Why do so many Americans hate European trucks?

Low loader........

 

Here is the customer letter. EPA useful life is 10 years/435,000 mi/22,000 hours whichever comes first. Tell them you want a "true" discount!

 

Thanks.
Next thursday i know what they will give.
I do know that some have paid full list price.
No matter what brand off truck,as a owner or person who is responsible for maintaining a fleet it is best to stay informed.

 

A rough time-line for euro cabovers.
Going by memory and it's many years ago, so I may be wrong at some of the facts. Anybody feel free to correct:

Late 60's early 70's several new truck ranges were introduced. For many it meant the transition of non-tilting cabs to tilting cabs. Cab suspension was in many cases still rubber blocks all around.
Axle suspension typically still multi-leaf springs.

Mid-late 70's introduction of rear cab suspension, for example Scania introduced the 1-series in mid 70's still on rubber blocks rear of cab, only few year later mechanical (coil springs) rear cab suspension became available, did not improve the ride much though.

For long distance highway trucks: transition from multi-leaf springs to parabolic springs during 70's.

Volvo first to introduce 4-point cab suspension in 1977/1978. Mechanical with coil springs.

First high roof cabs were introduced late 70's, Berliet/Renault Centaur and Volvo Globetrotter.
Today most manufacturers offer 2 or 3 different roof heights. For example DAF's XF can be ordered with flat top roof, the mid roof SpaceCab and the high roof SuperSpaceCab

Around same time, late 70's, maybe early 80's, MAN started to promote rear axle air-suspension. As far as I remember at first on single axle tractors only.
I remember their demo trucks at truck shows with small egg-tray taped to rear crossmember, raw eggs in them, and drivers were invited to drive the trucks trying to loose or break the eggs.

Not sure when first air-ride cabs became available, but my guess is first (optional) air-ride cabs were introduces sometime in the 80's.
Today many manufacturers have mechanical 4-point suspension as standard, air as an option.

 

Mb had 2point spring suspension on cab since 1973 dont know for earlier, i think late LP had one leaf spring on rear.

Front cab suspension was available at least in 1980

Scania had cab air suspension in late 1984.

Mb had air suspension on rear axle somewhere at late 1960s maybe 1967-8

Man forced air suspension more than anyone else. As much i know they are first with full air suspension already in mid to late 1970s. Mb in 1987

 

Two reasons, they need that crane so often that it pays to own one, and the second reason is that police and highway authority want the road cleared as soon as possible, so no time to start calling around for a crane.

However, some times they hire a second crane, if one crane is not sufficient. In the next clip the yellow crane and the wrecker belong to a salvage company, the red crane is owned by a crane company.

 

You have that many wrecks that require a Crane? What kind of drivers do you have?

 

This is a typical Dutch truck accident, a truck in the ditch. Almost all of our roads have ditches along side, so it often happens that a truck or a car ends up in the ditch.

 

No winches on your wreckers?

 

No, you look at the distance from the centres of the front axle and the rear axle on the red KW and the yellow Euro wrecker.
To get equal axle spacings on the GINAF, you have to move the two axles ahead of the rear axle further back, which will cause the gap between the rear steer axle and the leading axle of the rear tridem further apart, thereby increasing that distance.

Several people have already addressed this issue, I thank them.
If a crane is needed for a wreck in Canada, the tow company usually calls a crane company and they tell them what size crane and how many they need, which is not often unless they're lifting a truck out of river from the top of a bridge or a deep hole.
It's possible there is a towing company somewhere in the country that owns it's own cranes, I just don't know, I haven't quite seen the whole thing yet, most of it, but not all.

Yadda yadda yadda.......................

I want you to know that I understand the intricacies and theories of aerodynamics pretty good from experience driving aero and non aero trucks and being an auto racing fan since I was a kid.
The real world aero effect depends on the speed and direction of the wind in relation to the truck's speed and trajectory.

Yes, the closer the gap between truck and trailer increases efficiency, theoretically, which is beautiful if the truck cruises at speeds of 60 to 90 km/h.
But, if the cruising speed increases to 105 km/h that gap doesn't need to be so small.
Reason being that the slip stream behind the tractor becomes greater because of the increase in speed, the space between the truck and the trailer doesn't need to be so tight, the wind doesn't have enough time to slip between the two units.
Let me tell you something else I know from experience driving aero trucks in high winds.
It's a rare scenario that I have experienced with several aero trucks over the years, including a Vole Vo 780 with cab extenders and full aero package and enough gap to accommodate a refrigerated trailer.
My target cruise speed is always 105 km/h which will vary depending on the weather, traffic and infrastructure.
The winds were very strong and coming at a slight angle to the front of the truck from the side, the truck was working trying to maintain a constant speed of 90 km/h.
I slowed to 85/km/h which was a little better, the turbo boost was a few pounds less.
I then stepped it up to 100 km/h and the truck pulled easier than it did at 85 km/h, at 105 km/h it was working harder again, the reason is the scenario I described above.

A song to nit pickers from me, hope you have a sense of humour.