.5 mpg: $400,000.00
9.0 mpg: $333,333.00
$66,667.00 in savings. That’s most of a yearly salary for a trucker. Not bad at all!
A full time driver does 100–150k miles per year.
How much do they save if drivers idle it for 12 hours every day before leaving the dock?
Ironically enough, Ford was one of those competitors to respond to the T600 when it launched the AeroMax models of its Louisville line with the L9000 AeroMax in 1988. This aerodynamic effort culminated in the 1996 AeroMax 9500, one of the slipperiest line haul trucks of the era.
I recall talking with the folks at Cummins years ago about their engine developments for fuel consumption, and they were talking about how much the airflow through the grille impacts the drag of the rig. Never really put much through into it, but when the grille is nearly the size of a full sheet of plywood, it makes sense..
Fleets chase pennies on the mile – because it adds up quick.
Contemporaries? It had predecessors in the form of rounded Audis. The ’82 Audi 100 did it first and did it better. (It looked better and had a lower Cd (.30 cs.32))
It looks like Audi sold about 47k cars in 1982. I couldn’t find a tally for Ford, but it seems like about 10x that number. So the Audi may have been ahead but operating in a different realm of popularity.
The Audi, however, was a global product – sales were much bigger than what they sold in the US. Ford themselves had already done it anyhow, with the 1982 Sierra (that’s the Merkur XR4Ti to you).
Citroen ds at .38 in 1965? About 1.45 million made
It may have been a global product, but Audi still only sold half as many of that generation cars total as Ford did first generation Taurus just in NA.
The Taurus was an absolute revolution in the US domestic car market compared to what GM and Chrysler were pumping out. That it wasn’t the VERY first aero-designed sedan is irrelevant, it was the first one to sell in huge numbers in the US. And it wasn’t just the styling, the ride and handling were very much a cut above as well. But Ford will be Ford and the drivetrain options were pretty meh, to say the least.
…except the SHO, of course. That drivetrain was not meh.
Yes indeed. Though that came long after the initial introduction.
Drivetrains in the 80s were limited by technology/cost. Taurus wasn’t worse than the domestic competition, but they certainly were meh compared to more expensive Euro sedans.
Yes and no. A 3.0L Taurus was faster than an Audi 5000, and no slower than a BMW 528e. And much faster than a non-turbo Volvo or Saab. The 3.8L was a little faster still, but horrifically unreliable. The transmissions were pretty much made out of glass unless you picked the glacial MT5 and rowed your own. Performance really wasn’t much of an issue, the sixes were more than adequately rapid for the family cars that they were. But none of them were amazingly reliable. Better than what Chrysler was doing, on par with GM, but in a much, much better overall package than either of them.
I corresponded with Wolf Heinrich Hucho, who was director of aerodynamics at VW/Audi when the 100 was designed, a few years ago. Without my bringing it up, he mentioned the 100 in one email and called it the “world champion” (which it was at the time it was released, in terms of the lowest drag coefficient of a production car). Apparently he was still quite proud of the achievement nearly 40 years later.
With the Taurus comparison and talk about aerodynamics, I could have sworn we were about to get a history lesson on the Ford Aeromax.
I still want a street legal Olds Aerotech.
What about the Chrysler Airflow?