RoadwayR

Just the start: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-daimler-results-q2/daimler-considers-legal-split-in-strategic-overhaul-idUSKBN1AB0IA I think VW needs to do this more than Daimler does, but the reasoning is sound in both cases.

Isn't that interesting? They are already in class 4 and 5 with Ram, currently the sales leader in that market. Does mean mean Cummins is looking or has found another class 4/5 customer for their engines? And does that refer to the B6.7L or the new 5L V-8? This article asks more questions than it answers!

Interesting little tandem, and it looks like the lighter versions have independent front suspension.

Like to see a gasoline option in the Chevy 6500XD cabover.

https://www.autoblog.com/2017/08/24/daimler-report-restructure-break-up-mercedes-divisions/

Good for Cummins, they will have most of Navistar's mid-range business until the International's all get MAN diesels! Navistar needs to consider alternate fuels more seriously too, but that's another subject.

So those were the last of what began as the DT's? End of an era, I really liked the old mechanical DT-466.

None of this makes sense. For a minute I thought when UD pulled out of the U.S. market it may have been in preparation for Volvo and/or Mack to sell UD medium trucks through their dealers. Didn't happen. I am sure we won't be seeing this Isuzu-built UD here.

Volvo is starting to look like White did in 1979.

I think both VW and Daimler should think about spinning their truck operations off. Volvo and Fiat have done this, and in both instances it helped the truck operations considerably. Little or no 'synergy' between mass auto manufacturers and commercial truck manufacturers anymore. In VW's case, I think there is a very real threat that their car business will eventually damage the truck business.

It looks interesting. Seems to be an I-beam front axle under it, and judging by how high the cab sits on the frame I would be willing to wager it has straight frame rails front to back. Tip hood and fenders too, looks like it has DuraStar hood hinges above the front bumper. More of a class 6 design than a 4/5, much like the old TopKick/Kodiak or TerraStar. Might not be too much trouble to expand that platform into the higher GVW ranges.

Grocery stores out to love it. And that is not necessarily a dig. Anyway, listening to the comments on this thread and my own observations indicate to me that Volvo needs to rationalize their operations in North America. I think the sensible thing to do would be to focus Mack on vocational and heavy haul, and focus Volvo on regional and OTR. Mack gets a steel cab, Volvo get aluminum. Share basic engine platforms to a point, but optimize to application. Mack gets severe service frame/axle/suspension options, Volvo gets light weight highway components. I would not offer a Volvo mixer chassis, nor would I have a Mack version of this new VNR (I would offer a way to spec. a Mack for OTR highway service just because I am nostalgic!). Sell both lines at all dealers. Oh yeah, and get Mack back into medium duty. They used to be pretty good at it. Volvo wasn't..........

https://www.trucks.com/2017/06/22/spy-shots-first-look-navistargm-medium-duty-work-truck/

No complete trucks, just gliders?

I think the point is the FTR was first in fuel economy, and by a considerable margin. I personally could care less about acceleration, as long as the truck can safely keep up with traffic. Since if the Isuzu placed mid-pack in the acceleration comparison, it is probably acceptable.

16% to 22% better fuel economy, comparable performance. Interesting to see how the FTR does against the M2 when it gets the DD5. Any word on the tandem FTR?

Well, keep in mind GM has not been accused of any 'cheating' by the EPA, at least not yet. Take a look at who Bronstein, Gewirtz, and Grossman LLC is and what they specialize in. My guess is that Ford is next, and keep in mind Toyota and Hyundai don't sell diesel light trucks in the U.S.. Really staring to think diesel engines are on the way out. I think it is going to be too expensive to clean them up to the standards the EPA is calling for,

Cement mixer? Garbage packer?

They may have something there. It's priced a bit on the high side, but I suspect operating and overall cost-of-ownership will be quite low. And if it's anything like an NPR, it will be very reliable. Question about Spartan Motors: Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Spartan formed by some guys from Diamond Reo and Dodge's heavy truck operation after those truck lines went under in 1975? I seem to remember a Chrysler engineer named Sztykiel that ran Spartan for many years.

Ford's success with these trucks comes from Ford having the lowest priced trucks in the class 6/7 market. No, I don't think the truck is competitive with the International DuraStar or Freightliner M2, but it is priced lower and that will make the Fords appealing despite their shortcomings. Taking that into consideration, I think there is not a lot of incentive for Ford to offer vendor-supplied drivetrain components or a purpose-designed medium duty cab, because doing so with likely cause them to loose their cost advantage. At that point they compete head-on with International and Freightliner, and Ford is clearly not willing to spend the money to do that. I think Ford's position in the market is pretty safe for now. I think there is a possibility that International or Freightliner could come up with a low-cost (Mexican assembled?) class 6 competitor with a specific drivetrain/gasoline engine option, or possibly International could cook something up with GM (likely in the future), but for now Ford is in a good position if they stay the course.

Yellow iron? Say, didn't Caterpillar have a truck..........never mind. Interesting the tier 3 Series 60 is available for off road applications. Great engine.

Look what else was introduced today: https://www.internationaltrucks.com/trucks/rh-series Think I will like it better. Notice only the MAN-based diesel is offered?

Back to the topic, I am not sure where Cummins thinks they are going with this. All they make is a prime mover suitable for railroad service, but what about the rest of the locomotive? Are they going to compete with EMD and G.E., or are they looking only at the repower business? Yes there are a LOT of old 645 powered EMD's still in service (old G.E.'s tend to get scrapped!) but they run and parts are no problem. Unless the E.P.A. comes down on old locomotives I am not seeing big repower business.

It is just that everyone I know is hoping for something along the lines of a Jeep Wrangler, Not saying there is anything wrong with the Everest, but it's all in the name! The Everest would make a fine Explorer.

If this is going to be the new Bronco................a lot of people will be disappointed.