kitbuilder123:
Slightly off topic but if working on a paid by ton basis, is there much of a weight penalty for going for big horsepower? For instance how much heavier is a v8 scania as opposed to a 420?
And would the fuel saving of higher horsepower balance the scales?
V8 Scania is aprox 250kg heavier than a six. Fh16 will be heavier than a Fh13 too, although both straight sixes the 16 is obviously bigger block/bore heavier pistons.
Thinking Lukes 750 must be an impressive piece of kit, remember a post from him a while ago comparing his journey times along a route his R440 vs a R500 he was driving, difference wasn’t much and if I remember right the absence of a retarder meant the 500 wasn’t that impressive.
Juddian:
Remove that tat and stencil nett £ per hour on the side, you’d know who to work for then, but more importantly who not.
I don’t get all this HP show off bollox, we’d have given our eye teeth for a 500+hp jobbie back in pre limiter days, doesn’t make a scrap of difference now you can only go as fast as the bloke in front up to about 56mph…its money that counts not willy waving.
I used to think the same. Till I got this 570. The time it saves running heavy is insane. The most notable example is loading fruit in Spain once, in my R440 its was two and a half days driving to Dieppe. In this I did it in a 9 and a 10, and even more surprising? I got better fuel consumption than the R440 did. About 8.8mpg. So big power can be justified.
kitbuilder123:
Slightly off topic but if working on a paid by ton basis, is there much of a weight penalty for going for big horsepower? For instance how much heavier is a v8 scania as opposed to a 420?
And would the fuel saving of higher horsepower balance the scales?
V8 Scania is aprox 250kg heavier than a six. Fh16 will be heavier than a Fh13 too, although both straight sixes the 16 is obviously bigger block/bore heavier pistons.
Thinking Lukes 750 must be an impressive piece of kit, remember a post from him a while ago comparing his journey times along a route his R440 vs a R500 he was driving, difference wasn’t much and if I remember right the absence of a retarder meant the 500 wasn’t that impressive.
Yes I remember, that was the A5 through Snowdonia, times were about the same because without the retarder I couldn’t push the R500 anything like I could the 440.
When I got the 750 I actually expected to be disappointed, didn’t think it could live up to the hype. It exceeded it, it really is the most incredible machine. There isn’t a single motorway hill in the UK that Ive found that will make it drop a gear. Even my Dad who at this stage isn’t impressed by much truck wise after the first day driving while I was off text ‘the way this truck pulls is mad’. Its a genius piece of engineering
if you could look back through this thread you would see that I have at NO time called you a liar, I just don’t see that you saved “half a day”
Yes your quite right I have never “done Europe”, never needed to or wanted to, having said that I have been an o/d for many years who has at this time 2 trucks bought and paid for
I don’t see why you have to “do Europe” to know owt about running/mending trucks, infact its a good job that when I jab away at my calculator the numbers that matter add up, if they did not I may have to take a job where I have to follow orders, sleep in a tin box for days on end miles away from my family and home!
just for the record I don’t give a monkeys what happens when you “do Europe” for what in reality is not a lot of money for the hrs and mither involved
What will be the score in about 20 years, when trucks have even more power?
by the time 1000 hp is common you will save that many half days you could well be back before you set off!
I suggest you go back and read what I posted and what you posted after consulting your calculator. Your figures dont make much sense. There’s a surprise.
I wouldn’t worry about how I operate my calculator, infact the speeds you must be rushing about up hill and down dale how long will it be before you run out of road again?
maybe you could at some point do a film showing the terrain that you encounter during your travels around Europe, for those of us on here that have not been up these monster hills it would be more interesting than say a 0-limiter clip as we do realize that a 750 will go quite well
Moose:
maybe you could at some point do a film showing the terrain that you encounter during your travels around Europe, for those of us on here that have not been up these monster hills it would be more interesting than say a 0-limiter clip as we do realize that a 750 will go quite well
There’s loads of clips in my videos showing the terrain. But just for you on the way back from Spain I’ll do some more. The road up over the Millau Viaduct is unbelievably steep. Thats provided I can keep it on the road, trucks are hard to handle on the limiter, up hill.
So the general public have got it wrong,all this downsizing,sell the 2.0 mondo and buy a 1.0 Eco- boost,sell the 4x4 and get a citreon c1
They should take a tip from the truck driving fraternity and sell there c1(fh440) and buy a 3.0 ltr bm( fh700) and they’d actually be getting better mpg mmmmmmmmm.
If high bhp is a waste of fuel, why does an empty artic grossing 18t manage over 10 mpg? What exactly does a fully loaded 18 tonner with an engine circa 200 bhp manage?
Not having driven high HP trucks i have no personal knowledge but what surprises me is that if, large engined trucks are so more economical why aren’t the bean counters at large operators aware of this and ordering them?
I imagine that if the orders where there the manufacturers would be happy to put a large engine under a fleet spec cab.
Because bean counters are just that. The bigger engine is a bigger outlay. They see it more beneficial to limit down to 52 instead. On another thread, Harry Monk quite rightly said that cutting the corner of the M25 via the M3 and Bracknell, whilst 12 miles shorter, is harsher on the vehicle due to the nature of the road, so will cost more to use. The logistics companies will demand you use Bracknell, as it’s 12 miles shorter
They are only more economical on certain work, normally hard heavy mountainous work. Running round the UK it wouldn’t be any better than a standard 4**. Plus they cost rather a lot of money new and of course it depends on the driver. Fuel consumption could be disastrous if driven badly. You need to learn when to use the power and not floor it off the lights every time. Its hills where the power comes in and in the UK they aren’t that big.
I also dont think Scania and Volvo would sell you a big engine in a bog standard truck. Well, Scania might, Ive seen amazingly poorly equipped R730s! But the manufacturers create them as flagships really, not to make money. They are devices to get headlines and publicity, and they do. Same reason I drive one, the company wanted to make a splash for their birthday. I dont see us buying any more any time soon!
I think that you are wrong there Luke.
I’m sure that if the orders where there they would produce them.
I remember years ago seeing Volvo F16 chassis/engine with the small cabs (F6 type) on them.
del949:
I think that you are wrong there Luke.
I’m sure that if the orders where there they would produce them.
I remember years ago seeing Volvo F16 chassis/engine with the small cabs (F6 type) on them.
Perhaps for the Swiss market, CH230, 2.3m width limit at the time and a high bhp/tonne requirement.
