Is it feasible to run a daycab in this situation?I

i did a out and back run today went up to roccanville sk back to Bismarck, nd parked my truck where im going to unload in the morning less than 4 blocks from the house, walked home. i still was glad to have my sleeper today, i sat in melita, mb today coming back down for 2 hours waiting for the customs broker cause there was some sort of computer malfunction causing them a huge back log. i kicked my boots off stretched out on the bed popped in a dvd made some lunch. now i should still get my 10 in but really i could roll after 8 if i needed two because i had 2 hours in the sleeper berth

iv got a 2000 vision, with a e-7 460 13 speed and 3.70's rolled off the scale at 97k when i loaded. i would see what you can get a 380 turned up to cause cans although not as heavy as me have the aerodynamics of a barn door, there like dragging a boat anchor. that is one draw back to day cabs is they tend to be speced for p/d routes low horsepower low gears not happy on the highway. the asct/ac engines are a bit problematic although most of there issues have probably be updated and addressed by now, they don't pull near like the pre egr

 

i would guess he probably has a mp-8 or something like that in a pinnacle little different bread than a asct egr version of a e-7 and probably rated 100hp more than that 380. im not a gotta have big hp guy but i think i would want a bit more umph than a 380hp egr aset engine to pull cans, cans don't pull easy even empty. but it would surely get him from point a to point b without issues, but he would probably be working for it the whole way. cross town loads would probably not even notice.

 

My E7 has the 460P file...485 hp/1660 ft lb of torque (I'd LOVE to get the XT file for another 100 ft lb, but my local Mack hasn't been too willing to fight for it and corporate has been rather stingy with that file). That runs through a Mack 2180B transmission to Mack rears geared at 4.17 with 11R24.5 tires. Pulls pretty well for a little 728 cubic inch motor.

The 355/380 is going to have 355 hp while cruising and 380 hp when pulling...and only 1560 ft lbs of torque. That can be compensated for by running shorter gears, smaller tires, or both...but that'll cost you mph on the top end. It'll still pull the loads even with the taller gears & tires, you'll just have to downshift a few more gears and it'll take a little while longer to top a hill...but it should get the job done. Hell, 300 hp used to be considered a lot...and the freight still got moved.

 

You obvisiously weren't around, back in the day when a 350 Cummins was a BIG Motor......

 

i would say waiting just a little bit to get a truck that your going to be happy with is better than settling for the one you can afford, my first truck i got would have been just fine for what i had in mind when i bought it, put a lot of money into fixing it up and then replaced it mostly because it was the completely wrong truck for what i ended up doing with it, after i had already changed a ton of stuff on it to make it better for what i was using it for. i guess i don't regret buying it it still made me money learned a lot. but if i was going to do it all over again knowing what i know now i would have got a different truck.

i put a lot of time into choosing, even this one has a few compromises but it works great for me and im happy with it.

 

id love to get that 460xt file as well, mine is pretty stout as well i am impressed with the power for the displacement iv been as heavy as 113k it had its tongue hanging out at that weight but its a lot better than i would expect for a 12L 460

id certainly agree that 355 engine will get him from a/b and if he is running around town probably wouldn't even notice. iv moved 90k+ loads with 350hp spend much time on the highway esp in the mountains pulling heavy cans i think he will be wishing for more i don't know if there is hard parts to be changed but iv heard of a lot being happy with the 425 setting. supposedly has a better tq curve than the 460 if i was the op and serious about the truck id look into what the truck could be up-rated to before buying the truck.

 

...and for what it's worth, I pull shorter trailers. When I bought it, I was pulling pneumatic tanks and end dumps...now primarily flatbeds with an occasional grain hopper or van. Might be going back to end dumps with the whole ELD BS, but I can definitely feel the resistance pulling a van with my truck. Might not be AS bad if my wheel base wasn't so long...240" on a day cab...or even if you added some cab fairings or a roof deflector to help move the air around the trailer instead of directly into the nose of the trailer.

 

the containers i think its the rippled sides and mabye the junk chassis don't help but they pull hard, way worse than any van trailer. the easiest pulling trailer i pull are the hoppers, right now pulling a tall side 48 ft tridem i swear it pulls like its 10k lbs lighter than my side dump loaded to the same weight. my belly dump falls somewhere in between.

 

@haycarter - nope, I wasn't around for that, but as someone with quite a bit of seat time in a 355 ASET Mack, I'll bet a mechanical 350 Cummins would pull harder. Hell, my company Volvo with an ISX12G CNG motor pulls harder, as does an older E-7 350.

OP, I don't know what kind of things can be done to the 355 ASET motor as far as turning it up, and it will move, but it won't move fast if the road gets off level. You said NC/VA mountains, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say you'll be crawling up Fancy Gap in low range with a heavy can. It'll do it, but you won't enjoy the mountains part. The one I drove was in a CH Mack, with a Mack 9-speed, for a dry box hauler whose heavy loads were barely cracking 30K. All over the northeast, NY, PA, CT, MA...flatland or smaller hills were nothing, steeper climbs were miserable. Not trying to discourage you too much, since I really am a Mack fan, just something to be aware of.