Cabovers

It's actually also a way to keep the economy moving. It pushes a lot of the worlds industries to innovate, many new companies that have some new solution how to keep it green. All because people start to asking for greener products. Thanks to this you have given an economy that was going to slow down an enormous boost.
If you guys think about it there hasn't been any real inventions since the 90s, okay we have some stupid phone companies fighting but that's about it. All the other stuff has been about making the word greener and what would be better than the government helping doing some propaganda work to boost it even more.

The welfare we had before the dip in 2009? (#### forgot when it stopped) was the longest the world have ever seen. That may never ever be again.

 

Yea, no shait!

Yea really, CO2 a "polutant" and a "greenhouse gas"! What the F?
Any honest scientist would say that CO2 makes up well less then 1% of so called "green house gases" and it's NOT a POLUTANT!
And gases are inert and DO NOT have the property of absorbing and/or reflecting heat! Only solid or liqid matter particles have this physical property
Over 99% of "greenhouse gases" on this planet it's WATER VAPOR, water particles + solid matter (dust) in the atmosphere.

CO2 it's necesary for allot of the vegetation life cause without the absorption of CO2 and photosynthesis we wouldn't have a bush or any darn green thing on this earth!

So where is the F'in logic behind this environmentalist BS agenda?

How stupid one has to be in order to believe this environcomunist propaganda?

 

humans are very naive in their try to keep the actual configuration of ecosystem,withthem or without the system will change anyway,cause everything change, thats the propriety of matter

 

Dude, do you even "listen" to yourself when you're thinking such BS with so many holes in whatever logic you'd try to apply?

1: So the way to grow the economy, we first have to go broke trough a government dictated and managed wealth redistribution trough implementation of totally immoral, illogical and flawed science laws and regs!

2: Create a system where the all mighty government picks the winners and the losers acording to a political criteria instead of a free market values system!

3: Create a mass dependence on gov programs and a "cradle to the grave mindless utopia"!

4: The way out of trouble consists of "doing the same thing over and over again and expect a different result each time". Gov's spends tones of money they don't have, bankrupt every existing gov program but, yet create more programs, keep on borowing in the name of countless future generations with the "promise" that things are gonna get better if we're just spending more money that we don't have. Decade after decade, generation after generation are doing the same thing and at an ever increasing speed and yet, we're still waiting for that "super reach utopian future generation" that is gonna pay all the debts of the past generations.

Ignorance is bliss, ain't it?

Why do we have to stop economic development and destroy the things we already have in the name of a flawed science in order to promote some wishful thinking science fiction "star trek" utopian idea?

The other day I was driving trough west Texas. A milion windmills and not even one was turning producing 1/2 watt of electricity. Hundreds of Billions $$$$ wasted in Gov subsidies that made a guy like T Boone Pickens super reach, but everybody else has to fit the bill.

5: The illusional "green tech and green jobs": "people want and demand green blah blah blah??? BS!
People want jobs, want to eat and have a decent life!

What is more GREEN then trees, grass, and vegetation that depend on that "bad polutant" CO2 for photosynthesis which enables these to actually exist and survive???? It's like saying that people and animal life don't eat food, just simply exist in an inert form. Really?

Dude, we're here only for a little speck in time compared to the grand skeem of things. I ain't in the slightest concerned about what's gonna happen on this "third rock from the Sun" hundreds and thousands of years from now!
I don't give a crap about that and also I strongly believe that 99% of the people alive today, if they were to answer honestly to this issue, they couldn't care less. As for that 1%, well, ya always gonna have some wackos around at any time and in every generation. The funny thing is that, those 1% tend to be the freaks with the crazy ideas that push the crazy agenda and ultimately greatly benefit in the "now" from it, at everybody's else expense.

 

Short answer, I never ever said it was good for the nature, just a way to spend some more money and keep the economy rolling.
I don't give a crap either about the nature other than I don't spill out hazardous stuff just for fun....

People want jobs? I don't know a single person without work were I live, okay some but they don't want to have a job.

 

Reallyt it is true that new EPA and Euro regulations are politically motivated.

Old rigs made in 70-s were diesel gusslers, really, as I remember made in 70-s KRAZ trucktor burns about 45 l/100 km, new Euro-5 truck needs about 30 l/100 km. And fuel economy is not the direct economy of 20-30 % comparing with 80s, but it limits fuel and oil prices all over the world.

From other view poin new EPA 2010 and Euro-6 makes us use low sulfur diesel (ULSD). This fuel may be made of good oil, but not Syberian oil, so Russian oil goes cheapper and cheapper, and it is not all, new engines with DOC are not compatible with Russian diesel fuel.

Really it is a result of poor Putin's politics.

In future EPA and EU gonna make us use Hybrid trucks and later zero emission electric trucktors. And do not forget new E-Highway technology of trolley trucks that may charge batteries on highway and use batteries in urban areas

 

My point was actually made from an economy point of view.
I was trying to actually show that the whole idea is motivated first amd foremost for an economical impact, but NOT POSITIVE, actually it's meant to bring western economies down to the level of third world banana republic economy and NOT vice versa.

OK, creatimg jobs that are in big part subsidized by gov or, 100% gov payed jobs it's NOT a good way to even try stimulating an economy, or just keeping people artificially employed!
I was trying to make evident that the gov is not creating wealth, it only taxes the wealth created by the private sector and then it spends it at a much bigger rate then wealth is created in the first place, thus creating debt that in many cases exceeds much over 100% of the country's debt sustainability capacity, compared to it's anual GDP!

A recipe for 100% destruction!

I actually was trying to show that all this LATER EPA PROPAGANDA it's based on FALS ASSUMPTIONS of a FALS SCIENCE!


NO ONE in this world, well, the western world at least, wants to pore HARMFUL SUBSTANCES on the grounds and in the waters that produce our food, nor that we want to pump HARMFUL GASES and/or particulates in the air that we all breathe!


But the EPA declared that CO2 IS A POLUTANT, which in all honesty, IT IS NOT!


That's all folks!

PS: I don't know what the population in Finland is, how much of its economy is gov controlled and/or gov subsidized and what kind of products Finland produces,( well, I know of Valmet paper and paper machinery,) amd what's the marketshare of Finland's products in the EU compared with the EU funds contributing to it in direct corelation to population/production/marketshare of the other EU countries.

All this factors radically changes the ball game from one country to another in a what it's supposed to be a "free market" multy national economy.

So, Finlad's low unemployment rates might just be subsidized by the EU at the expence and/or disadvantage of the other participant countries.

Ya gotta look at everything!

 

Well, I don't know what the fuel economy achievements were anywhere else, but I can tell you that, here in the US of A, the diesel engines produced in the late 1990's and up to 2003 were at the best fuel economy to power ratio at any time in the history of building diesel engines.
After the introduction of EGR in 2003, things started deteriorating very fast and fuel economy dropped back to almost 1970's levels.
In 2007 EPA forced another changes and then we had EGR+DPF(diesel regeneration), the worst thing of all diesels produced since Rudolf Dieasel invented the diesel engine. The fuel economy dropped right back to 1970's levels. And I've seen 03 and 07 engines blow more black smoke in the air than the 1970's engines.

2010 EPA regs forced yet another set of regs and now we have engines that in some cases improved fuel economy back to somewhere in between 03 and 07 levels, but the reliability of EPA components on the engine it's the biggest hurtle yet to be dealt with. Now we don't only have to use diesel but have to use DEF/Add Blue which it's yet more stuff that requires production and distribution and added costs.

I think that "Add Blue" stands for aded costs/more operating $$$ wasted!

All this for only 0.0001% contributing factor to the compounded causes of "climate change" issues!

Make everything, including food, so expensive world wide, to the point of creating an "Ethiopia Effect" at a global level........all of this done in the name of "Saving the Planet"!

Really, who in the F is gonna save us while still here? Cause on the other side of "Jordan" I know, we've got Jesus!

 

i am sharing same thoughts about that bold as you , they should offer crawler gears, overall ratio of ishift is really small this often require short rear ends. company from my city deals with heavy haulage have some fh16 600(612hp) as 6x4 and fh16 750s 8x4 with 4.55 diff ratio they run them as 150-180ton gross and i believe that this is too fast in bottom gears...

 

i think they are showing just basic vehicle configuration in those sheets , because they did not say they offers twin heavy duty frames, they did not mentioned extra heavy duty chassis, they did not say anything about stronger 13t axle housings for road train work , they did not say anything about hub reduction axles for 200t, also nothing about different kind of available suspensions and front axles , but still might be possible that you cant get 3300 on 730 i dont know

as for 3100, i would be first to chose it this make distance from cab to trailer shorter....