Truck Brand Perception - By Manufacturer

I was waiting for someone to mention the StarCar. I have a 379 Pete now, but really if I had been able to find one, I would have bought a 4900EX or LowMax. They tend to be a little heavy, but I have never heard a complaint about squeaks and rattles or build quality. Spacious cab and sleeper, more options than you can wrap your head around. Hard to say what's up on resale value, because I rarely see them up for sale around here. Seems like the people who buy them keep them.

 

Maybe it was just an oversight, but what about Western Star? I absolutely love mine. Rides great, open sleeper, spacious - and the rumour about being heavy is just that. I can haul 44,500# with reefer & half tanks.

 

Sorry, but its got to be more than just a rumor...35,500# tare weight with half tanks of fuel is heavy!

 

In my job for a used truck dealer in CA dealing in Fuel trucks and trailers so I drive them all at some point. Peterbilt is the most comfortable and driver friendly, KW has little footroom without sleeper and they can't figure out how to consistently wire the light switches! Freightliners are mostly ORT trucks, no off road to the oilrigs! Just drive them at night so no one will see you, Macks are OK just one ##### looking at another.

 

Peterbilt and Kenworth and both owned by the same parent company, PACCAR. The Pete 387/587 and KW T2000/T700 are virtually the same truck minus the hood and front facia combo and the dash. The structure of the door panels, cab and windshield are identical. The only difference is cosmetic. These can be had with a Cummins or their in house brand PACCAR engines.
Volvos are good trucks, but parts are harder to get quickly with their own Volvo engine. They get great MPG.
Macks are great vocational trucks, IE: dumps, cement mixers, trash trucks ect. but they are not necessarily set up for drivers comfort in an OTR application.
International has gotten better. Past models are very utilitarian and leave a lot to be desired in terms of fit and finish of the body. International motors are probabally the worst in quality when it comes to durability. So much so, that my current LTL company will not order any more, due to Internationals not offering Cummins brand engines anymore.
Freightliner is like the Chevy of the trucking world. There are hoards of them out there and most of the newer ones are very similar. The Columbia and Cascadia share alot of the same parts and the original Century Class. They can be had with Cummins, Mercedes-Benz (from the Diamler Chrysler marriage) and Detroit Diesel ( the most popular ) Over half of them are Detroits with 10 speeds and produced with fuel econemy in mind, nothing else. The old FLD models and XL's were not the greatest in terms of body quality. If I were to buy a new one,it would be their new Coranado, a blend of tradional styling and newer aerodynamics. Its probabally the best looking truck they built in a long time.

 

Well, I'm partial to my Mack. Sure Pete's and KW's are nice to look at, shiney, chrome. But, hell, go look at the thread I did in the TRUCK section on the '12 Mack CXU I spent 5 days driving as a loaner. Chrome galore, long WB, huge sleeper, 505hp motor. I would take that over a Pete or KW anyday. The one thing I can say about International, the Lone Star, love it or hate it, but it's innovative. Volvo, pretty much an overpriced Mack. I do agree, I like the looks of Western Star's, but they are #### heavy. Freightshaker, well, there is a reason they have that nickname.