Jon,
Thanks for the input. I'm sure for heavy hauling what you say is correct
but most of us use our pickups all year (50 weeks) for general
transportation and haul the race trailer for two weeks. I really don't think
I could justify or would want to drive an F-650 or F-750 with a CAT diesel
for daily transportation. You are absolutely correct about SOME
applications.
Howard
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Wennerberg" <jonw@up.net>
To: "LSR list (E-mail)" <land-speed@autox.team.net>
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2001 1:32 PM
Subject: Back to trucks, please
> Okay, boys and girls. I've been reading, I've been observing - and the
> recent question about trucks for hauling hits a point where maybe I can
> offer some input.
>
> My company runs a pair of medium-duty trucks (26,000 # GVW) about 125,000
> miles/year each. Take a look at them at www.infodestruction.com if you'd
> like. We haul medical waste, confidential documents, and an occasional
> motorcycle. What I've learned is: DO NOT BUY A PICKUP TRUCK, no matter
how
> carefully you spec it, if you're going to haul anything bigger than 4x8
> plywood! You'll waste money if you do!!
>
> That is: we drive all over our territory in a pair of "medium-duty"
> trucks - a '93 F-700 and a '99 C6500. The Ford has a Cummins 5.9L "B"
> turbo, the Chevy a Cat 7.2L 3126Bs. Both, in case you're not familiar
with
> their nomenclature, are diesel motors. The Ford has about 450,000 miles
on
> it (I say about 'cuz the odometer has broken several times - the hour
meter
> shows around 11,000 hrs, which at 40 mph/average is about where I think it
> is); the Chevy has 125k miles on the clock. The Ford has never been
opened,
> save for one front head gasket at about 350k miles. The Chevy is still
> untouched.
>
> Both were intended to haul cargo around Michigan's Upper Peninsula, and
were
> ordered with 18k-26k gross loads in mind. Each has a straight six-speed,
> but the Ford has 4.33 gears, the Chevy 3.73's. Both run 10R22.5 radial
> Group IV tires. Both trucks have delivered about 11 mpg since new, as
> expected for the way I've got them set.
>
> Keeping all of this (and 'way more) data in mind, I would certainly
suggest
> buying a trailer-hauling vehicle in the MID-size range, such as these,
> rather than a pickup that's pushed to the max. Here's why:
>
> These trucks can be built specifically for the job. When spec'ing the
Chevy
> I talked to the Caterpillar engineers to let them know what body I'd be
> using, which engine rating, which tires, and so on - and they told me,
after
> checking with their computer program, what my fuel mileage would be. So I
> could therefore re-design the truck to maximize the economy (or, as it
> turned out, other parameters which were of interest to me).
>
> How could this be of help to a race team? Well, imagine that you could,
> first of all, build a hauling truck that you knew would do your job for
> years and years - not just one or two seasons? Second, think of being
able
> to spec a hauler truck that had the air-suspension seats that you've
always
> wanted - at a cost that's less than "Captain
> Chair's" in a custom pickup? Or a crew cab with enough room. Think
about
> ordering with gearing that'd let scoot down the highway and still tug out
of
> the glop when it has rained.
>
> Then there's the thought of a "real" truck engine. No "indirect"
> combustion, there are low revs to save wear and tear, and there's the idea
> of not having to trade in every couple of years.
>
> How about ordering a "low-profile" mid-size truck with the engine, gears,
> cab, and everything else you want? Exactly - - no compromises!! The cost
> will be darn near the same as a "fancy" pickup; the life expectancy will
be
> at least a handful of years or longer, and you'll be able to design your
own
> truck without padding the pockets of the "pickup truck" factories. You'll
> save money over the long run -- and your truck will do the job 'way
better.
>
> I'll defend my statements at your request.
>
> Jon
///
/// land-speed@autox.team.net mailing list
///
|