Is anyone running one of these? How do you like it? Do you think it makes a difference in mileage?
It sure would save some cosmetic work on my tailgate. But I'm also wondering if these would make the bed more rattley and maybe eventually less strong/off square.
What do you all think?
Thanks,
Joe
Mesh/Net Tailgate? Opinions sought
Mesh/Net Tailgate? Opinions sought
1971 4-eyed Shortbed D100 225 /6 727 AT 3.23 rear running on Sweet Lady Propane
-
wideblock
- Founding Member
- Posts: 5617
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
- City: las cruces nm
- State: NM
- Location: Las Cruces, New Mexico
- Contact:
in my 66 i ran from NM to houston tx, tail gate up. ran back with it down. i didnt see a difference in gas mileage, but i did feel a difference in the way the truck handled the windy sections of I-10 thru west texas. didnt seem to get pushed around as much, and cut thru the air easier. why not mix it up a bit? use the factory gate, remove the center section where dodge is and replace with expanded steel. then you got a gate that latches like it should, and a flow thru?? all the flow thru gates i have had on past trucks never closed tight, they all rattled.
Trey
1965 CSS Utiline.
ex trucks:
70 D100
66 d100
66 d100
67 d100
69 d100
69 d200 crew cab
65 crew cab
66 d100
66 d100
"i don't know it all, but i know enough to be dangerous"
1965 CSS Utiline.
ex trucks:
70 D100
66 d100
66 d100
67 d100
69 d100
69 d200 crew cab
65 crew cab
66 d100
66 d100
"i don't know it all, but i know enough to be dangerous"
-
Seabee
- Founding Member
- Posts: 919
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
- City: Houston
- State: TX
- Location: Houston, Texas
Brilliant.wideblock66 wrote:in my 66 i ran from NM to houston tx, tail gate up. ran back with it down. i didnt see a difference in gas mileage, but i did feel a difference in the way the truck handled the windy sections of I-10 thru west texas. didnt seem to get pushed around as much, and cut thru the air easier. why not mix it up a bit? use the factory gate, remove the center section where dodge is and replace with expanded steel. then you got a gate that latches like it should, and a flow thru?? all the flow thru gates i have had on past trucks never closed tight, they all rattled.
-
MoparDude427
- Sweptline.ORG Member
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
- City: San Diego
- State: CA
- Location: San Diego, CA
- Contact:
Good to dispel the old gas mileage myth on tailgate up/down.
Trey--your suggestion about cutting up a perfectly good tailgate borders on some kind of sacrilege, I'm sure. I'll thoughtfully ignore it.
What I was really considering is some kind of Pro-net thing. Thought it would be easier than doing the work on my tailgate. But they've got some downsides, too. I haven't been able to find one that I like the look of much, either.
Thanks for the comments,
Joe
Trey--your suggestion about cutting up a perfectly good tailgate borders on some kind of sacrilege, I'm sure. I'll thoughtfully ignore it.
What I was really considering is some kind of Pro-net thing. Thought it would be easier than doing the work on my tailgate. But they've got some downsides, too. I haven't been able to find one that I like the look of much, either.
Thanks for the comments,
Joe
1971 4-eyed Shortbed D100 225 /6 727 AT 3.23 rear running on Sweet Lady Propane
-
wideblock
- Founding Member
- Posts: 5617
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
- City: las cruces nm
- State: NM
- Location: Las Cruces, New Mexico
- Contact:
joe, there is one big issue with the net gates. they dont give the support needed for the bed sides. picture a 3 sided box with a string as the forth side, not very strong. i ran one for a few years on a mid 80's dodge i used at work. the joints where the sides meet the bed were coming apart from the flexing it was doing without the gate to complete the box. whatever you choose to do, stay with a steel gate of some sort. you will need the support to save the bed. and i wouldnt cut a good gate, but many are beat to hell in the single wall area of the lettering, so it wouldnt be a big deal to remove it. something i saw today, i thought was real interesting. my mechanic buddy has a 56 ford truck, smoothed gate. he used seat belt clips to shut the gate with. hook attached to the gate, push button style clip attached to the bed side. might work real good on a home made air gate to keep it from rattling.
Trey
1965 CSS Utiline.
ex trucks:
70 D100
66 d100
66 d100
67 d100
69 d100
69 d200 crew cab
65 crew cab
66 d100
66 d100
"i don't know it all, but i know enough to be dangerous"
1965 CSS Utiline.
ex trucks:
70 D100
66 d100
66 d100
67 d100
69 d100
69 d200 crew cab
65 crew cab
66 d100
66 d100
"i don't know it all, but i know enough to be dangerous"
-
WD
- Sweptline.ORG Pioneer
- Posts: 1741
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
- City: Rosemark
- State: TN
- Location: Lancaster Plantation
If the letter panel is good, save them. That's what I'm getting ready to do. Square stock tubing tube and bottom, as well as bracketing the letter panel. Same size tubing as uprights and related bracing. Corner brackets up top. Silicon-bronze bushings to fit over the factory pivots. Tailgate cables (27") like on late models. Boat latches on backside of the gate to hold it shut or spring loaded latches with center pull. That way I have a straight, strong gate, that cross breezes or tailwind can blow through, and have the factory letter panel, which on mine is perfect, the rest of my stock gate is destroyed. Might look funny, but, it is MY truck. Strange is expected!
Went to the boneyard yesterday after some front end pieces. Found a 69 Adventurer, with the net gate. Looks like
. Too low, doesn't tie in smoothly, vynil peeling off from the net flapping. Where'd my puking smiley go? Nice badges and good rebuildable bench/bucket though. 3 roof lights too. Decent rear bumper (which I can't use, mine is welded on, and, of course, damaged).
-WD
Went to the boneyard yesterday after some front end pieces. Found a 69 Adventurer, with the net gate. Looks like
. Too low, doesn't tie in smoothly, vynil peeling off from the net flapping. Where'd my puking smiley go? Nice badges and good rebuildable bench/bucket though. 3 roof lights too. Decent rear bumper (which I can't use, mine is welded on, and, of course, damaged).-WD
If I didn't build it, it ain't mine.
1949 Dodge B1B-108; 1969 D100-128; 72 Super Beetle; and a bunch of others...
1949 Dodge B1B-108; 1969 D100-128; 72 Super Beetle; and a bunch of others...
-
Coelacanth
- Sweptline.ORG Member
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
- City: Rochester
- State: MN
- Location: Rochester, MN
Hey everyone--
I was a member of this group several years back (may have even been under a slightly different name back then...) Any way, I just registered again and have some insight to this question. My background is applied physics and engineering, and I really researched this subject a number of years back, about the same time pickups started racing on the NASCAR circuits. Hang on, this gets long...
First, NASCAR did lots of research on the flow dynamics of pickups alone and in packs, primarily to make sure that what they were going to allow wasn't too hazardous as pickups differ substantially from cars. Studies were run with the trucks in a variety of configurations: gate up, gate down, net gate, no gate, bed cap, bed topper, several shapes of bed toppers, ground effects, spoilers, etc... I never saw these results, but the fact that that they NASCAR trucks use bed caps is the direct result. HERE'S MORE:
About the same time frame, a mechanical engineering group, I believe in Oregon or possibly at Washington State, put some of full-size pickups in a wind tunnel and ran some similar experiments, including looking at cross-winds. The group had a quite thorough website set up with lots of pictures and data of the trucks in the tunnel and visible smoke bands showing the flow lines. The results: a specially made sloping bed topper that ran from the cab top down to the tailgate top was the most efficient, as it was obviously very aerodynamic. This worked well, but this makes windows and visibility extremly difficult, particularly in a race application (most likely NASCAR's reasons for not using them). Next in line was the bed cap. Then un-outfitted truck with tail gate UP. Here's the reason: The front end of trucks these days is reasonably aerodynamic, but it is the drop behind the cab which disrupts the laminar air flow over the bed. With the tail gate down, the "drop" is essentially top of cab to bed floor, which is a HUGE amount of drag. A bed cap reduces this by roughly half the cross-sectional area of the cab, as the air more smoothly flows over the cap. This reduction, which is quite similar to air resistance is close to a square function, meaning: if you double the area, you quadruple the drag! How does the tailgate "up" affect it? The tailgate actually creates a turbulent pocket in the bed, which is so violent, that the laminar flow over the cab essentially rides over the turbulent bubble. Not as smoothly as over the cap, but more so than the tailgate down or "netted," as that just allows a big turbulent "zone." Also notably, most configurations didn't really affect the cross-winds, other than that any higher profile bed caps or toppers made them more susceptable to it. If I can find the site and it is still up, I'll post a link.
I was a member of this group several years back (may have even been under a slightly different name back then...) Any way, I just registered again and have some insight to this question. My background is applied physics and engineering, and I really researched this subject a number of years back, about the same time pickups started racing on the NASCAR circuits. Hang on, this gets long...
First, NASCAR did lots of research on the flow dynamics of pickups alone and in packs, primarily to make sure that what they were going to allow wasn't too hazardous as pickups differ substantially from cars. Studies were run with the trucks in a variety of configurations: gate up, gate down, net gate, no gate, bed cap, bed topper, several shapes of bed toppers, ground effects, spoilers, etc... I never saw these results, but the fact that that they NASCAR trucks use bed caps is the direct result. HERE'S MORE:
About the same time frame, a mechanical engineering group, I believe in Oregon or possibly at Washington State, put some of full-size pickups in a wind tunnel and ran some similar experiments, including looking at cross-winds. The group had a quite thorough website set up with lots of pictures and data of the trucks in the tunnel and visible smoke bands showing the flow lines. The results: a specially made sloping bed topper that ran from the cab top down to the tailgate top was the most efficient, as it was obviously very aerodynamic. This worked well, but this makes windows and visibility extremly difficult, particularly in a race application (most likely NASCAR's reasons for not using them). Next in line was the bed cap. Then un-outfitted truck with tail gate UP. Here's the reason: The front end of trucks these days is reasonably aerodynamic, but it is the drop behind the cab which disrupts the laminar air flow over the bed. With the tail gate down, the "drop" is essentially top of cab to bed floor, which is a HUGE amount of drag. A bed cap reduces this by roughly half the cross-sectional area of the cab, as the air more smoothly flows over the cap. This reduction, which is quite similar to air resistance is close to a square function, meaning: if you double the area, you quadruple the drag! How does the tailgate "up" affect it? The tailgate actually creates a turbulent pocket in the bed, which is so violent, that the laminar flow over the cab essentially rides over the turbulent bubble. Not as smoothly as over the cap, but more so than the tailgate down or "netted," as that just allows a big turbulent "zone." Also notably, most configurations didn't really affect the cross-winds, other than that any higher profile bed caps or toppers made them more susceptable to it. If I can find the site and it is still up, I'll post a link.
-
mopar-maniac
Holy ! That's a lot of good information. I'd sure like to see that site if anyone finds it. (heading to Google in moments 
)
Good to see another phycisist around. I'm working on my MS in material science. I like you're handle as well. Fitting, a fish thought to be extinct on a board for trucks that many abandoned. Welcome back!
! That's a lot of good information. I'd sure like to see that site if anyone finds it. (heading to Google in moments ) Good to see another phycisist around.
I'm working on my MS in material science. I like you're handle as well. Fitting, a fish thought to be extinct on a board for trucks that many abandoned. Welcome back!-
Coelacanth
- Sweptline.ORG Member
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
- City: Rochester
- State: MN
- Location: Rochester, MN
FOUND IT! Or, most of it anyway...
I didn't find the actual paper but I found it's reference and another bit from an aerospace guy:
http://www.fordf150.net/misc/tonneau-co ... rticle.php
http://66.70.82.214/Forum_MSG.aspx?mast ... &page_no=1
(toward the bottom)
The first kid won an annual award from ASME, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. The first link has a list of the data, the second cites an older study. I was off a bit about the tailgate bit, but bear in mind that the study only looked at one model year for one make. Other brands could have better or worse performance. The tonneau cover, though, stands out significantly. The second guy has a much better description of what's occuring, and his study supports my rendition, but for a different year and model. Kind of bummed 'cuz the more recent study site had some great pictures of the experiment.
I didn't find the actual paper but I found it's reference and another bit from an aerospace guy:
http://www.fordf150.net/misc/tonneau-co ... rticle.php
http://66.70.82.214/Forum_MSG.aspx?mast ... &page_no=1
(toward the bottom)
The first kid won an annual award from ASME, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. The first link has a list of the data, the second cites an older study. I was off a bit about the tailgate bit, but bear in mind that the study only looked at one model year for one make. Other brands could have better or worse performance. The tonneau cover, though, stands out significantly. The second guy has a much better description of what's occuring, and his study supports my rendition, but for a different year and model. Kind of bummed 'cuz the more recent study site had some great pictures of the experiment.