I detect some teeth-gnashing over the technical bent this thread has taken. It is inevitable, when discussing the merits of a piece of machinery, that some engineering will enter the discussion, I would have thought. The forum has contributions from a wide range of professions, and is the better for it. If the thread was moved to the Moderns part of the forum, it would lose the perspective of the more experienced members. The mechanical stuff would be a lot less complicated, if a certain member did not do his best to complicate it.
kr79:
What the assessor guy said rungs true ramone. Apparently these autos can adapt to different driving styles. Now after the last few days my truck can’t decide who’s driving either Lewis Hamilton or miss daisy and easing off the throttle was encouraging down changes. Hopefully it will settle down tomorrow.
Haha! Is there a reset button? Even better, does it have a socket, into which you can plug your laptop? Then you could programme it to do whatever you liked!
Not that I know of. I’d imagine it can be rewritten to various settings as I drove a n MAN that had manual disabled.
Fact is if you ran a 730 up to peak torque and changed up you wouldn’t be able to change up to many gears as you would stall it so you will use a fair few unneeded gears.
kr79:
Fact is if you ran a 730 up to peak torque and changed up you wouldn’t be able to change up to many gears as you would stall it.
Obviously if you went for a 1,000 rpm gap upshift running at 44-60 t gross.
But if you ran it up to peak power before going for that wide ratio upshift back down to 900-1,000 rpm and then did that a few times during the course of a day and then a week,month that would probably be the firm’s profit if not total running budget all gone on just fuel.
But if we’re talking about just solo running without a trailer on I’m convinced by the theory and I’m in.But the road will need to be dry.
Wears peak torque on a 730 scania 1400 rpm tops so to go down to 900 rpm that’s one whole gearchange tops. 60 ton are we on stgo work now. The fact is 60 ton haulage vehicles won’t be on the road any time soon.
greek:
All this tecko stuff gives me a headache, all my driving life ( for a living since1969) Ive driven by feel & sound not looking at dials & my use of diesel has never been questioned, in fact few weeks ago was 13th out of 180 on fuel economy & driving style (telematics said so) & I am on a job & finish so not condusive to economic driving. I would think that most drivers good & bad will prob be the same its only journos & anoracks that would bother talking about peak touqre power etc, Drivers drive how they drive
On autos i wouldn`t agree either about just being a steering wheel attendant because just like Eaton twin spilltter , range change, merc eps,etc etc, you stiil have to learn their traits
Fysheet seems to have disapeared his original post was I shift & other, I dont think he was looking for Driving lessons especialy as it posted on the old codgers forum, we dont do conflict on here we just mull over old times, maybe the post just be moved to the pro forum so more of the tecko guys could join in
How do you find the telematics,we had the TMS version fitted to our fleet and i had the job of monitoring it,i think just like the auto box its far from perfect .The info was unreliable and in some cases just wrong ,i think a system which tells the office a driver has been over revving his engine is totally un necessary
The fans of this system would have a field day with some of the drivers on here
H’mmm a 730 Scania and a 18 speed Fuller. I reckon with a 730 you would , with the power you’ve got , need about 8 of them , at most.
I don,t know about Popeyes arm but I don.t think your arm would stop moving and it’s to be hoped you’ve got an air assisted clutch cos you’d finish up with a left leg like a Sumo wrestler.
Everyone seems to be confusing the benefits,of having lots of close ratios available,and the idea that having an 18 speed box means using every single gear between 1’st and 18’th.
The fact is driving a 620 let alone a 730 by using as few gears as possible over a rev range between 950 rpm-2,000 would probably result in a fuel bill which would cost more than the rate for the job.
Whereas using ‘enough’ of those 18 gears to keep the thing in a very narrow rev range,as close as possible to the centre of it’s torque plateau,would probably be as,if not more,productive and fuel efficient as using a 450 powered wagon at 40-44 t gross let alone 60 t gross which is where the government (should be) looking to create more efficiency in the industry.
I`m gonna get slated here but why do you need to run a high powered motor up to 2000 rpm , it doesnt make sense to me ,i would think the more power you have the easier it would be to keep it in the green
[zb]
anorak:
I detect some teeth-gnashing over the technical bent this thread has taken. It is inevitable, when discussing the merits of a piece of machinery, that some engineering will enter the discussion, I would have thought. The forum has contributions from a wide range of professions, and is the better for it. If the thread was moved to the Moderns part of the forum, it would lose the perspective of the more experienced members. The mechanical stuff would be a lot less complicated, if a certain member did not do his best to complicate it.
kr79:
What the assessor guy said rungs true ramone. Apparently these autos can adapt to different driving styles. Now after the last few days my truck can’t decide who’s driving either Lewis Hamilton or miss daisy and easing off the throttle was encouraging down changes. Hopefully it will settle down tomorrow.
Haha! Is there a reset button? Even better, does it have a socket, into which you can plug your laptop? Then you could programme it to do whatever you liked!
I havent a clue how this works (zb)anorak but i have heard it too ,the computer gets used to a regular drivers style of driving and performs accordingly ,we had Ivecos that were like chalk and cheese in the way that they drove,
H’mmm a 730 Scania and a 18 speed Fuller. I reckon with a 730 you would , with the power you’ve got , need about 8 of them , at most.
I don,t know about Popeyes arm but I don.t think your arm would stop moving and it’s to be hoped you’ve got an air assisted clutch cos you’d finish up with a left leg like a Sumo wrestler.
Everyone seems to be confusing the benefits,of having lots of close ratios available,and the idea that having an 18 speed box means using every single gear between 1’st and 18’th.
The fact is driving a 620 let alone a 730 by using as few gears as possible over a rev range between 950 rpm-2,000 would probably result in a fuel bill which would cost more than the rate for the job.
Whereas using ‘enough’ of those 18 gears to keep the thing in a very narrow rev range,as close as possible to the centre of it’s torque plateau,would probably be as,if not more,productive and fuel efficient as using a 450 powered wagon at 40-44 t gross let alone 60 t gross which is where the government (should be) looking to create more efficiency in the industry.
I`m gonna get slated here but why do you need to run a high powered motor up to 2000 rpm , it doesnt make sense to me ,i would think the more power you have the easier it would be to keep it in the green
That’s what I’ve been trying to tell them but it goes against ‘the theory’ which says that it’s most econimical to run it up to 2,000 rpm before missing out a load of gears and then running it up to 2,000 rpm again.
kr79:
Wears peak torque on a 730 scania 1400 rpm tops so to go down to 900 rpm that’s one whole gearchange tops. 60 ton are we on stgo work now. The fact is 60 ton haulage vehicles won’t be on the road any time soon.
As I’ve said it does no harm to have more gears available and the more there are the easier it is to keep the engine in a narrower band closer to the centre of the torque plateau especially when taking off fully freighted on an incline.The argument about wether 60 tonners will or won’t be allowed by eventual Euro realisation that it’s the way forward sounds a bit like the type of arguments in the late 1970’s early 1980’s which said let’s carry on with 265 hp Gardner powered trucks and 9 speed fullers at best.
H’mmm a 730 Scania and a 18 speed Fuller. I reckon with a 730 you would , with the power you’ve got , need about 8 of them , at most.
I don,t know about Popeyes arm but I don.t think your arm would stop moving and it’s to be hoped you’ve got an air assisted clutch cos you’d finish up with a left leg like a Sumo wrestler.
Everyone seems to be confusing the benefits,of having lots of close ratios available,and the idea that having an 18 speed box means using every single gear between 1’st and 18’th.
The fact is driving a 620 let alone a 730 by using as few gears as possible over a rev range between 950 rpm-2,000 would probably result in a fuel bill which would cost more than the rate for the job.
Whereas using ‘enough’ of those 18 gears to keep the thing in a very narrow rev range,as close as possible to the centre of it’s torque plateau,would probably be as,if not more,productive and fuel efficient as using a 450 powered wagon at 40-44 t gross let alone 60 t gross which is where the government (should be) looking to create more efficiency in the industry.
I`m gonna get slated here but why do you need to run a high powered motor up to 2000 rpm , it doesnt make sense to me ,i would think the more power you have the easier it would be to keep it in the green
That’s what I’ve been trying to tell them but it goes against ‘the theory’ which says that it’s most econimical to run it up to 2,000 rpm before missing out a load of gears and then running it up to 2,000 rpm again.
Well its a sad day CF but i after agree with you , i think you would do more harm to an engine running it up to 2000 rpm just to reduce gear changes than to keep it in the green band it was designed to work in initialy
H’mmm a 730 Scania and a 18 speed Fuller. I reckon with a 730 you would , with the power you’ve got , need about 8 of them , at most.
I don,t know about Popeyes arm but I don.t think your arm would stop moving and it’s to be hoped you’ve got an air assisted clutch cos you’d finish up with a left leg like a Sumo wrestler.
Everyone seems to be confusing the benefits,of having lots of close ratios available,and the idea that having an 18 speed box means using every single gear between 1’st and 18’th.
The fact is driving a 620 let alone a 730 by using as few gears as possible over a rev range between 950 rpm-2,000 would probably result in a fuel bill which would cost more than the rate for the job.
Whereas using ‘enough’ of those 18 gears to keep the thing in a very narrow rev range,as close as possible to the centre of it’s torque plateau,would probably be as,if not more,productive and fuel efficient as using a 450 powered wagon at 40-44 t gross let alone 60 t gross which is where the government (should be) looking to create more efficiency in the industry.
I`m gonna get slated here but why do you need to run a high powered motor up to 2000 rpm , it doesnt make sense to me ,i would think the more power you have the easier it would be to keep it in the green
That’s what I’ve been trying to tell them but it goes against ‘the theory’ which says that it’s most econimical to run it up to 2,000 rpm before missing out a load of gears and then running it up to 2,000 rpm again.
Well its a sad day CF but i after agree with you , i think you would do more harm to an engine running it up to 2000 rpm just to reduce gear changes than to keep it in the green band it was designed to work in initialy
The bit I don’t get is that I’m sure that kr did try something similar as part of ZB’s test of ‘the theory’ and I’m sure it came up with a figure of around almost 1 mpg worse fuel consumption and that wasn’t running at 40-44 t gross . The green band is there for a reason and the narrower rev range that you can keep it to either side of the centre of that green band the more fuel efficient it ‘should’ be. Unless ‘the theory’ is in fact correct in which case all those green bands will need to be altered up to peak power engine speed.
Been following this discussion with interest as Iv’e never driven an auto-box wagon.
Had a good look at the link to the “Thesis” [zb] posted. Seems Scania have programmed their Opticruise control-unit for max. fuel consumption to block-up-shift at rpm’s about 1600rpm, no higher when accelerating to cruise speed. I could be wrong tho’.
There is something to be said about over complicating things, which some of the technical stuff has done, not just to the people that don’t understand or don’t really care about it one way or the other
The thing with driving a lorry is that things constantly change, even if you’re doing the same job day in and day out, what may work on Monday will not work on Tuesday
If you let an Auto Shift get on with the job without interference it will do a fairly good job of being efficient, no matter what the circumstances
However, on any given day, a good driver can beat any Auto Shift, sometimes by using the short shifting method as described by Carryfast, other times by using the method described by V8 Lenny, the scientific data that has proven that both methods will work, sometimes you just let the thing get on with it and sit back and enjoy the ride
If you read through this thread and take in the information from all sides, you’ll get a balanced view and maybe with a bit of trial and error you may gain from it when you’re out on the road
my old 97 scania is programmed so no use to rev more then 1700,so could gouvenors set,have no problem,s live whit it(even if i the gouvenor) ,and still i can skip gear as i like,in heavy distribusion 50/60(finish joke )road town fuel 30l /100km medium speed 50km/h means 15l/h , and theKWH is onthe 144 about 0.200g/kwh ,mean,s in one our driving the medium consuming is75KW and it is 100HP ,so if you not in a very hurry and road is flat GARDNER was agreat engine, ,cheers benkku
The bit I don’t get is that I’m sure that kr did try something similar as part of ZB’s test of ‘the theory’ and I’m sure it came up with a figure of around almost 1 mpg worse fuel consumption and that wasn’t running at 40-44 t gross . The green band is there for a reason and the narrower rev range that you can keep it to either side of the centre of that green band the more fuel efficient it ‘should’ be. Unless ‘the theory’ is in fact correct in which case all those green bands will need to be altered up to peak power engine speed.
[/quote]
I did run it up to the rev limiter and made as big changes as the truck would allow as a acceleration test and that was the quickest way to 56 but imho i wouldnt like to do that on a regular basis is i dont think its good for the engine and probaly why in auto power mode it wont go above 1900rpm.
if we look at the two auto tests i think the economy seeting was about half mpg better but to be fair these were congested a roads so not perfect conditions but i suppouse thats the real world.
To be fair i have been lazy and used the auto in economy until doing these tests and now use a combination of both unless in traffic.
As Mark says driving isnt a science and letting the auto do its thing but with a bit of assistance sometimes using power sometimes using the torque gets the best result. I think the thread has become a bit to technical there is no hard and fast this is the best way its a combination of lots of things and a good driver will get the best out of either a manual or auto.
When i spoke to flysheet a few weeks ago his problem was more with the display than the gearbox.
i wouldnt want to give up i shift for my current job but for a job like flysheets it is not realy needed.
geoffthecrowtaylor:
i ll defy anyone with an auto box not to break the egg
Ok then, how much do you want a bet on that
Never had that problem with an auto rolling back myself.
Yep me neither.
Like has already been said they’re still machines that need to be cajoled and their shortfalls learnt to get the best out of them. Perhaps auto box is not an appropiate name, perhaps because its labelled AUTO people think its going to do it all for them…wrong, they’re probably more fool proof but they’re not going to make anyone redundant.
I don’t do the easiest of road work, country lanes, manouvering down ■■■■■■ farm tracks, shunting about in ■■■■■■ farm yards trying to turn around but I still love my auto, but the best thing about it though is the ‘‘A/M’’ button I can leave it to its own devices, or I can go up and down the box changing gear when I want to by just twitching a finger and when it gets into top gear on the motorway, the button goes into ‘‘M’’
fly sheet:
I’ve given the I-shift 15,000 miles of chances over the last few weeks & I’m still not keen.
Luckily I work for decent people who have let Me swap into a manual, its about 10 months older & not as shiny but that suits Me too.
Anyway off I go with My Fuller & its 13 gears & bollox to Volvos I-shift its pants.
And they all lived happily ever after
Well there you go John its all down to preference, and to deny anyone their choice is the most heinous of crimes , but don’t you get winging now if you start missing gears
fly sheet:
I’ve given the I-shift 15,000 miles of chances over the last few weeks & I’m still not keen.
Luckily I work for decent people who have let Me swap into a manual, its about 10 months older & not as shiny but that suits Me too.
Anyway off I go with My Fuller & its 13 gears & bollox to Volvos I-shift its pants.
And they all lived happily ever after
I love a happy ending,but its like those american films where the endings are like fairytales it never happens in the real world,well not until now ,good luck with the fuller not that you’ll need it and dont forget shiny motors need cleaning more for the same pay leave 'em to the glory boys
. 
and when it gets into top gear on the motorway, the button goes into ‘‘M’’