If you could drive any tractor what would it be and why?

As a civilian in the industry I see a few different models and I know which one I would like to be in. I am around KW t-600, Pete 379 and 387, and Frght Columbias every day.

The 379 and T-600 sure look sweet but for an OTR driver I would think that they would suck due to the room in the cab and sleeper??

That aerodynamic 387 doesnt really have the old school look but there is so much headroom in the cab and storage everywhere in the sleeper it seems to me that it would be a big favorite.

The Columbia has a ton of room in the cab and sleeper as well as the storage but most drivers dont seem to excited to be driving a Freightliner. Why?

The reason I ask this is that the drivers I often encounter seem to drool over the 379 Pete, is it because of the looks or is there some feature I am not seeing?

the International 9400i

havnt seent eh prostar on teh inside yet, but if its as sweet as the 9400 it will be a nice ride.

my 9400i aint much to look at on the outside, boxy and bulky. but inside shes got so much room its insane i love the layout of the interior, the room even in a midroof, all in all this is the only truck i ever want to be caught dead or alive in

Growing up I used to spend a week or two in the summer with my Dad on the road. That was back before the days of aerodynamic trucks and therefore I've got a sweetspot for the 379's and W900's. Dad drove nothin' but Pete's (even a COE Pete for one outfit). If I had the means to pay cash for one, I'd buy one outright and get my own authority and run the highways they way they oughtta be run. IMHO

__________________
Keep that diesel burnin' and those tires turnin', but get there safe to keep on earnin'!!

It's too bad that we all (myself included) can't remember our own short comings at the exact moment a fellow man or woman is having one of their own.

All the KW models use the same cab and sleeper. T6 T8 and the W9.

I've driven a KW several hundred thousand miles and by now I know where every thing is laid out. No desire to change. I've looked at other trucks, even driven a few but a KW feels like home.

__________________

Well, the first requirement for doing the work that I do is that the truck be lightweight. And that pretty much eliminates all of the "classic" designs, since they all tip the scales pretty heavy. Add in the fact that I have never been impressed with styling from the great depression, and you can take them off the board for me. Just because Great Grandpaw had to get by with lousy aerodynamics, doesn't mean that I should have to bear the same burden. In fact, I'm so uninterested in them that I don't think I have ever looked at the interior layout of any Pete or KW.

I've looked carefully at the 9400 IH, and I do like the interior layout, but the one that I test drove the other day weighed in at 17,940 with very low fuel levels. Too heavy for what I do, so there would have to be some changes in it before I could make do with one. my estimate was that to putthat truck on the road, at the very best you would be u around 19,000 pounds, and that was more than I could deal with. In fact, our policy is that we will not take on any trucks weighing over 18k, so O/O's who work for us have to deal with that weight limit. My current company Mack Vision weighs less than 18,000, with the fuel tanks filled to the brim (200 gals), the product unloading blower mounted to the frame, a large filled storage box on the back, all my gear inside, and me in the seat.

One of the nice things about the Mack is that the engine could be uprated in power without any weight gain, so I could have a 460 under the hood and not pay any penalties, except possibly a small price in fuel use. I'd change from the Mack built trans to an Eaton Fuller 10 speed since I'm not in love with the Mack trans, and if the weight permitted it, I would love to upgrade to a 60 inch sleeper vice the 48 I have now.

But other than those differences, I would pretty much stick with what I have. If I were pulling a van or a flatbed, then I might make some changes, but I learned long ago that I am interested in pulling where the money is, and what I do pays a lot more than van or flatbed rates. So I'll make the sacrifices needed to have a lightweight truck, and have more weight capacity available to haul the money I make.

I work for a farmer, he also runs a trucking company. The trucks that we use on the farm are typically the older trucks from his trucking company, so typically they're well used. My opinion is based on the tractors I have actually driven enough to get a feel for them.

With his trucking company, the farmer I work for runs a fleet of mostly Pete 379's and IH 9900i's, but has added a couple Western Star 4900's recently. When my truck ('98 379) goes into our shop for an inspection, since it's a farm truck, it rarely gets priority. That can mean a regular inspection takes 3 days. As a result I drive a few of the other trucks from time to time. I get put in any spare trucks that are around. I've driven 4 or 5 of the 9900i's, ranging in year from '02 to '07, and a number of different 379's, ranging from '90 to '04.

As far as the space goes, there's no doubt way more room in the 9900i, but for what I do, space is not really an issue. I drive it for the day, and go home at night. I really have no reason to use the sleeper, so the space between the seats and into the back isn't an issue.

The biggest thing I notice going between a 379 and a 9900i is that the Pete is WAY quieter inside the cab. I have the volume on the radio significantly lower because it's so much easier to hear it in the Pete. The other main thing I notice going into the 9900i is that the interior feels really cheap. Why do I say that? When I go to release the brake, there's a whole lot of flex in the dashboard. One of our drivers pulled his dash apart and built himself a little frame to add a little support after he pushed the valve right through the dash. The Pete dash feels solid, and I like the switches way better than the plastic switches in the IH. The 9900 rattles badly too. And that door on the sleeper? Seems like ever other trip I take in the 9900 that stupid cheap latch lets go and I see the door in my mirror flapping in the wind. As far as getting in, getting into the IH feels like climbing a ladder whereas getting into the Pete is more like climbing stairs.

I get mixed opinions from other drivers on which truck rides nicer, for me it depends on the individual truck; I've driven good and bad of both.

And finally, since the first time I laid eyes on one, I've been of the opinion that the 9900i is butt ugly. The 379 looks great (always has) so in the end the Pete takes the cake for me. The first truck I ever drove was a Pete, and the regular truck I drive is a Pete, so I may be a little biased since that's the truck that I'm familiar with.

I'd like to drive a KW sometime. I've always liked the look. I would assume that they're rather similar to a Pete.

I drove Macks and Internationals for years then started driving a Freightliner Classic and just recently went back to Mack and and glad I did, I run heavy haul and spec trucks pretty heavy and Mack seems to take the abuse better than others. just my .02

I drive a freightliner columbia now, but I hate getting flashed all the time because the headlights are so bright and I prefer the mirrors off the century and the hood latches...so I'm gonna say my fave truck is a Freightliner Century.....roomy, turning radius,fuel economy. I do have to say though those new Kenworth t660's are looking sweet, and I loe the layout of the new Freightliner cascadia(think thats how its spelled)

That new Cascadia is a nice looking rig and I agree with you on the T660 too. I still like the T2000 though the best out of the KW lineup. Had an O/O in the shop with one the other day, brand new and a deep black cherry color, looked sharp.

Dunno about the FLDs but a KW headlights are very easy to adjust and stops pissing off your fellow motorists.

__________________