The Most Technically Effective AND Cost-Effective Drop-In Baffle Solution
Features of Surge Busters
Eliminate 96% Surge Energy
Surge Busters eliminate 96% of surge energy within the tank itself (this energy is dissipated and NOT transmitted to the truck). And while visually, they appear to use a significant amount of tank volume, they actually displace less than 1% of your full tanker’s liquid load (which, when partially filled, is irrelevant).
Significantly Lower Driver Stress
By reducing surge energy by 96%, you remove nearly all force responsible for rollover accidents in liquid tankers. With the surge energy almost entirely removed, drivers have less responsibility to manage that surge and, therefore less stress. This translates to happier drivers who stick around longer AND makes it easier to bring new drivers on board.
Lower Costs
Because there is 96% less surge energy being transferred into your tankers, that means there is less stress on your machinery as a whole. This translates to lower maintenance than other baffle systems. Surge Busters also last for years and require nearly no maintenance themselves (in some cases, such as food transport, you may wish to wash them). Finally, because you’ve significantly eliminated the likelihood of an accident due to surge, you’ve significantly reduced your financial risk.
A Letter from Gary Mauer
Dear Friend,
For over 20 years, I’ve been working to help companies that depend on the transport of partially filled liquid loads to run their tankers in the safest most economical way possible.
It’s been my pleasure during this time to have a significant impact in meaningful ways:
Helping fire departments better transport water tankers with lower risk, assuring water gets where it needs to be on top.
Helping fuel tankers transport through busy city streets and highways with significantly reduced risk to their drivers, everyone around them, and the environment.
Helping food delivery trucks, such as milk trucks, get their deliveries in the safest possible way, and with the least possible product waste.
To me Surge Busters is about making this job safer and happier for our drivers, as well as other cars on the road, better for the environment, and the best possible financial solution for the businesses we work with.
I’m proud to create a product which is so good that many of our original clients don’t reorder after 20 years, because their original surge busters are still doing their job (they only order when they have new trucks to fill).
I hope you see how impactful Surge Busters can be both for the people working at your company, as well as the bottom line of your business.
Surge Busters are The Ultimate ROI
There is no other solution for liquid surge control which eliminates as much surge energy, lasts as long, and provides as much cargo volume fully filled as Surge Busters.
Government regulations require certain flammable commodity haulers to have some level of baffling type system designed to reduce liquid surge-related problems and accidents.
Because Surge Busters are so easy and inexpensive to set up, whether it’s retrofitting an older truck or adding to a newer one, the cost-to-benefit ratio is very much in your favor.
Here’s some simple math to consider:
Surge Busters can last easily 10, 15, or 20+ years (many of our clients still have their original baffles running from 20 years ago).
In this example, each Surge Buster costs $27.95. For every 30 gallons, you are going to have 1 of these. That means a 2000-gallon truck will have 60 Surge Busters.
(These exact numbers will vary slightly for your specific scenario)
In this case, that will be $1677 upfront cost for a 2000-gallon tank.
Now, if you only get 10 years out of these, that’s $167.70 per year.
How much do you think you’re going to save in maintenance, how much in operation capacity, how much from greater driver retention and acquisition, how much from a higher level of safety, every year?
Do you think you’d see a significant ROI on that $167/year investment with your vehicle?
Compare that to standard baffles, their lack of actual energy dissipation (they only redirect energy), their greater level of ongoing maintenance needs, and ask yourself which sounds like the better investment?