Valence = better mpg?

[Vortec Lover]

how heavy your foot is will do more for MPG than the valence

 

[GM Guy]

I run the valence for looks, aerodynamics and cooling improvement. There is a slight difference, which is important when you are exceeding the max GCWR like I am.

 

[Bob L]

I always thought it was to direct air from hitting suspension components for aerodynamics. On a 4x4 or lifted truck I can't see it making much difference on a 2wd It may help a little as the front is usually much lower than the rear. I am sure the wind tunnel would tell more than measuring gas mileage.

 

[redchevy914x4]

neither of my GMT400's have it installed. I ripped it off my 91 while off road. The first thing I did was remove it from my Yukon when I put new tires on it.

 

[Justin S]

If it does, I guarantee it's no more than a 10th of a mpg. To make a difference it would have to be 3 times wider, and that still might only gain 1 mpg if that.

 

[One1999Chev]

Not saying you're totally wrong there Dean, but things work a little different then that. The more air it lets under the greater the chance of it creating a high pressure area. Now think if it was completely sealed off from air moving through it. It would create an extreme low pressure area, causing the vehicle to actually be sucked down to the pavement when you drive. That's gonna create more drag, but a lot more downforce at the same time, making drivability better.

So in theory, with the valance you wouldn't so much get better MPG's, but better drivability. But it all honesty, when the bottom of the valance is already 2 feet off of the ground, I think it's mostly there for appearance.

2 feet off the ground? Lol have you ever seen a valance?

 

[90halfton]

Valence is not good for anything other than looks. Take a real good look at our trucks and tell me they put precision aerodynamics in mind when they built them. They weren't exactly built by NASA.

 

[LMB1500]

Well..... this bodystyle is (one of) the first pickups to be tested in a wind tunnel from what I understood, coulda sworn I had read that on here.

 

[camaroman101]

This thread was from 2014, that being said I'm certain it does have some effect on aerodynamics. Same with the factory rake our trucks have.

 

[Supercharged111]

In practical application, the rake is twofold: first, it aids in downforce/lift reduction by allowing less air under the truck and second, it gives the rear suspension a "head start" for a load. Also gives the front a little room to lift if that weight is on the hitch. I ASSume this is why positive camber is acceptable on these trucks, but that's just me. Since we don't care about aero lift at speed, I can only believe that the real reason for the valence is to help create that lower pressure area under the truck and encourage airflow through the radiator. All stuff that's been said, but now you got it from me.