Full size tractor unit empty fuel efficiency. Best one?

I’d like to know mpgs and suggestions on year 2000+ under 20k£ used lorries or tractor units for affordable/semi-affordable traveling.

The mpgs I’m most interested is when the truck is empty, since everything in the back will be made as light as possible(aluminium, carbon fibre). Which full size truck would have the best fuel economy. Excluding hybrids, can’t afford those, yet.

Tractor units are a choice as some people have converted them into short lorries.

Why?
I have an itch to make a full height 4x4 camper for living longer periods in the woods. I will be working as a forestry machine operator and I prefer to live in my own hopefully spacious modern camper instead of a site hut.

I have made up some 3D mockups and animations to see how I would be able to make a full width and height slide-out with good insulation, access to back with every wall and floor moving and how to have it two stories with enough height. Two stories with enough height would require a full height(4.2 meters here) truck since the ‘slide-up’ needs to have sturdy frame and insulation, plus it’s folding furniture need to have space between first and second story roof while the slide-up is down in travelling position.

Thus the interest for full size, as economical as possible trucks. Do you get 7.5-18T(MB Ategos, Daf LF CF) trucks with full width cabins?

  • Naamapokemen

p.s. the search gave some mileages and ideas, also weeks of Googling had mostly US bobtailing mpgs. Otherwise the mpgs in the net are way over 30, but thats usually loaded or half-loaded mpgs I’ve found.

If your going up wood track roads I would suggest a 6x2 tag axle tractor.unit twin steers tend to loose traction and pusher axle tractor units tend to do that push you when in wet conditions now for the technical bit as for mpg all depends on your driving if you sit with foot to floor no truck is goin to return the mpg you want.also so get one with cruise control and a decent engine brake,and use them as much as possible.if your not weighted up to the max go for a 450 no higher than a 500 but do go for a big engine cc I.e scania 13liter 450 or a Volvo 13liter 480 the last bit is your preference and what truck you like

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

Single-drive tractor units only have good traction when there is weight on the drive axle…which you won’t have.

If you want 4x4, you are pretty much limited to ex-army stuff. Like this

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyland_4-tonne_truck

Note: the four-tonne bit refers to payload, not gross weight.

I converted an old fire truck into a motor home. It’s a 16 tonner 4x2, weighs about 12 ton with all the stuff I carry. I get about 10 mpg. I do some dirt road driving but mostly highway. It could be better because the gearing is set up for fast acceleration and it revs far too high for cruising at 55 mph.

Thanks for the answers. I like the insight you are giving. I’ve seen similar responses in other forums I’ve browsed. This is the first place I’m asking for help.

I think a bit bigger engine/driveshaft than needed would last longer. Could also waste more capital. Not sure.

Here are some trucks/lorries I’ve had my eye on. Dunno what’s broken in them since they are so cheap. Anyway:

autoline.info/-/tractor-units/M … 3163034700 Would need at least adjustable ride height and weight on back axle. Engine is large, I’d prefer 7.5-10l. Big displacement in diesel at least in older vehicles would consume more in idle, too. I would think that’s still the case.

truck1.eu/trucks/dropside-t … 22285.html Double-cab on 4x4 would rock, but price is too steep. Especially with taxes.

trucksnl.com/used-mercedes- … 4755185-vd would want a cabin mod to enlarge backwards. Dunno if that’s possible without hefty amounts of money and still be ‘street legal’.

truck1-fi.com/kuorma-autot/ … 67685.html Renault had surprisingly amount of positive comments. Still electrics seem to be same fuss than with 2000+ Renault cars.

I’m just scared these would consume 30+ l/100km(~8+ mpg) even with my lighter load which I really don’t want. Those 2000km trips up here would quickly cost me arm and a leg.

  • Naamapokemen

ChrisArbon:
I converted an old fire truck into a motor home. It’s a 16 tonner 4x2, weighs about 12 ton with all the stuff I carry. I get about 10 mpg. I do some dirt road driving but mostly highway. It could be better because the gearing is set up for fast acceleration and it revs far too high for cruising at 55 mph.

Do you have any images. I would love to see some shots. 10mpg is decentish.

naamapokemen:

ChrisArbon:
I converted an old fire truck into a motor home. It’s a 16 tonner 4x2, weighs about 12 ton with all the stuff I carry. I get about 10 mpg. I do some dirt road driving but mostly highway. It could be better because the gearing is set up for fast acceleration and it revs far too high for cruising at 55 mph.

Do you have any images. I would love to see some shots. 10mpg is decentish.

Here is a link to photos of the build that is on Youtube.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfiVTCqSi4c&t=76s

It’s gorgeous. Was the living part of the vehicle crew space initially or did you convert the pump and gear area to one? I love that you kept the fire truck feel in the living area. Also conventional cab behind engine look good.

  • Naamapokemen

GasGas and Chris Arbor are both making good points. A solo tractor unit has a heavy engine putting loads of weight on the front axle and you’ll only have a virtually empty box on the rear where the drive is. Traction suspension braking etc will be all wrong.
Look at the 4x4 Renault fire trucks used by the French for forest fires?
Any truck will be expensive if anything breaks, or is worn. Much more so than a big car/van based vehicle. Fuel economy worries will fade when you look at other costs.

Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk

Of all the options you have outlined, I think the Mercedes 4x4 tractor will be the best base vehicle.
They were reliable if unspectacular with that engine, Also, from the photographs it seems to have steel suspension and drum brakes, which is a big advantage on a vehicle which is not in regular use. and from the description it seems to have a conventional four wheel drive system; ie no hydraulic drives. Biggest disadvantage is the short wheelbase, but I think you would be able to get a body approaching 4.8 meters long on it without cutting and stretching the chassis.

Unless you’re thinking of driving up the Atlas Mountains etc I would consider ex prison vans or trucks. The body is already insulated, has the door in it ready, it comes with a large diesel heater to keep warm. Would be an easy conversion.

The answer to this I think is keep it simple. A max weight tractor unit is going to have all sorts of bells and whistles you just don’t need let alone want the attached aggravation. Even with a body the handling/ ride is not going to be pleasant. You’ll have low mounted front spoilers and cab steps to knock off on forest tracks and the already mentioned traction problems. Just because you can read claims of 11/12 mpg with a light load does not mean that removing the trailer is going to dramatically improve that figure.

Go smaller, go run of the mill. It used to be said that the working man’s car was a Ford and the tradesman’s van was a Transit. Now it may not be quite the same today but the principle does still just hold. No matter where in the world you go you’ll find someone who knows how to fix it. To transpose that to heavier commercial vehicles we need to look for the most popular driveline components in the 7.5 - 18tonne sector, which leaves us with two choices DAF and Iveco both of whom use their own version of the ■■■■■■■ ISBE engine, badged as Paccar or Tector. Both manufacturers also have very extensive dealer networks and their bread and butter products form a substantial proportion of the workload for the independent heavy commercial vehicle workshops around Europe. Behind that engine series we need to have a simple manual six speed gearbox. Now we need to decide on actual design gross weight 7.5t, around 12t or 18t. The higher up the range we go the greater the ground clearance - in theory. A probable compromise between that and fuel consumption rests around the 10/12t mark. You won’t achieve anything brilliant, particularly in low gear up forest tracks, but 12/13 mpg or better should be possible on tarmac.

anything full size and 4x4 will have similar mpg to an antar that the army use to transport tanks.
itl also drive like a bag of dung on the road with the associated ridiculous cost of spares being a specialist vehicle.
anything else full size will be garbage off road regarding traction and ground clearance.

why dont you buy a middle range 4x4 gruntmobile pickup and slap a proper demountable on the back and have something worth having instead of a no cred ex prison van ambulance,or whatever.
they make great practical campers,but mostly unsellable because of hat they started off as no matter how good they are finished off.
you will also have a proper boys toy to play with once you lose the demountable.

Truck-Camper-on-Trailer-1.jpg

I saw a really interesting camper van for sale a few years ago, thankfully away up in Scotland or severe danger it would be here now.

It was on a Merc 814 chassis cab and obviously was based on a horse box design body, though as far as i could see it had been a camper from new.
What interested us is that the rear step frame had been used for carrying motorcycles as it was a race team wagon for most of its life, but that handy section, the boot basically, being strong enough to support horses was actually big enough to fit a Smart car in, and with a little alteration would i suspect have been able to get a little Suzuki 4x4 inside, making the most of getaway holidays.

Have a look at Expedition Portal.

There are a variety of different vehicles but I would agree that a modified rigid would probably do the job. Maybe a 6x4 ? Whilst you think it might be relatively light, you would probably have to be carrying your own fluids, freshwater, extended battery systems, and everything else to go with it.

You would probably also want to be carrying some spare wheels in case of puncture in a rural area.

having watched a few vanlife youtubers vids it seems the bigger the vehicle is the sooner they want rid of it . The cost of fuelling it is the killer and the big needs big tyres etc all sour the dream badly by all accounts

15mpg and room for a car and caravan in one. whats not to like :smiley:


go big or go home
(and yes, its mine, all mine :grimacing: )

corij:
having watched a few vanlife youtubers vids it seems the bigger the vehicle is the sooner they want rid of it . The cost of fuelling it is the killer and the big needs big tyres etc all sour the dream badly by all accounts

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+1
i sell a lot of campers and motorhomes.
anything larger than a lwb transit is poison compared to that size.
nobody has ever wanted to trade in their van and upsize to a lwb transit,its always the ones that cant get rid if the larger ones want to downsize.

corij:
having watched a few vanlife youtubers vids it seems the bigger the vehicle is the sooner they want rid of it . The cost of fuelling it is the killer and the big needs big tyres etc all sour the dream badly by all accounts

You’re right about the fuel. Two days ago we were heading into a gale and boy, was I grumpy. Yesterday it had swung round so I cheered up a bit. Today it’s the mountains. The only good thing about the trip is that we will be parked up and working for 19 weeks when we get there. The other half thinks we should tow a little runabout behind the truck but I’m not so sure.