Why do so many Americans hate European trucks?

Where did you read that? I explained how a Dutch company had handmade an extended version of a standard cab, and then I explained in detail which panels should be factory made for an NA version of a big sleeper cab. You don't think I was suggesting that every NA type sleeper cab had to be handmade????

You are confusing two things. Your trucks want work here for very technical reasons, they get stuck, you can't change that. A European truck can easily be adapted for the US market, after all they can be adapted for any market in the world contrary to US trucks. The other problems you mention are a matter of organizing. The manufacturers seem to have a problem with training dealers for new engines and other technology.

 

No they clearly can not. Those pollution control systems are not some bold-on thing, they are an integral part of the motor-management system. Developing a new engine with all components will quickly cost you over a billion dollar or more.

 

This seems to be a circular argument with you, and you refuse to accept it. One more time 3 multi-billion dollar corporations have determined there is no market for European styled trucks in the US and Canada, so they don't do it. If you don't like it, take it up with Daimler and Volvo, not us.

 

at the risk of repeating myself .
What we have now is a disaster
The only ones who like it are the tree huggers and they don't care if the systems are dependable
They might prefer trucking to struggle with these systems
You seem to gloat how these euro systems have been adopted by us
All I'm saying is this is one of many reasons why we don't want or trust your tech
You can twist your pretzel logic into a knot , and throw up straw man arguments to try to prove your point .
Following euro tech has been a disaster , we should have taken more time and used trials to find something that works and is dependable

 

Does this help you?:

"One other difference is in the warranty. SULEV cars registered in Arizona, California, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, or Vermont are covered by the "California Emission Control Warranty". This warranty covers emissions related parts for 15 years/150,000 miles."

The tank is one of those very specific parts.

 

And who should have done that please with which engines?

 

I'm going to assume your not stupid
So we must have a language barrier causing this
What we have here is a failure to communicate , some men you just can't reach

 

I know why they don't do it, I explained that a few postings back. I will quote myself:

That is the same reason they don't try to market EU style trucks. Not because they can't be adapted, or do the job, you want the dinosaur look.

 

So now you are saying that european trucks don't meet the north american market demands/requirements/wishes.
And yet ....... all the time you were telling/insisting that european trucks are so much better for the north american market.

 

I'll let you in on a secret. Just because you say it is so, doesn't mean it is.

If you adapt a Euro truck to the US requirements it's no longer a Euro truck. It would be a North American truck.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the looks of the truck. If a Euro truck would make me $1,000 more a year than what I have now, I'd buy one tomorrow. If it were looks, our Canadian and Mexican neighbors, who are far more "euro" oriented than the US, would have more Euro trucks. They don't.

What we KNOW is

* the life cycle of a Euro truck is about half of that of a US truck.
* The axle weight distribution of Euro trucks are the way they are because of length restriction laws in Europe. Without length restrictions, weight distributions can be optimized.
* Cabin sizes of Euro trucks are the way they are because of length restrictions. Without those restrictions, longer cabs and sleepers are a better business choice. Or mega companies with 15,000 trucks on the road would not buy them.
* Any increase in complication of a design increases capital costs, and maintenance costs. Those costs have to be paid by increased performance, or they are just an added cost.
* What looks good on paper, in the shop, and during the demo doesn't always look good on the bottom line. Everything, on paper, shows that wide singles are more economical than duals. Adoption rate was pretty good, as high as 30% but it is now falling. Companies are going back to duals, because when you take into account real world factors like damage due to failure and related down time, casing value, costs of road side service or towing when not available, duals end up the lower cost option. Other technology, like disk brakes, now have adoption rates well over 50% and rising. The proof is not on paper, not in the shop, not in demonstration projects, the proof is on the bottom line.