Introducing the Kevin Rutherford "signature" truck

[sgreer78]

Either that, or buy a truck yourself and just spec it out the same way, and avoid the "Rutherford markup", which I'm sure is quite high.

I have to agree with some on his site that are stating that this truck is foolish, because the engine will not meet any of the future EPA requirements.

Did you see the rear end ratio? Good luck pulling a hill in that thing.

Sure it has 2.64's, but it's also a direct drive(no over drive), so the final gear ratio is still higher(numerically) than say a truck with 3.55's and an overdrive.

Bottom line, it'll pull just fine, if not better than most.

[Heavy Duty]

I have a set of Walker Mega-Flow mufflers, they are stait thru and I could tell a difference in power, but I took off pulgged up factory mufflers.

They sell a mega flow and a mega flow noise breaker. Had the noise breaker on another truck and wished I had bought them this time instead of the strait mega flow.
My Jake is extermley LOUD, and with the noise breaker you could run the Jake anywhere and know one would notice, very quiet. I will probably replace them this spring. Want some used one's?

[Windwalker]

I'm inclined to believe it would be a great truck, much better than new. It's like Trick My Truck for guys who actually make a living with them, not just a nice TV show. I don't know anything about ceramic and teflon coated pistons but I just bet they're better than a fireplace.

Yeah, Kevin's a self-promoter, but that doesn't mean he doesn't know a lot and have a lot of good advice.

I just got my fingers burned on the Turbo 3000 and am not ready to forgive or trust him again. There's always that one little thing- after 7,000 miles, my Vada hadn't done a damn thing for me. But...what if...30,000 miles!? Ah, forget it. I'm listening, but I'm taking everything with a grain of salt, too. I am probably going to pick up one of those Walker Mega-Flow mufflers, unless one of you guys tells me I'm wasting my money.

I remember a thread a while back that was based on a number of "SNAKE-OIL" remedies to improve the fuel economy on a truck. That "TURBO-3000" was one of the things on the list. Yes, there are things you can do, and reducing the back-pressure is one of them. Increasing the intake pressure will also help. But, this turbo thingy and the magnet that you put on your fuel line (that is California EPA approved) won't do a damned thing but relieve you of some of the weight in your wallet. If you looked inside that turbo thing, all it is, is an addition to the length of your fuel line, with a few baffles inside it. I'm told it's supposed to "ATOMIZE" the fuel... In the fuel line??? Where it's supposed to be liquid??? Feed atomized fuel into the injectors???

One look at the truck... It's a Frightliner...
One look at the engine... It's a Detroit...

If I want a signature truck, I'll keep looking... There's gotta be a Kenworth out back somewhere... Then, a Cat 3406 or a Cummins N14+... About 3:46 rears, and a good 10 speed, and I'll run circles around his signature. So, now, I've already had a look at the truck, and the engine, and I don't have to waste my time anymore.

[allan5oh]

I have to agree with some on his site that are stating that this truck is foolish, because the engine will not meet any of the future EPA requirements.

It will meet EPA requirements because it meets the EPA regulation of the year of the engine. It may not however meet CARB requirements.

Did you see the rear end ratio? Good luck pulling a hill in that thing.

2.64's with a direct drive is the same steps as 3.55's with an overdrive. Within less then 1%.

[Heavy Duty]

If I want a signature truck, I'll keep looking... There's gotta be a Kenworth out back somewhere... Then, a Cat 3406 or a Cummins N14+... About 3:46 rears, and a good 10 speed, and I'll run circles around his signature. So, now, I've already had a look at the truck, and the engine, and I don't have to waste my time anymore.

It may be a Freightshaker(no thank you) but Bruce knows how to build a engine. The truck will run good and he will set it a what ever horsepower you want. Good horsepower, low rolling resistants and good aero, it will run better than most. Take you N 14 to Bruce and he will make you king of the hill.

My problem with the truck besides it being a FL is single drive, not good on job sites and I couldn't find the full size bed and shower, sink and toilet. No Thank You, I'll keep my Pete. But I would be proud to have Bruce build me a motor.

[oltrucker]

Kevin's dream truck is set up for pulling light FEDEX loads on flat ground in Florida. That is not the real world. The turbo 3000 is in the same class as magic magnets, the little bypass filter is a joke. A centrifuge oil cleaner is much more effective and cost about the same. As far as his Super single low profile doughnuts go, long distance bicycle riders use those large diameter tires because they have less rolling resistance not more. Of course if anyone wants to get rid of their big tires cheap I have a little CH Mack that is geared too low. He is right about the lug tires vs. highway tread unless you are running off pavement. The lift pusher axle makes much more sense. I was using one 40 years ago, worked very well. Those old gas rigs didn't have any extra power to turn another set of gears in a twin screw. I was not running mountains in winter at that time. That might present a problem. Been out here fifty years. Every time I get to thinking I've seen it all, some four wheeler shows me something different.
THAT CHEAP BACKHAUL WAS PROBABLY SOMEONES DECENT REGULAR HAUL BEFORE YOU TOOK IT.

[deep dixie blue]

So what kind of fuel mileage will this truck get? Any guesses, or better yet, real world numbers?

[semicomputing]

I'm inclined to believe it would be a great truck, much better than new. It's like Trick My Truck for guys who actually make a living with them, not just a nice TV show. I don't know anything about ceramic and teflon coated pistons but I just bet they're better than a fireplace.

Yeah, Kevin's a self-promoter, but that doesn't mean he doesn't know a lot and have a lot of good advice.

I just got my fingers burned on the Turbo 3000 and am not ready to forgive or trust him again. There's always that one little thing- after 7,000 miles, my Vada hadn't done a damn thing for me. But...what if...30,000 miles!? Ah, forget it. I'm listening, but I'm taking everything with a grain of salt, too. I am probably going to pick up one of those Walker Mega-Flow mufflers, unless one of you guys tells me I'm wasting my money.

Couldn't you get your money back when you found out the hollow tube did nothing for you? It is supposed to have a money back guarantee if not 100% satisfied. Does nothing for the labor used to put it on, but that isn't much.

[semicomputing]

So what kind of fuel mileage will this truck get? Any guesses, or better yet, real world numbers?

Hauling heavy reefer loads in the Sierra Mountains it is getting somewhere above 8mpg. Not bad, considering the weight and terrain. They are suppossed to give out some more numbers after it get's past 75,000 miles as they will consider it broke in at that point. This is from the owner of the truck who called in to KR's show a month or so ago.

[tracer]

I question whether this would be CA emissions legal.

I'm starting to think that Rutherford is basically a charlatan. His main goal is to promote himself.

And that's kind of sad because there is a substantial germ of truth to his basic message.

On Saturday he was answering a question from a listener on the Trucking radio on XM and said that if the guy installed Turbo 3000 and changed from dual exhaust stacks to one single stack with a free flow Pittsburgh Power muffler behind the sleeper, the fuel mileage should go up by 0.7 mpg. I don't think it's realistic to think that.

[semicomputing]

On Saturday he was answering a question from a listener on the Trucking radio on XM and said that if the guy installed Turbo 3000 and changed from dual exhaust stacks to one single stack with a free flow Pittsburgh Power muffler behind the sleeper, the fuel mileage should go up by 0.7 mpg. I don't think it's realistic to think that.

I would agree that could be a little high, he apparently is expecting some results, which some people get, from the Turbo 3000 D, although I don't understand how turbulance in the fuel would help. But the increased flow from a flow through muffler and reducing the turns and splits in the exhaust would help and possibly bring .4 - .5 increase but that is just a guess. Of course just like dieting the room for improvement there is the more potential for good results from anything tried.

[KKtrucking]

That guy builds a glider, charges almost as much as a new truck, uses an outrageous rear end ratio to get around the Pittsburgh power main drawback, burning the bearings out of the overgear transmisson because of the increased torque PP introduces, an ongoing problem PP refuses to admit to and then tries to sell a pipe nipple to increase mileage!!! Where do they find a person to buy this stuff?

[Steel Horse Cowboy]

I would rather spend the money on one of Pittsburg Diesel's 389EXHD and have 800+hp at the turn of a knob and still get 8mpg

[classictruckman]

Maybe to a highway driver this question sounds stupid, but coming from an backroad/offroad driver why would the lift axle be infront of the drive?, with a tag axle you would shorten the wheelbase while bobtailing giving you a better turning radius for city driving.

[Mackman]

I always like the lift axle in front of the drive. When you have it behind the drive axle it makes you get hung up alot backing into ruff places off road.

[classictruckman]

well yeah I have experienced that before, but that truck doesn't exactly look like the type to be in ruff places

[terrylamar]

Either that, or buy a truck yourself and just spec it out the same way, and avoid the "Rutherford markup", which I'm sure is quite high.

I have to agree with some on his site that are stating that this truck is foolish, because the engine will not meet any of the future EPA requirements.

Did you see the rear end ratio? Good luck pulling a hill in that thing.

The rear end ratio is perfect for a direct drive transmission. It is equivalent to a transmission with a top gear ratio of .73 : 1 and 3.55 rears, as in most transmissions out there. It is just a more efficient setup.

[Steel Horse Cowboy]

The rear end ratio is perfect for a direct drive transmission. It is equivalent to a transmission with a top gear ratio of .73 : 1 and 3.55 rears, as in most transmissions out there. It is just a more efficient setup.

I see your with ATS.... didnt happen to be pulling some blades north on US59 thru Diboll on friday afternoon were ya??? LOL

[terrylamar]

I see your with ATS.... didnt happen to be pulling some blades north on US59 thru Diboll on friday afternoon were ya??? LOL

Wasn't me, I was sitting in Marble Falls, TX with a trailer whose brakes would not release.

[Steel Horse Cowboy]

thats no good terry.....can't make any money that-a-way