15 vehicles
Best vehicle consolidation
Deliveries100
Total weight30,000 kg
Fleet utilisation92.9%
Average route load93.5%
Total route timeNot recorded
Main weakness
Geographically scattered routes
Comparison of three optimisation stages using the 100-delivery, 30-tonne London shared-delivery benchmark. The objective is to minimise total operating cost while maintaining practical delivery routes.
← Back to Platform| Metric | V2 | V3 | V4 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Deliveries | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Total Weight | 30 tonnes | 30 tonnes | 30 tonnes |
| Vehicles Used | 15 | 17 | 18 |
| Total Route Time | Not recorded | 73h 58m | 57h 22m |
| Average Route Time | Not recorded | 4h 21m | 3h 11m |
| Longest Route | Not recorded | 6h 39m | 5h 25m |
| Fleet Load Utilisation | 92.9% | Strong | Strong |
| Google Matrix Cache | No | No | Yes |
| Distance Matrix Data | No | No | Yes |
The lowest vehicle count is not automatically the cheapest delivery solution. Additional vehicles can reduce driver hours, mileage and operational risk.
The primary V4 benchmark should therefore become £ cost per 100 deliveries.
V2 achieved the strongest vehicle consolidation. V3 improved route-time control. V4 currently delivers the strongest route-time performance and introduces a reusable Google Route Matrix cache with distance data.
The next commercial test is determining whether V4 produces the lowest total operating cost.