Why do so many Americans hate European trucks?

Kinda interesting .....

 

Can we agree . The EU trucks are different, not bad or wrong, just different . What works for the NA market will not work in the EU market. What works in the EU market doesn't fit the NA market.

 

Cat,did you notice he lifted his tag axle when empty?

 

If you have it use it.

 

Ya, one on the truck and at least 2 that I saw on the trailers......

I also like the remote control load securement devices .

 

Take a look at these two trucks:



Both trucks are in the present Kenworth catalogue. Technically both trucks have to comply to the same regulations, including all of those electronics. The yellow T680 will save a lot of fuel compared with the red W600. So why would you pay extra for a second hand W600, and have higher running costs? Just for the looks? Makes no sense to me. If you have to earn your living with a truck, you should look at economics first. Of course you can pay a bit more to make it look a bit nicer, and perhaps to have more comfort, but unless you have a lot of spare cash laying around, don't waste a fortune on looks.

 

EU cabovers are 90 kmh governed, becouse of fuel milage. And belive me W600 fuel milage is better thn DAF XF

I have both Cabover and Conventional truck and I can surelly say conventionals save fuel at highway speeds. but not too much, about 5%.

 

Not the first time this has been pointed out here and probably won't be the last. You do realize there are quiet a few applications where the latest, greatest wind tunnel tested aerodynamic tractor will get no better fuel mileage than any barn door pulling the same load? In heavy haul, oil fields, logging, tankers, open deck - I mean there is a whole world of trucking out there where aerodynamics don't amount to any fuel savings at all no matter what the aerodynamics.

So really it boils down to ease of maintenence. Who needs all those plastic panels to break loose and be flopping or have to remove when doing maintenence work? There's something to be said for simplicity. Everything need not be overly complicated.

Granted in a typical highway application pulling some van or reefer trailer the obvious choice would be the T680. But to assume fuel savings across the board in every application is off the mark. It just ain't so.

 

Say that to your wife/girl friend about something she is going to purchase ......

Let us know how it goes.

 

And again Caesar, there is a lot more involved in economics and cost per mile/km calculations than just fuel mileage. Plus, we now have some states that allow 80 mph (129 km/hr).

In 1989 I traded in a conventional (359) for a T600. I did gain about 5% in fuel mileage, but I also gained cost incurred by stuffing all the air through one small air filter under the hood (which needed replaced often) rather than two large ones, increased exhaust temperature, miserable visibility in the winter because every snow flake would stick to the windshield, less productivity because the T600 was heavier than the 359, much less longevity from the steer tires, more time with the fan running because of the decreased radiator surface, and on and on. I had reached the point of diminishing return.