new units are 500bhp up to the two 750bhp units
Buy still restricted to 89 kph 
You just get there faster
OVLOV JAY:
Punchy Dan:
i wouldn’t entertain anything less than 11 litres or 380 for a 26 tonner .Typical boss, I wouldn’t drop below a 13 litre 460
i have a 14 litre too but I’ve not seen many that can get it off the yard !
Beau Nydel:
Don’t you think though that most of the ‘problem’ is not with the powerrrrr but the torque or lack of it with the engines being strangled at euro 5 & 6? Also final drive could be a bit high geared to ‘improve’ fuel economy on ordinary roads but crucifies them on more difficult routes. My ***burner is a typical example. Goes lovely with about 15 tonne in the box but any more or difficult terrain and she doesn’t half start crying!
According to the official figures, peak torque for an Euro3 164 - 580 is the same as on a new R520 - 2700Nm. Gearing would be the choice of the customer though, a bit foolish to order an overdrive box for heavy loads on hilly terrain.
Do most of the purchasers think about that or even understand it or do they just take x number of whatever the salesman/manufacturer offers them (it will be ok we only have them for 3 years).
SWEDISH BLUE:
new units are 500bhp up to the two 750bhp unitsBuy still restricted to 89 kph
You just get there faster
A claimed 89 kph … 
kr79:
I have a 420 at 44ton not the fastest with a 14.10 trailer at full weight. Does the job though
To be fair though Kev, torque gets you off the mark, and horses keep you going up hills. With the work you do a big engine would be a waste
Muckaway:
NickW88:
We have 2 MAN 26t fridge rigids at work. The 290hp variant feels slow sluggish and unresponsive yet the 320 feels like a completely different vehicle, far more than you would expect for just 30hp difference.Is the 320 a TGS? If so I think it has a larger engine (10litre?) whereas the TGM is barely 7litres.
That’lol be why then! The 320 is the TGS yes and nice to drive, if you ignore the auto box that is. Pretty certain the 290 is the TGM. I know which one I pick given the choice
Steve-o:
SWEDISH BLUE:
new units are 500bhp up to the two 750bhp unitsBuy still restricted to 89 kph
You just get there faster
A claimed 89 kph …
90kph minimum for us 
milodon:
Beau Nydel:
Don’t you think though that most of the ‘problem’ is not with the powerrrrr but the torque or lack of it with the engines being strangled at euro 5 & 6? Also final drive could be a bit high geared to ‘improve’ fuel economy on ordinary roads but crucifies them on more difficult routes. My ***burner is a typical example. Goes lovely with about 15 tonne in the box but any more or difficult terrain and she doesn’t half start crying!According to the official figures, peak torque for an Euro3 164 - 580 is the same as on a new R520 - 2700Nm. Gearing would be the choice of the customer though, a bit foolish to order an overdrive box for heavy loads on hilly terrain.
This is what matters to me - most of my work will be cross country, A roads and hills. Only spend about 30% of the time on dual carriageways/motorways…
Was just talking to my boss about why they never bought a 410 for the 8w. Apparently the salesman took into account the work they did at the time, not much 50mph+ running so the 360 was specced. It had something to do with torque distribution. Now the limit has gone up and we travel further, he uprated it. Roughly 0.5 to 1 mpg improvement.
My last unit was scania r440 and it would pull my trailer empty (19ton) up the Glen at dumfries on the limiter. The one i have now is a r450 and with same trailer it’ll only do 50.
Beau Nydel:
Don’t you think though that most of the ‘problem’ is not with the powerrrrr but the torque or lack of it with the engines being strangled at euro 5 & 6? Also final drive could be a bit high geared to ‘improve’ fuel economy on ordinary roads but crucifies them on more difficult routes. My ***burner is a typical example. Goes lovely with about 15 tonne in the box but any more or difficult terrain and she doesn’t half start crying!
Yep. As I was saying earlier.
“Horse power ain’t all that matters though. We got by with 120,150,180 horses years ago when it was 32 ton gross. What we seemed to have more of was grunt (torque). No rose tinted glasses here, it’s just how I remember it. We weren’t in so much of a hurry either, but on the other hand, we could do 70 and more on the quieter roads we were on. I reckon that all the euro 3,4,5, etc crap has made those horses in to foals”.
No replacement for displacement.
All the lorries i’ve ever driven, the smaller capacity engines have had to be thrashed to get any sort of normal progress from them, resulting in more fuel burned let alone the engines and drivetrain having to work harder.
You don’t see many individually user specced vehicles any more, most of them are fleet fodder one size fits all for one size fits all operations and drivers, vehicles that increasingly regulate how they should be driven and increasingly monitored by box tickers in traffic admin.
I don’t quite get why so many vehicles are so high revving at motorway speeds, most vehicles in the upper weight bands have 12+ gears to choose from (not needed when engines were bigger) so why gear the vehicle to be revving too high when higher gearing can be used to a clear advantage.
Good drivers will always get more for less (fuel usage and general vehicle wear as well as more efficient work) from their vehicle no matter how badly it’s specified, good operators would get better results by tailoring their vehicle specs to the job/weight/terrain and their indvidual driver’s skills and attitude.
Good drivers saddled with fleet spec underpowered or poorly (sales) specified vehicles (due to lowest common denominator philosophy which is now the norm) lose heart.
Bad drivers don’t use well specified vehicles correctly, hence they use even more fuel and associated drivetrain wear is higher still.
Chicken and egg.