Why do so many Americans hate European trucks?

In a direct drive trans or say a direct drive ratio on an over drive , you have the crank and the drive shaft going the same speed , strait through .
On a overdrive you have power coming off the main shaft going through a gear and shaft then returning to main shaft .
There is parasitic loss in an overdrive .
That's my laymen explanation , not an engineer

 

any long driveline mean more strain on it, more vibrations, etc.

our transmissions 2%, hill climbing should not be problem, there is always gear below, automated transmission especially latest ones with dual clutch or direct splitter will make this gearchange quick in combination with gps cruise control it downshift it on time. if you are off highway, on some country road ( here many trucks work on this roads) than little bit shorter transmission will be better to avoid unnecessary downshifts without sacrificing fuel. with long driveline i see problem in startability, offroad, reversing real drawbar (A) trailers etc.

for normal weight and long distances i dont see need for overdrive,
for low speeds, lot of starting, offroad, heavy terrain and more weight i always use heavy planetary hub reduction and if possible double overdrive 0.69. ordered recently one with triple overdrive 0.57 of course for special use.

with longer wheelbase you need central bearing on driveshaft. this is one of parts that first start to create problems on for example heavy tippers, robust driveshaft, double overdrive lot of revs create this problem. this might be good reason to avoid double overdrive on road, also adds more wear on flange bearings. for on road application i would avoid double od.

in europe most of trucks use retarders for braking, jake brake is only fraction of power retarder provide and for heavy haulage/tippers/timber trucks, you need to use overdrive gearbox and slower diff to gain more power from retarder at lower speeds as it is secondary and its power depends on driveshaft speed. since new longhaulage trucks got fast transmission, retarder lost its power at lower speeds they had to adapt its proporties, scania use different set of gearings to gain optimal performances, but this kind of retarder bring more drag( increase fuel consumption) so they made one that disengages when not in use

 

I'm quite familiar with transmissions. I've rebuilt a couple. Just seems really dumb to castrate a truck so badly for a 6% gain. No way a truck with 2.xx rears will ever lift itself out of a hole loaded. Even trucks with 4.10's and 18 double over transmissions have enough trouble doing that loaded.

 

for long haulage work, i guess average truck get 7mpg? this would be 33.5L/100km, 6% of that is 2L , lets round that on 1.9L(1/2 gallon) for easier calculation.

you all say that you keep trucks up to 1million milles = 1600 000km ->1600 000/100= 16000 x 0.5 gallons = 8000 gallons, if i have found out good fuel is now 2.75-2.8 USD/ gallon this mean 22400USD over lifetime of truck for extra fuel. even if this long driveline, direct drive means you will have to rebuild something i am quite sure it wont cost you 22400usd, add lower engine revolution, which helps with compressor lifetime, alternator lifetime etc.....

here matematics look like, normal fuel consumption is 27.5L = 8.5mpg, overdrive is 2% more drag is 0.55L/100km, normal lifetime for first owner is 5 years 750 000km = 4125L of fuel more, curent price is about 1.18€/L = 4870€ = 5700USD., quite a lot, this number change game, engineers spent many many months working around to gain this 2%.

for work trucks i preffer 5.333:1

 

I know nothing about long haul stuff. I've always been involved with logging and fuel mileage isn't even a concern. Most guys are lucky to break 4.5mpg in that application.

 

can you please put some example, weight truck combination, explanation of conditions etc.

here we have 3 kind of logging trucks:
-ones ultralight, everything light as possible, hypoid axles even 6x2, alcoa wheels, they keep care about tire brand in order to save weight, alu air bottles, bumpers, low cabs, smaller tanks, bit shorter platform, alu front wall, alu timber bunk, weight optimised crane, and body. 2axle trailer with twin 265/70r19.5 ( they are best in size/payload vs. own weight ratio), short frame so timber bunk get almost above axles, this means no strain on chassis, so it can be lighter. used in international transport, you should not bring them much above legal weights.
they weight something like 15.5-16t with trailer and crane

-"normal ones", 6x4 hub reduction axles, 2400+ lbft gearboxes double clutch etc, often on steel springs, longer platform in more solid design, stronger cranes, 4x timber bunks, long trailers, solid design, 22.5 wheels, capable of loading some 60t on 5axle. empty weight around 18t

-heavy ones, 6x4/6x6 hub reduction, strongest driveline, strongest chassis, always on springs , often fitted with fully platform, cranes in range of 170, 3axle trailers. they are capable of 80t or more(if you can find enough heavy wood) empty weight from 20t.
cousin run 2 trucks that would match this, one 6x4 +3axle trailer and other 6x6+3axle trailer, trailers are from austrianriedler, and extendable , can load 2x5m on trailer

in neigbour countries they already use 7axle combinations altrough anything above 5axle means you are overloded, i wont be surprised if they will use 9axle for few years ( finish combination)

 

Sorry 98989 I don't know specs like you do......

Northern Maine private roads they pull doubles and load them up....

I would guess 20k front 52k rears maybe more . Double/ triple frame. Steel everything


Here is a typical ridged as you call them. A straight truck with loader...

2018 Western Star 4700SF A4484 | O'Connor Trucks

 

Let's hope such a thing doesn't tilt to much to the right or the left, that would make it tip over quickly.