kscarbel2

Mack Trucks Australia / August 25, 2016 Watch the wrap up of the Win a Mack for a year competition. Congratulations to Dave Martin from D&A Martin Transport. Dave was the well-deserved winner of our 'Win a Mack for a year' competition and yesterday Dave’s dreams became a reality as he was handed the keys to a brand new 600hp Super-Liner. Well done Dave and we look forward to checking in with you throughout the year. .

Scotty Douglas, Owner/Driver / August 30, 2016 While modern machines may boast efficiency gains, Scotty Douglas pines for the old days when a truckie's relationship with a truck grew from the way it made them feel and the life-changing moments that it hosted I’m not sure how much Patrick Swayze was paid to holler "I love me a Caterpillar engine!" before dropping a cog and shunting another rig off the road in the movie Black Dog. It was probably a lot. But I have to admit it’s a sentiment I shared. Maybe it’s just familiarity but I’ve ended up with a thing for Cat engines – both big and small. The big yellow engine has played a starring role through much of my time behind the wheel from a C-12 and even a C-10 to C-15. Topping it off is my favourite, the good ol’ fuel-sucking C16. I cried tears of blood when Cat announced that it wasn’t going to play ball in the engine game anymore and I haven’t had the chance to drive a current model Cat truck. But they’re all ACERT anyway and I’m not keen on an engine that runs on its own recycled farts. As to why I like the old Cats? It’s kinda hard to put my finger on. Back in the 1960s, the BBC recorded a series of interviews with steam locomotive drivers. These old guys were soon to be retrained to drive diesel locos or to be retired. They were fascinating to listen to because these old guys talked about their engines like they were alive. Maybe I should spend more time driving with the window down but I got where they were coming from. Before the advent of emissions legislation truck engines were able to breathe and burn like a living thing. A big bore Cat engine lugging up a grade with a load on the back burped and breathed like it was alive. Most of the time there was no need to split a gear, you could let her lug right down and grab a whole cog and wake up the beast. The big C16 would let out a waste-gate sigh and knuckle back down to work. It was involving and had character. Modern truck manufacturers will tell us how their products are an efficient and cost-effective business tool. That they are safe, environmentally friendly and will make you a million bucks. But they forget that someone actually drives the thing. For a long-haul driver especially, the truck is more than just a mobile office. Anyone who’s spent a long time driving long distances will tell you that a truck cab has often been the setting for the most pivotal moments in their lives. News of deaths, births, marriages, arguments, and reconciliations with home. Even marriage proposals or the end of a relationship. I found out that my Grandfather had died while south bound over the Gundy bridge. I found out that I was going to be a father while reversing into a glass factory loading bay. All this while at the wheel of a truck. You can’t quantify those things in a business plan. They just are. I’d like to know how many people haven’t spoken to their truck at some point in time. I’d hazard a guess it wouldn’t be many. Whether it’s urging it up a climb or rumbling down a long hill. Or maybe when it sounds like there’s something wrong you’ll swear at it in the vain hope that it will keep going like a tired old draught horse. So yeah, I’m probably over thinking it. But I don’t care. I reckon whether we like it or not we build a relationship with our ride. It’s human nature. We can’t help but give inanimate objects personality and character, otherwise we wouldn’t give ships or aircraft names. And we wouldn’t use gendered terms like ‘girl’ to describe our rig. And when it gets the job done, we are grateful. That’s why I struggle in this digital age where every mechanical element needs to be quantified. A distance between man and machine has been imposed that gets in the way of the relationship. So like it or not, for me the sound of an old Cat hollering at the heavens is like a siren song that takes me back to a different time in trucking. A time when a cold winter’s night produced a sharp exhaust crackle, a jake brake bark and a few extra horses under the bonnet.

Just curious, is the "41MR" part number on the tags of the two wiring harnesses the same ?

"Real" car haulers run Detroit-powered Dodges. .

SPEED LIMITERS: Feds propose speed limiters for trucks, but not a speed Jami Jones, Land Line managing editor / August 26, 2016 Federal regulators are proposing to speed limit trucks, but they just don’t know what speed they want them set at. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration released a preliminary copy of a notice of proposed rulemaking on Friday, Aug. 26, that seeks to mandate speed limiters on heavy-duty trucks. As expected, the proposed regulation seeks to require truck manufacturers activate speed limiters at the time of manufacture and possibly all trucks with engine control modules (ECUs) capable of restricting speed be activated on trucks already on the road. In both instances the agencies are proposing that the speed limiters remain activated throughout the life of the truck. The agencies are not, however, prepared to pick the speed that the speed limiters should be set at. Throughout the rulemaking process the agencies studied speeds of 60, 65 and 68 mph – estimating the number of lives that would be saved by limiting trucks to each of the various speeds. “The agencies estimate that limiting the speed of heavy vehicles to 60 mph would save 162 to 498 lives annually, limiting the speed of heavy vehicles to 65 mph would save 63 to 214 lives annually, and limiting the speed of heavy vehicles to 68 mph would save 27 to 96 lives annually,” agency officials state in the NPRM. “Although we believe that the 60 mph alternative would result in additional safety benefits, we are not able to quantify the 60 mph alternative with the same confidence as the 65 mph and 68 mph alternatives.” If speed limiters were to be mandated, the agencies are proposing that in order to ensure that the speeds have not been adjusted and meet the set speed, that the speed determination be able to be read on the roadside through on-board diagnostic connections. And, not only would the reading report the current speed the truck was set at, but the feds are proposing that the truck report the previous two speed settings, along with the time and date of those speed modifications. In 2006, the American Trucking Associations and Roadsafe America petitioned NHTSA and the FMCSA to pursue a rulemaking to mandate speed limiters on heavy trucks. The NPRM states the groups asked for a 68 mph cap on speeds. NHTSA, on its own, granted the petition in 2011 and began drafting a proposal. FMCSA rejoined NHTSA in May 2013. The proposal has been stalled at the White House Office of Management and Budget for more than a year. The agency does not state when the comment period will officially open for the proposal, but a 60-day comment period is planned. “While we are in the very first stages of reviewing the agencies’ proposal, it’s about what we expected – a feel-good proposal based on shaky science that will likely detract from highway safety,” said Laura O’Neill-Kaumo, OOIDA director of government affairs. “The arguments in support of speed limiters haven’t changed much. Neither has the science, which is in part why we didn’t see DOT pursue a rule long ago. It will be interesting to see what the justification is this time, but rest assured OOIDA is more than ready to fight this on a variety of fronts.”

That my friends, is how a professional sales marketing video is done by a leading truckmaker.

Scania Group Press Release / August 29, 2016 Scania has introduced a new top model to its range of truck cabs, in the form of the S-series. Featuring a completely flat floor and maximised interior space, the S-series is the clear choice for those customers and drivers with the highest demands for space, ergonomics and living comfort. Regardless of which cab Scania customers choose under the new truck range, they’ll receive a more generous allowance of interior space than before. This is partly due to more efficient packing of components and the fact that the interior of the cabs have become a little over 65 mm longer, but also because ceiling heights in general have been increased in the new generation. ”The ceiling of the new normal roof height ceiling is 10 centimetres higher than previously,” says Kristofer Hansén, Head of Scania’s Styling and Industrial Design division. “And the higher roof variants are even more spacious, with a difference in ceiling height of 16 centimetres. This, of course, will be especially appreciated by those who both live and work in their vehicles.” Totally flat floor Sitting at the top of the new truck generation is the new S-cab, which both internally and externally feels like The Biggest. With its totally flat floor and maximised interior space, the truck is the obvious choice for the most demanding customers and drivers. “We’ve observed how perspectives are constantly changing and how our customers’ demands are increasing,” says Göran Hammarberg, Head of Cab Development at Scania. “Our new S-cab, without a doubt, puts everything that we have previously done in the shade in terms of factors such as comfort, storage, spaciousness, ergonomics and field of vision.” Hammarberg continues, “A user-friendly and ergonomically shaped set of four boarding steps leads up to a workplace that we believe will be loved by every driver who gets the chance to try it.” Best conditions for sleeping The storage facilities have been expanded with a particular focus on volume and accessibility. The cabin space has been thought through, down to the smallest detail. A wide variety of flexible options regarding storage boxes, shelves, hooks and nets can be chosen, depending on the type of cab, bed choice and other specific needs. The options for choosing a bed are particularly extensive. Both the under and optional upper mattress can be specified in different configurations and performance steps according to individual needs and comfort requirements. In the S-cab, two 80-centimetre beds can be specified, the lower of which can be extended to 100 centimetres. All beds are equipped with Scania’s most advanced mattresses, and in two driver operation comfortable and wide beds are available for both drivers. The spacious S-cab is also equipped with extra insulation, and right down to the smallest detail offers extremely well thought-out, comfortable solutions that create the best possible conditions for a good night’s sleep. The flat floor in the S-cab, meanwhile, makes it easy to move about in the cab. Messaging system As part of the new truck generation, Scania has expanded its investment in connected vehicles, with services that make life simpler for both drivers and transport companies. A messaging ­system connects the truck directly with fleet management at the fleet operator’s office. Drivers receive assignments, routing information, and pickup and drop-off addresses via a 7-inch touch screen, which also provides infotainment and camera support. The ability to use voice commands to operate the system means that drivers need not take their eyes off the road. “The truck range that we’re now presenting is the result of the work of thousands of people and a very large investment over a number of years,” says Hammarberg. ”We are extremely proud over the results and just dying to tell you in detail about all the new solutions and services for prospective customers.” .

Iveco Trucks Press Release / August 9, 2016 World premiere: a new long haul futuristic concept truck breaking new frontiers for totally sustainable transport New Daily Euro 6 and New Daily Hi-Matic Euro 6 open a new world of connectivity New Eurocargo “International Truck of the Year 2016” in new full air suspended version and CNG versions Iveco will host a press conference on its stand A01 Hall 16, on September 21st, at 9.15 am. Iveco will participate in the 66th edition of the IAA Commercial Vehicles (IAA), the most important international event in the commercial vehicle industry, which will be held in Hanover from September 22 to 29, 2016. The brand will host a press conference on its stand A01 Hall 16, on September 21st, at 9.15 am. Iveco will introduce a host of new products and innovations on the ample stand of over 2,500 square metres, showcasing its full range – from light vechicles to heavy trucks for on- and off-road applications, from buses to heavy-duty trucks for quarries and construction sites. Iveco will also present in a world premiere a new long haul futuristic concept truck breaking new frontiers for totally sustainable transport, protected by over 25 patents. Official premiere of the New Stralis, the TCO2 Champion Centre stage on the Iveco stand will be the New Stralis, which makes its debut to the international public following the official presentation that took place last June in Madrid. The New Stralis introduces a completely new driveline and, with the best reliability and efficiency, delivers leading edge Total Cost of Operation (TCO) and CO2 reduction. The three-vehicle range was developed around Customer missions and meets all the requirements of the on-road heavy transportation sector: The New Stralis has been designed to offer the best solution for regional and short-range missions, including transport of hazardous goods, where it maintains the unique advantage given by the exclusive HI-SCR after-treatment system. The New Stralis XP was developed for the demands of the international long-haul transport business, and is packed with innovative fuel-saving features and new services to maximize uptime and fuel efficiency. The most reliable and fuel-efficient truck on the market, designed to maximise reliability and reduce CO2 and TCO, it delivers fuel savings of up to 11% while the new generation services can add further savings of up to 3%, resulting in an impressive 5.6% reduction in TCO in long-haul missions. The revolutionary New Stralis NP (Natural Power), which runs on CNG and LNG, is the most sustainable international transport truck ever and a real breakthrough in the gas truck industry. It is the only natural gas truck to offer the power rating, driving comfort and fuel autonomy to suit long-distance haulage missions. The new engine that delivers 400 hp and 1,700 Nm torque - equal to its diesel equivalent - is coupled with an automated tramission. The improvements contribute to a 3% reduction in TCO compared to the previous model, which already had fuel pump costs up to 40% lower than its diesel equivalent. It is the first true long-haul gas truck in the market that offers an alternative to diesel vehicles. Also on the stand will be three “Emotional Trucks”: versions of the New Stralis XP dedicated to Ferrari, Dakar Team Petronas De Rooy Iveco and Schwabentruck as a special tribute to Iveco’s great partnerships with big names from the world of sports. The vehicles’ liveries were designed and produced by the CNH Industrial Design team, who devoted particular attention to the personalisation of the vehicles with the colours and graphics of the partnership they are dedicated to. New Daily Euro 6 and New Daily Hi-Matic Euro 6 open a new world of connectivity The New Daily Euro 6 is the first light commercial vehicle to turn on-board connectivity into a true professional work tool with the revolutionary new app, DAILY BUSINESS UP. Leveraging on its strength, versatility, performance and durability heritage, the new Daily Euro 6 introduces new features that use technology to push the boundaries of performance, raise comfort to a new level, deliver unique connectivity and lower its TCO, reflecting its Business Instinct of Iveco’s customers and making it their perfect business partner. The New Daily Euro 6 delivers unrivalled performance day after day with its new and powerful 2.3 and 3.0 litre engines developing as much as 210 hp and 470 Nm at the top of the range. The advanced driveline technologies further deliver fuel savings of up to 8% compared to the previous models. The low maintenance and repair costs due to the extended service intervals and long-lasting components result in additional savings of up to 12%. The cabin is even quieter than in previous models, with the noise level reduced by 4 decibels, improving the vehicle’s acoustics and sound recognition by 8%. The NEW DAILY BUSINESS UP turns any smartphone or tablet into an interface with the DAILY, allowing customers to experience ultimate efficiency in their mobile work station. The NEW DAILY BUSINESS UP is a smart tool for drivers, acting as a Driver Assistant that provides real-time suggestions to reduce fuel consumption through the Driving Style Evaluation (DSE) system, and works out routes optimised for commercial vehicles with the Professional Navigation system. It is also a smart tool for Owners, acting as their Business Assistant that makes fleet management easier by facilitating scheduling, dispatching and tracking jobs with Sygic Fleetwork and providing a direct link to Iveco Assistance Non Stop, the 24/7 roadside assistance service. The NEW DAILY BUSINESS UP is an OPEN Platform in continuous evolution; new features will be developed to continue to help our customers improve their productivity and efficiency further. The New Daily Hi-Matic Euro 6 family has been extended to include a wider range of models to meet all business needs. It offers the ultimate driving experience and all the benefits of safety, performance and productivity with features such as the ergonomic multifunctional lever and self-adaptive shift strategy. It also benefits from the new EcoSwitch PRO, an intelligent system that recognises if the vehicle is loaded or not and adapts the engine torque, with a consequent reduction in fuel consumption and further lowering emissions with no compromise for the customer’s productivity. This vehicle is an example of how Iveco puts the driver at the core of its design process, improving productivity and providing absolute driving pleasure. New Eurocargo, “The Truck the city likes”, in new full air suspended and CNG version Known as “The Truck the city likes”, the Eurocargo range was crowned “International Truck of the Year 2016”. On the stand, Iveco will introduce the new Euro VI C compliant ML160 (16t) in the new full air suspended version and display the eco-sustainable Natural Power version that runs on Compressed Natural Gas (CNG). The new Eurocargo ML160 Full Air version complies with Euro VI C regulations, which will come into force on December 31st 2016, with Iveco’s patented HI-SCR only technology with passive Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF). It is the only vehicle in its class (6- 19 tons) to adopt a single anti-emission system rather than relying on exhaust gas recirculation. HI-SCR is simple, reliable and lightweight. Most importantly, it regenerates the DPF without requiring vehicle downtime or any intervention by the driver. The Eurocargo ML160 Full Air on display features pneumatic suspension on the front and rear axle, now available with a payload increased by 1 ton. The constant chassis height and horizontal loading bed ensure a further improvement in safety even when the load is not distributed evenly. The reduction in vibration in transport ensures the driver travels in comfort and the goods are well cared for. The possibility of modifying ground clearance ensures high versatility on approach to loading and unloading docks of varying heights, and the capability of taking on different ramp gradients. The new Eurocargo Natural Power, which runs on Compressed Natural Gas (CNG), will also be present on the Iveco stand. It is particularly at home in major cities for its low emissions and quiet operation. The new engine delivers 204 hp maximum power at 2,700 rpm with torque of 750 Nm from 1,400 to 1,800 rpm – 100 Nm more than its prececessor. True to Iveco’s commitment to sustainability, it already meets Euro VI Step C emissions standards which will come into force at the end of the year, and can run on bio-methane derived from biomass or organic waste. It is also an exceptionally quiet vehicle at 3 dB quieter than diesel, as a result of its engine technologies. This also means that the Eurocargo Natural Power is allowed to drive in restricted traffic zones and is ideal for night-time work. The new Eurocargo NP has a range autonomy of up to 400 km, thus meeting the requirements of a variety of missions from multi-drop urban distribution to municipality missions. Astra HD9 for extreme conditions and environments Iveco’s toughest vehicle, the ASTRA HD9, will also be on display at IAA. From the special heavy-duty chassis and state-of-the-art driveline to the simple electric and electronic architectures, everything in this extra-strong vehicle has been designed take on the most demanding situations for climate, terrain and loading capabilities. Easy to maintain and repair, it is the ideal partner on the most challenging missions. The Euro VI 13 litre High Pressure Common Rail engine optimises the combustion process and increases the engine efficiency in terms of power output (up to 560hp) and torque rise while reducing noise and minimizing fuel consumption. The HI-SCR system without EGR delivers the best thermal efficiency while reducing weight and complexity. The electronic controlled variable geometry turbocharger delivers outstanding performance. The high torque at low engine speed results in excellent driving elasticity in all conditions. The robustness, versatility, mobility, mission dedication and loading capabilities of the HD9 range make it the ideal choice for heavy-duty applications in mining, construction, oil & gas and heavy haulage. .

The case for speed limiters: More political than technical? Fleet Owner / August 29, 2016 Is the Dept. of Transportation “cherry picking” research to support the rulemaking to require speed limiters in heavy-duty commercial vehicles? At least one source—and one that is often cited as providing evidence to support the rule—raises a number of concerns the DOT glosses over, or ignores altogether, including speed differentials, driver fatigue, fuel efficiency, and the overall cost-benefit analysis. The first footnote in the “executive summary” of the DOT proposal refers to a 2005 paper, “Cost-Benefit Evaluation of Large Truck-Automobile Speed Limits Differentials on Rural Interstate Highways,” by researchers at the Mack-Blackwell Rural Transportation Center (MBRTC), a College of Engineering program at the University of Arkansas. In that initial cite, and in three other footnotes, the paper “confirmed the common-sense conclusion that the severity of a crash increases with increased travel speed”—as, indeed, basic physics determines. However, while the DOT rulemaking mentions the issue of speed differentials, the 118-page document does not reference the MBRTC report with regard to its primary subject matter. Indeed, after opening the “Safety Benefits” section by citing MBRTC, the proposal refers to two other studies that “observed no consistent safety effects of differential speed limits compared to uniform speed limits.” The MBRTC report, a survey of available research at the time, also cites those “inconclusive studies,” and says the research did not address the impact of voluntary speed limiters, prevalent even 10 years ago, and so those studies were “inherently flawed.” More broadly, “the large number of safety studies that were discussed in the literature review indicates that this issue has received a great amount of attention,” the researchers write. “Unfortunately, many of the studies involve more advocacy than science.” The MBRTC study notes that proponents of lower truck speed limits argue that trucks require longer braking distances for any given speed and lower truck speeds help equalize the stopping distance. Truck drivers surveyed by the researchers, however, contend that their higher seat position allows a longer sight distance (multiple vehicles forward), reducing the effect of the differences in braking distance (to say nothing of the greater stopping power of modern disc-brakes and other safety technologies). The truck drivers are more concerned with the negative effect of greater speed variation and the number of interactions among vehicles. “It is likely that both of these arguments are correct,” the paper says. “This would indicate that differential speed limits have two effects: the positive effect that results from improved vehicle dynamics (braking and maneuvering) for trucks at lower speeds; and the negative effect of increasing speed variation and the number of interactions among vehicles. "These two effects of differential speed limits act in opposite directions and ultimately result in no observable effect on highway safety data.” Driver Viewpoints Based on a questionnaire, the MBRTC report summarizes driver sentiment on the matter of speed differentials. Two scenarios that dominated the drivers’ concerns were associated with on-ramps, according to the research. The first safety issue related to trucks being “trapped” in the right lane and the increased risk of continually encountering merging traffic. The second issue involved trucks not being able to reach traffic speed when merging into traffic flow. They also indicated a concern that lower truck speeds result in congestion and clustering of traffic and bottleneck situations on highways. Additionally, 87% of the truck drivers responded that speed differentials, whether due to regulated speed limits or company policies, increase the risk of accidents. Truck drivers also raised the issue of unsafe maneuvers by passenger vehicle drivers in overtaking and passing much slower trucks. If left up to them, the truck drivers indicated that a uniform speed limit of 70 mph for both automobiles and trucks would be both the safest and the most efficient configuration for rural interstate highways. The researchers note that drivers who generally have the ability to travel faster than 70 mph (owner-operators) also agreed that a 70 mph limit would be most appropriate. Safety managers, however, were somewhat more cautious. While they agreed that differential speed limits increase the probability of accidents, many felt that a uniform limit of 65 mph would be the best alternative. “Some managers indicated that new, less experienced drivers might benefit more from lower truck speeds, with more experienced drivers being able to handle the higher speeds,” the study says. “Other managers indicated that this policy would put less experienced drivers at additional risk due to the increase in the number of vehicle interactions that they would experience.” Driver Fatigue Noting the significance of driver fatigue in crashes, the MBRTC study suggests that while there is no empirical data indicating that increased speed increases fatigue, there are studies that have found that operating time has significant impact on truck driver fatigue. “One of the methods of reducing driving time and fatigue without reducing transport efficiency or driver pay, would be to travel at a higher speed,” the paper says. “From an hours-of-service perspective, an important issue is whether it would be safer to drive for 10 hours at 70 mph than it would be to drive for 11 hours at 64 mph.” In the survey, truck drivers stated that driving faster for a shorter duration of time would result in less fatigue and drowsiness. In addition, the consensus of drivers was that driving at the average traffic speed reduces fatigue, according to the report. However, most of the company safety managers indicated that traveling at higher speeds results in more fatigue. Even when drivers are allowed to use higher speeds, they do not get to their destinations sooner because they stop more frequently and take longer breaks, the managers responded. In response, most of the truck drivers stated that their driving time between stops is independent of speed and that their stops are based on time rather than distance. But the drivers did indicate that, if the pick and delivery are not adjusted for the higher speed, there is no benefit in getting to the destination early. Cost Savings One of the primary reasons for carriers to limit the speed of their trucks is the reduction in fuel consumption, and in ideal situations this is certainly true, the MBRTC report explains. But, in addition to the absolute vehicle speed, speed variance in the traffic flow also has an effect on fuel efficiency when both trucks and automobiles decelerate and accelerate to maneuver around slower traffic. “The negative impact of traffic speed variation on fuel efficiency has not been addressed in the research literature or as a policy issue,” the study says. “When speed policies are considered, it is important to consider that the driver effect is estimated to be double the effect of vehicle speed. It might be possible that by improving retention, the costs associated with higher speeds might, to some extent, be offset by the ability of more experienced drivers to conserve fuel.” The study also notes that owner-operators, “who have direct knowledge of their individual operating costs,” as a group preferred higher speeds due to the increased revenue, more flexible scheduling, and the benefits of increased personal time. Indeed, the researchers point out that their financial cost-benefit analysis illustrates how the results are very sensitive to estimates of the operational costs associated with increased truck speed. “Unfortunately, although there are many opinions, there is very little verifiable data that can be used to make these estimates,” the paper states. The study’s results ranged from an annual decrease in net profit per truck of $2,371 for the higher estimates of speed-related operational costs, to a net profit increase of $442 for the lower estimates. “Even the costs derived using the higher estimates could be offset, to some extent, if the higher speeds and increased pay would improve driver retention,” the study says. “In addition, the number of trucks necessary for the same annual mileage would be reduced, lowering the truck inventory costs for commercial fleets.” Popular Misconceptions One of the common misconceptions that motorists have is that they are often passed by trucks, the MBRTC report notes. However, results of the researches’ simulation study indicated that the frequency of automobiles being passed by trucks is very low. Using the traffic speed data from the uniform 70 mph sites in the study, an automobile traveling at the mean traffic speed (71.5 mph) would be passed by only 30 trucks during a 1,000 mile trip on a rural interstate. Similarly, many sources in the popular press refer to the statistics that indicate that more than one-third of the highway accidents are associated with “speeding.” However, speeding is defined as “traveling faster than the posted limits” or “traveling too fast for conditions.” Because there is no differentiation of these two categories in much of the literature, the effect of the posted speed limits on the number of accidents and fatalities is probably highly exaggerated in the popular literature, the report states. Conclusion “Although there is an abundance of opinion on many of the issues, there is very little empirical, verifiable, and scientifically valid data available from either public or private sources,” the MBRTC study concludes. “It is evident that there is a need for additional research in many of the areas relevant to the maximum speed for heavy trucks. The decisions pertaining to the state regulated absolute and/or differential speed limits for trucks will continue to be a political, as well as a technical issue.” Does the DOT proposal address all of these issues? I'm not convinced. But, to be fair, I've yet to dig as deeply into the all-important crash data on which the lives-saved projections are based—and I was already familiar with the MBRTC study. And gathering evidence, publishing the government's thinking, and opening the process up for review is how the rulemaking process is designed. Still, the rule was held for White House review for more than year, though we don't know why. On the other hand, big trucking and "safety advocates" support speed limiters, and Congress is backing the regulation, too. So something's coming—we just don't know how fast. .

Fleet Owner / August 29, 2016 Penalties Drivers and carriers would be subject to Federal civil penalties if they are determined to have operated CMVs in interstate commerce when the speed limiting device is (1) not functioning, or (2) set at a maximum speed in excess of the maximum specified set speed. They would be subject to Federal civil penalties of up to $2,750 for drivers and up to $11,000 for employers who allow or require drivers to operate CMVs with speed limiting devices set at speeds greater than the maximum specified set speed. .

Fleet Owner / August 29, 2016 Retrofits? In addition to the new vehicle requirements included in the proposal, NHTSA is considering whether to require commercial vehicles currently on the road to be retrofitted with a speed limiting device with the speed set to no more than a specified speed. The agency notes that a retrofit requirement is not included because of concerns about the technical feasibility, cost, enforcement, and small business impacts. However, DOT is seeking public comment to improve its understanding of the real-world impact of implementing a speed limiting device retrofit requirement. As an alternative to a retrofit requirement, the agencies are also requesting comment on whether to extend the set speed requirement only to all 26,000-lb. CMVs that are already equipped with a speed limiting device. The filing does note the previously expressed concerns of the Truck and Engine Manufacturers Assn. (EMA), which pointed out problems retrofitting vehicles manufactured from 1990 to approximately 1994 to 1996, frequently equipped with mechanically controlled engines and mechanical speed limiting devices. EMA indicated that it would be impractical to retrofit these vehicles with modern ECUs and estimated that it would cost $1,000 to $1,500 per vehicle. Given the agencies’ concerns about technical feasibility, cost, enforcement, and impacts on small businesses, DOT seeks public comment to improve its understanding of the real-world impact of implementing a speed limiting device retrofit requirement on existing vehicles and whether it is appropriate to have different requirements for these vehicles. .

Fleet Owner / August 29, 2016 New vehicle To determine compliance of new vehicles with the operational requirements for the speed limiting device (i.e., that the vehicle is in fact limited to the set speed), NHTSA is proposing a vehicle-level test that involves accelerating the vehicle and monitoring the vehicle’s speed, similar to the validation procedures currently used in Europe. However, NHTSA is not proposing requirements to prevent tampering or restrict adjusting the speed setting as part of its portion of the proposal. Instead, to deter tampering with a vehicle’s speed limiting device or modification of the set speed above the specified maximum set speed after the vehicle is sold, the proposal calls for FMCSA to require motor carriers to maintain the speed limiting devices at a set speed within the permitted range. NHTSA also is proposing to require that the vehicle set speed and the speed determination parameters be readable through the On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) connection, and that the two most recent modifications of the set speed of the speed limiting device and the two most recent modifications of the speed determination parameters be readable and include the time and date of the modifications. .

Fleet Owner / August 29, 2016 DOT estimates, for 68 mph setting: Lives saved: 27 to 96 Serious injuries prevented: 30 to 106 Minor injuries prevented: 560 to 1,987 Annual fuel savings/GHG reduction: $376 million Annual costs associated with increased delivery time: $206 million Annual total benefits: $684 million to $1.469 billion .

Fleet Owner / August 29, 2016 DOT estimates, for 65 mph setting: Lives saved: 65 to 214 Serious injuries prevented: 70 to 236 Minor injuries prevented: 1,299 to 4,535 Annual fuel savings/GHG reduction: $848 million Annual costs associated with increased delivery time: $514 million Annual total benefits: $1.564 to $3.281 billion .

Fleet Owner / August 29, 2016 DOT estimates, for 60 mph setting: Lives saved: 162 to 498 Serious injuries prevented: 179 to 551 Minor injuries prevented: 3,356 to 10,306 Annual costs associated with increased delivery time: $1.534 billion Annual fuel savings/GHG reduction: $848 million Annual total benefits: $2.695 to $6.522 billion .

What did Watts say on availability ?

I'm unfamiliar with that for Oz.

Steve’s second home Scania Group Press Release / August 27, 2016 Steve Pope spent 20 years driving trucks for the British Army in Bosnia, Iraq and Kuwait. For the past year, he has tested and lived in one of Scania’s new generation trucks under real life conditions. “This represents a completely new level of heavy truck,” he says. Field-test driver Steve Pope has used a masked vehicle from Scania’s new generation of trucks to conduct long-term testing along his regular transport runs across the United Kingdom. He has spent four to five nights per week in the new cab and now calls it his “second home”. “I work and sleep here, cook all my food here, and it’s also my office,” says Pope. “Even compared to the Scania R-series that I previously had, everything I’ve experienced represents a big boost. All the new technology makes life so much simpler for me. I don’t need to do much; the truck does it all for me. Sometimes it feels like all I need to do is push a button and point it in the right direction.” Asked to rank the improvements in Scania’s new truck, Pope thinks for a second before listing: the field of vision, the driving experience, the general level of comfort, and the bed! The forward- and outward shifted driver position and narrower A-pillar have given Pope a whole new perspective of the area around the truck. “The advantage with these narrower A-pillars is that you get a much wider view between the A-pillar and the rear view mirror,” he says. “Together with the new, lower dashboard, the slimmer door panels and this larger surface area of glass, you have a completely new experience in terms of passing pedestrians, cyclists and passenger cars in the roundabouts. It’s a big boost for traffic safety!” “Much better field vision” Pope describes the driving experience as “very much Scania”. “It’s the same feeling that I had in my previous Scania, but with a much better field of vision. I love the design of the new dashboard. When you sit behind the wheel and drive the truck you have everything you might need around you.” Pope continues, “The level of comfort in the new cab in just wonderful. The seats are adjustable in every way and the spaciousness in the cab beats anything that I’ve seen or experienced.” “It’s like sleeping at home” For Pope, who sleeps in the cab four or five nights a week, the bed is of utmost importance. “The mattress is much thicker in the cab and this has meant that I now sleep much better,” says Pope. “And it’s a firmer mattress, which is great if you, like me, have a bad back. For me personally, it’s like sleeping at home on a special mattress.” Pope sees his year as a field test driver for Scania as a high point in a very action-packed life. “It’s a fantastic feeling to be involved in developing tomorrow’s truck,” he says. “Sometimes when I’m drifting off to sleep in the cab, I think about how good it will feel a few years from now when I see this new truck out on the roads. I got to be involved with developing it.”

Scania Group Press Release / August 27, 2016 For field test drivers like ­Steve Pope, dealing with ­secrecy and spies is a part of everyday life. The field tests for the new generation Scania truck represented a major challenge. Advanced masking techniques and far-reaching organisational preparations were required to keep the vehicle’s identity, styling and new features under wraps. “We have used more heavy duty masking than with previous launches,” says Anders Karlqvist, who is responsible for Scania’s extensive field testing activities. “It should be possible to drive past one of our field-test trucks and, maybe, wonder what kind of truck it was. But it shouldn’t immediately draw attention to itself.” For Steve Pope, security around the vehicle was one of his most important day-to-day issues. The assignment was particularly sensitive, due to the United Kingdom’s large population, heavy traffic and numerous truck spotters constantly on the look-out for new trucks. “I have to plan all my runs very thoroughly,” says Pope. “When I park for the night, the first thing I do is draw black curtains around the entire cab so that no-one can see in or take pictures of the new interior. The same applies when I stop to fill up or to eat. I can’t stop all the curious people, but then the truck is quite ingeniously masked.” Occasionally Pope got questions from other drivers about the strange truck he is driving. The masking have given some people an impression of heavy ”armour”. “I tell some of them that I’m driving a special vehicle for the Royal Mint,” Pope says. “Others have been told that the truck is equipped with radiation protection or that it’s equipped with sensors for filming and digitising footage for use within different TV and computer games…” .

Cummins' New Little Brother: X12 Today’s Trucking / August 26, 2016 Are smaller displacements the engine trend of the future? Cummins seems to be hedging its bets on that question. The Columbus, Ind.-based global engine manufacturer now has very capable product at both ends of the spectrum: the 14.9-liter X15, and this new engine the 11.8-liter X12. Recent engine introductions from other engine makers suggest there's an appetite for smaller block engines that can deliver Class 8 power for regional and urban applications as well as the vocational market. With ratings up to 475 horsepower and 1,700 lb-ft of torque, the X12 will be running with the big boys. The X12 is also nearly 1,000 lb lighter than the X15, so weight sensitive fleets will be looking very closely at this engine. The X12 is derived from the ISG platform first introduced in 2013 as global engine platform. It made its first appearance a year later in a joint venture with the world’s largest independent engine maker, Beiqi Foton Motor Co. Ltd. of China. Foton now uses the ISG diesel in a new truck series developed with Daimler of Germany. Cummins says the engine in ISG trim already has more than 1 billion miles under its belt, and is ready to take on North American truck fleets. The X12 will be ready for market here in 2018. We got a close look at it and brief test drive in July when Cummins launched it 2017 X15 lineup. From what we saw, it looks like Cummins will have a full slate of orders for the X12 in no time at all. .

Head to the IAA show in September and see for yourself. You'll look back on the trip as perhaps the most eye-opening in memory.

When you called Watt's Mack (provider of the BMT website) toll-free at 1-888-304-6225, what did they say about E9 remack water pump availability ? The part number should be 316GC274DX. http://www.wattsmack.com/parts-department/

Suggesting 60-68 mph, FMCSA, NHTSA propose truck speed limiters Fleet Owner / August 26, 2016 A long-awaited, much-debated proposal for requiring speed limiters on heavy trucks was released today by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). While the 118-page proposal suggests that speed limits of 60, 65 or 68 mph would be beneficial, the agencies will get public input before setting the actual number, according to U.S. Transportation Sec. Anthony Foxx. The speed limit would be a physical one accomplished by a speed-governing device and would apply to all newly-manufactured vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating more than 26,000 lbs. (11,793.4 kg). The rule comes from both NHTSA and FMCSA to broaden its applicability. According to the proposed rule, NHTSA would require speed limiters for multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, buses and school buses, while FMCSA would require them for commercial motor vehicles. "Based on the agencies' review of the available data, limiting the speed of these heavy vehicles would reduce the severity of crashes involving these vehicles and reduce the resulting fatalities and injuries. We expect that, as a result of this joint rulemaking, virtually all of these vehicles would be limited to that speed," the proposal reads, with "that speed" yet to be determined. In a release, Foxx argues that the proposed rule would save lives and more than $1 billion in fuel costs annually, making it "a win for safety, energy conservation and our environment." Foxx has referred to this rulemaking as a top priority for the Department of Transportation, and the proposed rule originally was due to be published in March 2014; the idea behind it dates back nearly a decade. NHTSA Administrator Mark Rosekind calls the proposal "basic physics" in the same release. "Even small increases in speed have large effects on the force of impact," he states. "Setting the speed limit on heavy vehicles makes sense for safety and the environment." And FMCSA Administrator Scott Darling contends that the proposal "will save lives while ensuring our nation's fleet of large commercial vehicles operates efficiently." The proposed rule has been submitted for publication in the Federal Register, and once that happens there will be a 60-day period for public comment. One group that's sure to have something to say will be the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA), which has long been opposed to truck speed limiters and makes almost a polar opposite argument regarding the devices as the government does. On the heels of the proposed rule's release, OOIDA issued a statement calling it "dangerous" not only for truck drivers but for passenger vehicle drivers as well. "The government's proposal to mandate speed limiting devices on large trucks would be dangerous for all highway users," OOIDA states. "Such devices create speed differentials that lead to more crashes and promote road rage among other motorists." Todd Spencer, executive vice president of OOIDA, further states that "highways are safest when all vehicles travel at the same relative speed."