Why do so many Americans hate European trucks?

hidrokon is not that popular in europe, but mpg gain lot of popularity

now lot of 7axle scania trucks with 450mt, they are building now 8axle

in europe nobody is aware how turkey is big.
i had a meeting last month with son of owner of one company from turkey. they are mb retailer, sale 20 000 trucks per year, cars too, vans too, make about 15000 trailers per year. own insurance company, own 600 turcks, make all kind of special bodyworks, for military, for firefighters....produce concrete pumps under licence about 220 per year.
they are now going to make their own military truck, currently based on mb, they have construction company too

 

Wow, you can gross 62.5 tonnes with a straight truck?
I'm really impressed!

You have a real close look at the 2 pics, the GINAF heavy wrecker is not that much shorter than the KW tow truck, if at all.

Stop jumping from the 1980's to 2019 in our conversation, we all know about aerodynamics which wasn't a big deal at the time, only a consideration.
There were other considerations though when choosing a truck and it's WB, maybe in Europe as well, the territory you ran, the type of hauling you did, the road surfaces you ran on.
You snub a long WB truck, but you don't seem to understand that there are reasons the long WB was popular, more in the west where the weight and dimension laws were more forgiving, where some places in the USA, 55 feet was the max.
A lot of mountain truckers had long cabover trucks for safety as a longer truck is easier to control on slippery roads, because of the radius from the kingpin to the front bumper is long and it takes more time for the rig to jackknife, giving you more time to react and correct.
That Ford you poo poo'ed for it's long WB was ordered with deck work in mind at a company with a van/reefer division and a machinery division, but wound up in the van division.
When pulling flat decks in the 70's and 80's, there were many long WB cabovers, (235 inches was max), in the west because we could haul 60 foot long pipe and steel on a 45 foot trailer rather than an extendable trailer.
The greatest benefit is the superior ride over a short truck.
Many highways in Canada back in the day were rough, bucking bronco rough.
When I started in 1972 there were lots of short trucks running around NA with the trailers nearly touching the back of the cab.
If you look at pics of Peterbilt cabovers you'll notice the back of the bunk has a slope to it, so the reefer wouldn't smash the back of the cab if you went up an incline.
Although not as common, the slanted back of cab was an option on Freightliner cabovers as well.
I drove short trucks, what I call short is anything under a 185" WB and no matter how much comfort and technology they boast, I still wouldn't drive another one.
I drove both these trucks from brand new, one is 160 inch WB, the other is 170 inch WB which was my assigned truck for 2 yrs, and they both rode like hammers, I have the scars on my back to prove it.

 

Guessing that driver still lives in their parents basement.

 

I did not write anything about 62.5 tonne, besides that, the legal weight limit is 50 tonne in the Netherlands.

I do see a bit of a difference, and this wasn't even the longest 5 axle Kenworth.

well, you wrote this:

and those improved aerodynamic properties of the cab are rather insignificant compared to the horrible aerodynamic properties of that huge gap, I'm sure truck builders at that time knew.

European tractors are always short, they never have a long wheelbase. The reason is the maximum length of a semi truck of 16.5 metre.

These days Electronic Stability Programs on truck and trailer should prevent jackknifing.

That may well be, but is seems that ridiculously long tractors are still a kind of fashion statement in the US.

European manufacturers have tried to solve that problem with designing very good suspension, and and very well suspended cabs, and they succeeded quite well.

A DAF FT 4 x 2 tractor has a wheelbase of 3.6 , 3.8 or 4 metre, so 142" , 150" , or 158" .

And yet, those are very normal wheelbases for European tractors, and they have a better ride than expensive passenger cars.

 

Doesn't matter how much stability programs you have, short wheelbase (3,6m) are sooo ####ty to drive in Europe. Bounces forth and back all the time. You just can't fool physics, long wheelbase is the way to go.

And if you say, that modern trucks have better ride than expensive cars, have you ever driven a expensive car? Your beloved Daf, if cab is on springs then you bounce back and forth, if cab is on air then it feels like trying to manouver a boat on rough sea.

 

Even i agreed to the above,which i don't,it still rides twice as good as a volvo.

 

At one time the USA had the shortest wheelbase with daycab trucks.
They must have fun to drive.

 

If cab is on springs, maybe. Front spring cab suspension, rear air, 4 meters wb frame and it's almost perfect. Stiff enough so cabin doesn't jump each time you accelerate, and soft enough to absorb bumps.

 

You're right, you did say you could max your GVW with a straight truck.
I meant you couldn't gross with a straight truck what this outfit is capable of maximizing, which is 62.5 tonnes, but I imagine in the Netherlands that's small potatoes.


You have a good look at that GINAF and the axle spacings, it gives the illusion of being much shorter than the KW with closer axle spacing.
Why are you looking for the longest NA wrecker instead of the shortest one anyway?

Those trucks carry a lot of equipment and due to the lack of availability of cabovers and European heavy wreckers in NA our drivers have to make due with longer trucks and seemingly inferior technology.
Although........, the longer WB gives you a physical advantage when straight line pulling or lifting from the rear, the front wheels won't come off the ground as easily as they would with a short WB because the front end of the truck works as a counterweight.
You know, levers, fulcrums, radius and all that good stuff.

About the aerodynamics of the CLT9000 Ford I drove, why do you focus on that truck's gap, can't you imagine a shorter one with a smaller gap between the trailer and the truck and an air deflector on the roof, because we had those as well.
The CLT9000 that my boss drove was a double bunk, the WB was 185 inches and it had a fairing on the roof, a trailer with a reefer was plenty close enough to the back of the cab.

I'll agree with you about stupid long WB's being a fashion statement.
But if you look at the majority of sleeper trucks in NA you'll find that most are between 228 and 244 inch wheelbases.
At 244" you're legal with a 53 ft trailer pretty much anywhere in NA.

I'm sure the European manufacturers did all they can to make a good riding truck, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you could buy a 6x4 cabover with air seat, air suspension and 4 corner air ride cab in the 70's and 80's in Europe, like the Ford CLT9000, and you couldn't get a KW Aerodyne either.
Did I mention I also drove a couple KW Aerodynes, they were pretty nice to drive.
If you ever come to Canada, an old friend of mine might take you for a ride in one.