How the methodology models a 200-truck Texas Triangle LTL carrier's $1.85M annual operating cost reduction
Applied to a mixed-freight LTL operator running a relay network designed 10 years ago for a different customer mix. The methodology rebuilds the lane structure from scratch and identifies $1.85M in stranded efficiency.
This page presents a worked example of the route optimization methodology applied to a representative LTL carrier’s network. Identifying details are anonymized — we never share client information without explicit approval. Numbers reflect modeled cost reduction and projected outcomes from the analysis. Your results will differ based on your network footprint, customer mix, and operating conditions.
The operational profile
The profile applied is a 200-truck LTL carrier running mixed freight — dry van and temperature-controlled — across the Texas Triangle (Dallas–Houston–San Antonio) with extensions into El Paso, Albuquerque, Phoenix, and Oklahoma City. The fleet has grown through acquisition, absorbing two smaller regional carriers over five years, each with their own relay points, hub locations, and dispatch logic.
The result is a bloated network: 14 relay points, inconsistent sort windows, and drivers frequently running legs under 150 miles — well below the utilization threshold for profitable LTL linehaul. Leadership at this scale typically knows the network is inefficient but can’t untangle which facilities to close without risking service failures on key accounts.
Post-acquisition networks almost always carry redundant infrastructure. The legacy relay points made sense for each carrier individually, but combined, three pairs of facilities were within 60 miles of each other — creating unnecessary handling, extra dock touches, and wasted linehaul hours.
What the methodology surfaces
The methodology ingests 18 months of shipment-level data, driver logs, and facility throughput records. Every linehaul move, sort event, and dock touch is mapped across the network, and each relay point is scored by volume throughput, geographic coverage overlap, and contribution to total transit time.
| Inefficiency | Impact | Recoverable value |
|---|---|---|
| Redundant relay points (3 pairs within 60 mi of each other) | 22% excess dock touches | $720K |
| Suboptimal lane pairing (legs under 150 mi) | 34% of legs below utilization threshold | $480K |
| Sort window misalignment across hubs | 6–8 hr freight dwell at 4 facilities | $310K |
| Out-of-route miles to serve low-density corridors | 3 corridors at <40% trailer fill | $240K |
| Driver domicile mismatch (drivers starting far from first pickup) | Avg 52 min stem time | $110K |
| Total recoverable | $1.85M/yr |
What the methodology recommends
The methodology produces a 120-day implementation playbook with 11 specific actions. The modeled outcomes below reflect projected impact at full implementation. The top five recommendations alone account for 84% of the recoverable value:
1. Consolidate three relay pairs into single facilities. Waco and Temple (32 miles apart), Midland and Odessa (20 miles), and two San Antonio-area sort points are each merged into a single location. This eliminates 22% of dock touches and removes three lease obligations.
2. Restructure linehaul legs around 250-mile minimums. The methodology redraws lane assignments so that 90% of linehaul legs exceed 250 miles — the break-even point for driver utilization in the fleet’s cost model. Short shuttle runs under 150 miles are consolidated into fewer, longer pulls.
3. Realign sort windows across the DFW and Houston hubs. The two highest-volume hubs operate on sort windows set independently — freight arriving from one hub sits 6-8 hours waiting for the next sort at the other. Synchronizing the windows cuts average hub dwell from 7.2 hours to 3.4 hours.
4. Convert three low-density corridors to partner-carrier arrangements. The El Paso–Albuquerque, OKC–Tulsa, and Phoenix–Tucson corridors run at under 40% trailer fill. Rather than running its own trucks at a loss, the methodology recommends interline agreements with regional partners — maintaining service levels at 60% lower linehaul cost on those lanes.
5. Redomicile 18 drivers to match freight origins. Analysis surfaces 18 drivers starting their shifts 45+ minutes from their first pickup. Reassigning home terminals to align with high-volume origin points cuts average stem time from 52 to 24 minutes.
Modeled outcome — baseline vs. methodology target
The methodology timeline
Is your network overdue for a redesign?
We offer a free 30-minute scoping call for commercial fleets of all sizes.
Request a Free Scoping Call