Help with Truck Specs
 

I would like to get everyone’s thoughts/opinions in reference to truck specs. I apologize now if this gets to be a bit lengthy; however it is necessary to cover all the bases.

Now for the parameters:

Operating Area: NJ to TX to IL back to NJ.

Type of Work: Yanking a tank.

Truck Requirements: The goal here is to spec a truck capable of doing the job well, with reasonable comfort, while minimizing operating expenses. I want to look at initial purchase price, engine size and make, fuel economy, tranny, final drive ratios, wheel base, tire size, tare weight and maintenance/repair costs.

I realize the first two criteria of the initial statement (Truck Requirements) are a bit ambiguous; however that is why I am asking for everyone’s input. I realize what is comfortable for one may well be intolerable for another. While some may be happy crawling up a steep grade with a load, others prefer to haul a$$ to the top. All things being equal, everything is a compromise of one type or another.

That being said, I (like most) am looking for the biggest bang for the buck. I am looking to find the best equipment for the job, while minimizing operational expenses. I have started my search, and thanks to this board, I have learned a lot to bring myself back up to date with more recent changes in equipment. I have a projected target date of JAN 08 to find and purchase a truck, so I have plenty of time to search and compare various configurations and what should be a reasonable price.

Disclaimer: It is not my intent to stir up a hornets nest here. I am interested in what each person feels is important and best suits the given situation.

Thanks to everyone in advance for your thoughts and input.

For me go with a 13 speed trans around 450 hp and 3.55 rears. Set those on super singles and gear it for 1400 rpm at 65mph in 13th. Also since you will be heavy with the tanker forget the drum brakes go with disks will save you weight and also some of the larger tanker fleets like Air Gas are going to them and LOVE them less fade out. Truck manufactor what ever floats your boat. Same on the engine trans and rear ends. Consider an APU to save fuel from idle time costs and the new anti idleing laws.

Great Post, I agree completely.

In spite of my W9, You should strongly consider an "Aero" type truck. I hear they get better MPG. Also yanking a tank, as bad as it might be, I would advise a flat top or mid-rise sleeper so you are not pushing as much air outta the way for no reason.

Ironeagle,

Thanks for your reply. That is the direction I was headed in for hp and tranny. I had not considered disk brakes over drum, but that is an excellent thought. As for truck manufacturer, in the past I seemed to find excellent deals on Volvos. They were not popular the last time I bought a truck and good deals were relatively easy to find.

Be careful and stay safe.

Marylandkw wrote

In spite of my W9, You should strongly consider an "Aero" type truck. I hear they get better MPG. Also yanking a tank, as bad as it might be, I would advise a flat top or mid-rise sleeper so you are not pushing as much air outta the way for no reason.

Marylandkw,

Thank you for your reply. With fuel prices what they are, fuel economy is a concern. I was looking for a flat top, but they seem to be a bit on the scarce side. I like the mid-roof for the extra room and it helps push the air over the top of the tank.

Be careful and stay safe.

T600 KW
mid rise bunk
410hp N14 Cummins
15 speed trans
3.90 rear gear
24" rims

Have a 1995 spec'd like this and it is my favourite. Out pulls a lazy 475 Cat with 3.7 rear gear and 22.5" rims. Stayed even a 500 DD with 3.7 rear and 22.5" rims. Gets better mileage too. All with 1 million on the rebuild.

I like the 15 because I've had to rebuild/replace 13's and 18's but never a 15. The think the splitter is the weak link.

Rank,

Thank you for your reply.

T600KW is a nice truck.
N14 Cummins great engine. Shame they are no longer made.
15 Speed tranny. Good option with 3.90 rears. I have no experience with a 15 spd, but I am not so old that I can not learn.
24" rims I prefer taller rubber.

I have been checking the truckpaper and other places and I haven't seen any 15 speeds. It even seems that the 13 is getting rare.

Thanks again!

Be careful and stay safe.

Check out the Volvo VN430 or the 610 ( more spacious in the back ). The Freightliner Columbia flattop seems to be quite popular with a lot of companies hauling tanks in this part of the world. Never driven one, but it's not as expensive as a Volvo. You wouldn't want something which is too high, as hauling a tank you're going to have to go to places where there isn't much room at the top either while loading or unloading. I would prefer an 18-speed, but that's just me....that's what I drive, and I haul a bulker. Also, try to not go for something with a long wheelbase. Another reason that I find the above two brands very practical, especially for hauling bulk, is that when you want to back in, there isn't any stack blocking your field of vision, which I find to be of a great help. The company that I work for has Volvos and T800s....the latter is also an ideal truck for the purpose, except for the fact that it's stack creates a problem for me, which is why I preferred the Volvo when I was given a choice.

15 speed is little more than a 10 speed with a deep reduction gear in low range. Since the deep reduction gear ratios and the low ratios overlap, you only have 12 useable ratios, provided you even use the Deep Reduction at all. Depending on the weight of your loads, you might be able to get away with shifting it as a 10 speed most of the time. 8)

>I have no experience with a 15 spd, but I am not so old that I can not learn.
As a driver I prefer the ability to split, but that is minor compared to (my perception) that the 15 is more durable. With the 15, every shift is a lever shift. No biggie.

The 15 is just basically a 10 with some super deep reduction gears, but there are only 12 progressive shifts: 1-2-3-4-5-9-10-11-12-13-14-15.

If you don't use the deep reduction, it's a 10 speed.

Didn't think so, unless there was something wrong, with That CAT! :P
T600, is an excellent choice, i run "cats" only, 475, or 550 is a good choice, just make sure, that torque is 1850(if 475).
With 13-18 don't go lower than 3.55 with 24.5, and i believe 3.36 would be adequate with 22.5, that's for "pre emission" And Acert CAT definitely 3.36. that if you care about fuel mileage.

I prefer a CAT engine, but a Cummins or Detroit would serve you well. I would stay away from the Mercedes, Volvo or other truck specific engines. It will be more difficult to get parts and find someone who can work on them. You will likely be relegated to going back to the dealer, which will usually cost more for repairs. Although I prefer CAT, I have owned Detroit and have friends who love their Cummins. If weight is a factor, I would probably go with Cummins. I suggest something between 425-475 hp, but anything over 400 should do the job for you where you plan on running. A 10 speed transmission will also be adequate. The 10 speed is probably the most popular configuration. I like the 18 speed, but you really don't need it pulling standard freight. I would look at the aero trucks such as KW 2000, Peterbilt 387, KW T600, International 9200 or 9400, Volvo 660 and 610, Freightliner Columbia. Some of these are condo's. If you plan on pulling a tanker, I would go with either a flat top or mid roof. I own a couple of mid roofs and there is plenty of room. Condo's are mostly a waste of space for most drivers. You will also want to have a sliding 5th wheel. I prefer tall rubber (24.5), but also own a truck with 22.5 rubber. There are more trucks with 22.5 tires. While I love the long hoods, such as the W900 and 379 Peterbilt, they catch a lot of wind and will burn much more fuel than an aero truck.

I would look into the weight of the Volvo first,having a heavy truck like mine(21,000+ with pump,compressor etc.) it is sometimes a real pain picking up preloaded trailers,I am over 35,000 on my drives often.I have heard that the Volvo is a heavy beast.

Run tall rubber that will help getting the weight off the drives,and get a taller fifth wheel saddle to get he fifth wheel height up to atleast 51".

I run a C15 cat turned up to 550hp @ 1850 torque with 3.36 rears 13 speed and I think it does the job pretty well and get 6mpg,but most of that is all driver preference.I would defintely get a mid roof since the premium price you will pay for a flat top isn't worth it.

Just stay below 12'6" and you will not have any problems getting into places to load/unload.

Graymist,

Thank you for your reply. I have owned a couple Volvos and I really like the spacious cab and nice ride. I was looking at a WB in the 230-240 range for a better ride and to allow room for my product pump and compressor


Be careful and stay safe

Rank wrote:

As a driver I prefer the ability to split, but that is minor compared to (my perception) that the 15 is more durable. With the 15, every shift is a lever shift. No biggie.

The 15 is just basically a 10 with some super deep reduction gears, but there are only 12 progressive shifts: 1-2-3-4-5-9-10-11-12-13-14-15.

If you don't use the deep reduction, it's a 10 speed.


Packrat and Rank,

Thank you Gentlemen for the heads up on the 15 speed shift pattern. Seems simple enough! I like the idea of the 13/15 speed over a 10 speed for the shorter steps between gears. Makes a little more work for me, but the shorter steps helps with the surge when dragging a smooth bore.

Be careful and stay safe.

GMAN,

Thank you for your reply,

I have owned CAT and Cummins, although I have to admit it was not manufacturer loyalty, it was a matter of economics. Likewise, I have stayed away from truck specific engines for the same reasons you mention. Weight is an issue as I would like to stay around 19k for tare wt with myself, about 150 gals of fuel and the truck set up for pulling tanker. Thank you for your insight.

Be careful and stay safe

Mike,

Thank you for your reply.

I have owned a couple Volvos and I can verify the fact that they are heavy. I was thinking your set-up would be heavy, as I seem to recall reading in one of our posts that you are running a 260” WB?

I too like tall rubber and the 51–52” fifth wheel height will also help keep the product to the back of the tank and help some with the surge.

“C15 CAT turned up to 550hp @ 1850 torque with 3.36 rears and 13 speed” all I can say is SWEEEEEET! When you do have a real sloppy load, at least you can put it the floor and keep the surge in the back of the tank.

Be careful and stay safe.

Gman, since you own a bunch of Internationals, could you please tell me what the differences are among the 9200, 9400, and the 9900 ? Also, what does "i" and "ix" denote ? Lastly, what are the attributes of the "Eagle" designation ? Thanks.

I don't know about owning a bunch of Internationals, but I do currently own a 9400. The 9200 looks similar to the 9400 except for the hood. The 9200 has a shorter hood and tends to be lighter weight than the 9400. The 9900 has a long flat hood, similar to the 379 Peterbilt or W900 Kenworth. The Eagle is a little more plush. As far as the IX designation is concerned. The X only means that it has an extended hood. For instance, on the 379 and W900 they will have an X or XL to denote the longer or extended hood. I am not sure what the I stands for other than International. :wink:

[quote="solo379"]Didn't think so, unless there was something wrong, with That CAT![quote]
There might be something wrong with it. We've had the pig since it was a year old and I've always been dissapointed

The "i" as in 9200i stands for the new cab design.

The older 9000 series cab
http://www.i20trucks.com/xl/60150971.jpg


The current 9000i series cab
http://dealers.trucksale.ru/truckemp...6-01-03-07.jpg

Other than that there's no real difference.

Thanks for clearing that up, PackRatTDI.

There were some older 15's and 20's that were 10's with either the high range splittable like a 13 or both ranges splittable like a 18. The presently sold 15 with the deep reduction has the same gear spacing as a normal 10 plus two lower gears - only really useful in construction offroad I think?

Ours is in a '95 model KW.

When I'm loaded, usually 75,000-80,000 gross, I use the deep reduction all the time. I seems alot easier on the clutch when starting from a stop. Other than that, they never get used.

Roadranger and Rank,

Thank you for your responsse.

I replaced a transmission back in 2001 and I seem to recall (can not remember the specifics), you could choose the percentage of gear step depending on the model tranny. I was pulling dry bulk at the time and it wasn't an issue then. I guess the gear spacing was based on the tranny final gear ratio. I will have to look into the various set-ups to see what works the best and then weigh the benefits versus the cost.