| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Patrick
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 151
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2004 6:45 am Post subject: Opinions on Equipment (Cabover vs. Conventional - etc...) |
|
|
Hi.
First - you should know that if you want to see the result of the poll here, vote - then you'll see what the vote count is.
c4shm0ney and I were curious about the pros and cons of the different types of equipment out there - and what are the major differences between them. Namely the functional differences between cabovers and conventionals and why people prefer conventionals over cabovers. I've heard it is because of the shifting and the comfort for long haul rides - but what do I know? :wink:
Can you pros out there shed some light on this for us? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Patrick
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 151
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I've heard a few people mention that cabovers are more forgiving to rookies. Unfortunately they don't say why this is the case. Any thoughts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
TK THE TRUCKER
Joined: 11 Jul 2004
Posts: 781
Location: NEAR ROCHESTER, NY
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 10:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Cab overs have a short wheel base thus a better turning radius. Also they are not very aerodynamic nor do they ride well. A conventional doesn't turn as well but rides better,is more aerodynamic and usually has more room inside. |
|
| Back to top |
|
KDX1
Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 21
Location: West Virginia
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Depending on how you look at it, if your in a cabover and in an accident your the first one on the scene. :sad: |
|
| Back to top |
|
Patrick
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 151
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
KDX1 wrote: Depending on how you look at it, if your in a cabover and in an accident your the first one on the scene. :sad:
Forgive me but do you mean that, compared to conventional, cabovers are safer? You put a sad face :sad: there so I am a little confused - maybe you mean that the driver will be the first on the scene - literally? Sorry for my confusion. :? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Fred
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 84
Location: Michigan, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think KDX meant that since a cabover has no hood, you'll impact body first like the old joke "What's the last thing to go thru a bugs mind as he splats the windshield? Answer *His ASS*
I got it anyway! :wink: |
|
| Back to top |
|
Patrick
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 151
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 19, 2004 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I hate how I have to be spoon fed so frequently. :lol:
Thanks ... I think I agree with your take on what was meant. So I can take it from there that conventional are more safe in front end collisions than cabovers? Is this really true though? Don't you still have a driver's console and steering wheel in both cabovers and conventionals that are roughly the same size blocking you and the window? I mean, if someone were in an accident that would put them through the window wouldn't it take the same amount of impact force for each type - you know - to clear the steering wheel? Or does the cabover have a different, lower, less obstructive steering wheel and console in front of the driver's seat?
Okay, enough questions... :wink: |
|
| Back to top |
|
areyouvi3t
Joined: 10 Jan 2004
Posts: 358
Location: wilmington, de
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 19, 2004 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cabovers have nothing in front, so if you're in an serious accident, you'll be smushed dead instantly. at least in a conventional, you got a more better chance surviving, because of the nose.
also, i don't like the fact that i'm literally in a CAB-OVER-a-ENGINE |
|
| Back to top |
|
Patrick
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 151
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 19, 2004 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| But if you're in an accident that is severe enough to crush in the cabover in the passenger section (high), wouldn't that also be enough to push the engine of a conventional into the passenger section too? The engine being below you puts you way high - wouldn't that make it better in some types of collisions? In fact, aren't most collisions in vehicles head on and low? I wonder what the actual numbers on this are. It seems like it would be simple conventional (no pun intended) wisdom that the nose of a conventional make them safer somehow, but is it really true? |
|
| Back to top |
|
73Firebird
Joined: 05 Aug 2004
Posts: 115
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 19, 2004 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
just feels freaky to me, probably safe enough....just dont look down lol
havent driven a cabover but have riden in one, wouldent ask to drive one! probably wouldent turn down a temp job because of one though |
|
| Back to top |
|
Montara
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 23
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 19, 2004 11:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If the wheelbase is less than 244 inches...
If there's no real hood in front of my windshield....
you won't find me driving it.
Longer wheelbase = more stability |
|
| Back to top |
|
2bme
Joined: 04 Aug 2004
Posts: 79
Location: Hyperspace........................
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 20, 2004 6:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I have driven both and yes, I believe the cabover offeres a shorter turning radius and increased vision because of it's lack of a big hood in your line of sight, however, I believe that almost every one hates having to "Jack UP" the cab to take a look at engine components and fan belts....ect....ect You get the picture... Your stuff has to be secured or it falls through the windshield when the cab tilts. I guess we just get a bit lazy when it comes to that, and that means that there will be some who will cut their Pre-Trip Inspection short because they just won't do that unless absolutely necessary......... Hope that helps...... |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
