kscarbel2

Transport Topics / April 21, 2016 A fiscal 2017 transportation funding bill that would set the allowable time truckers may work before taking a break at 73 hours per week was advanced by a Senate panel April 21. The Appropriations Committee voted 30-0 to report a $56 billion transportation funding bill to the floor. But the committee adjourned without engaging in debate over trucking policies related to the allowable workweek schedules for truckers. Republican leaders who control the chamber have not indicated when the bill, which would provide funding for transportation programs, would be debated. The hours-of-service provision in the bill would retain the ability of drivers to reset their workweeks by taking an extended 34-hour off-duty period, with the recognition they still be limited to 73 hours of work, whether driving or other duties, in seven calendar days. “A driver who uses that restart rule may not drive after being on duty more than 73 hours in any period of seven consecutive days,” according to the bill. The provision targets a technicality pertaining to truckers’ rest rules in a fiscal 2016 funding law, the interpretation of which could result in relying on the rolling recap of weekly work limits of 60 hours in seven days and 70 hours in eight days. The fiscal 2016 funding law was intended to address only the 34-hour restart having to do with the consecutive 1 a.m.-to-5 a.m. rest periods, which took effect in 2013. The restart regulation was suspended upon enactment of a fiscal 2015 funding bill. American Trucking Associations welcomed the hours-of-service language in the fiscal 2017 funding bill. “ATA is pleased that the committee took such swift action on a bipartisan fiscal-year 2017 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development appropriations bill, which includes a provision that underscores Congress’ intent that America’s truck drivers can continue utilizing the hours-of-service restart provision if a congressionally mandated study is unable to demonstrate the July 2013 restart restrictions improve driver safety and health,” ATA Press Secretary Sean McNally told Transport Topics. While ATA and segments of the transportation sector expressed strong concern over federal hours-of-service regulations, a few groups have come out against the provision. The Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety has accused trucking interests of “writing a brand new regulation behind closed doors.” “There was absolutely no discussion or debate about a controversial provision slipped into the bill that will rewrite the Obama Administration’s truck driver hours-of-service rule and promote even more fatigue among truck drivers,” said Cathy Chase, the group’s vice president of governmental affairs, on passage of bill. “This action is especially egregious considering tomorrow marks the one-year anniversary of the devastating crash which killed five nursing students from Georgia Southern University. The driver in that crash had a history of falling asleep at the wheel in previous incidents.” Also, the fiscal 2017 funding bill would require the U.S. Department of Transportation to advance a rule on speed limiters for trucks. A segment of the trucking industry backs a proposal requiring speed limiters. Overall, the fiscal 2017 funding legislation would provide nearly $900 million for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, $644 million for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s safety initiatives, $525 million for an infrastructure grants program and $259 million for the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. “This bipartisan bill makes important investments in our nation’s infrastructure,” Collins said April 21. Added Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the transportation funding panel: “The new funding and policies in this bill will help improve the safety of our roads.”

Earnings Watch: Swift Profit Falls Nearly 16%, Forward Air Doubles Heavy Duty Trucking / April 21, 2016 Truckload carrier Swift Transportation Co. saw net income and revenue decline in the first quarter compred to 2015, while time-definite transportation and logistics provider Forward Air Corp. saw its numbers double. Net income for the Arizona-based fell 15.7% to $31.9 million, from 26 cents per share to 23 cents. Adjusted earning per share were 25 cents, beating a consensus estimate by Zacks Investment Research by 3 cents. Total revenue fell 4.7% to $967.8 million, but revenue minus fuel surcharge improved 1.3% to $906.9 million. According to Swift, the first quarter began with a soft freight environment, which caused the total loaded miles for combined trucking operations to be down roughly 4% on a year-over-year basis through January. “Although freight volumes improved throughout the month of February, March proved to be challenging as freight volumes again weakened year over year, causing our first quarter 2016 combined trucking operations total loaded miles to decrease 1.5% compared to the first quarter of 2015,” the company said in its letter to shareholders. Because of this, Swift said it has moved to downsize its combined trucking fleet by delaying equipment purchases while increasing tractor disposals. “We expect these initiatives to reduce consolidated average operational truck count by roughly 200 units when comparing our first quarter 2016 to our second quarter of 2016, but we will continue to monitor the market and will adjust the fleet up or down as needed,” the company said. Swift said the pricing environment in the first quarter under pressure from weak demand trends and excess capacity. “Pricing was especially difficult within our Intermodal and Swift Refrigerated segments, as we saw intermodal providers reduce rates in an attempt to gain market share. We strategically resisted the impulse to lower our intermodal pricing in response but instead decided to remain disciplined to moving only intermodal freight that meets our pricing and network standards” the company said. “To help offset these pressures, we also implemented several short- and long-term intermodal cost control initiatives.” Intermodal segment revenue less fuel surcharge dropped by 1.8% to $75.9 million in the first quarter of 2016 compared to the first quarter of 2015. Swift said this was primarily driven by a 2.2% decrease in load counts but partially offset by a 0.4% increase in revenue minus fuel surcharge per load. The company's refrigerated operations suffered a loss of business resulting from a change in strategy by two key customers, accounting for most of a $7.5 million drop in revenue minus fuel charge in this segment, which fell to $76.9 million, Swift said. However, the company found new business, most of which is scheduled to begin in the second quarter. Swift said its truckload segment saw first quarter revenue minus fuel surcharges drop $13 million from a year ago to $455.8 million, driven mainly by a 3.4% reduction in loaded miles driven. That was partially offset by a 0.6% year-over-year increase in revenue minus fuel surcharge per loaded mile. Dedicated segment revenue minus fuel surcharge grew 12.1% to $219.8 million in the first quarter of 2016 compared to the first quarter of 2015. “This growth was driven by a 9.2% increase in weekly revenue minus fuel surcharge per tractor to $3,500 primarily due to improved pricing and freight mix, and various new contracts that started over the last 12 months, which contributed to the 1.5% increase in our average operational truck count year-over-year,” the company said. “We are laying the groundwork which should enable us to react and adjust quickly to what we expect will be a more favorable second half of 2016,” Swift said. “We anticipate the capacity-demand equation will tighten up in the back half of 2016, further bolstered throughout 2017 by the upcoming electronic device mandate." However, the company now anticipates its full year 2016 adjusted earnings per share will be in the range of $1.45-$1.55, down from an estimate of $1.50 to $1.60 when it released fourth quarter 2015 earnings in January. Forward Air Earnings Jump Following Completion of Purchase Tennessee-based Forward Air the company has been only the second trucking company so far this earning season to report an increase in profit (following J.B. Hunt), hitting $13.1 million in the first quarter compared to $4.8 million a year earlier. Part of this is due approximately $11.8 million in one-time deal and integration costs associated with the Towne Air acquisition that were included in the 2015 first quarter results. Earnings per share also moved higher, as expected from an estimate by Zacks Investment Research, hitting 43 cents, up from 16 cents a year earlier. Revenue increased 11.5% to $229.5 million. On an adjusted basis, income from operations of $21.4 million compared with $20.1 million a year earlier, and net income for the current period was $13.1 million compared to $12.1 million in the prior year quarter. Also, on an adjusted basis, income earnings per share for first quarter were 43 cents compared to 40 cents a year ago. “In the aggregate, our results came in as we anticipated," said Bruce A. Campbell, chairman, president, and CEO. "Expedited less-than-truckload was the star performer, and our intermodal business posted a solid performance." According to Campbell, Forward Air has been experiencing lighter volumes in the second quarter. “Also, we have a difficult second-quarter revenue comparison, as a year ago we hadn’t eliminated lower-yielding business that resulted from the Towne acquisition,” he said. “We will, however, continue to benefit from the pricing and dimensional factor changes made over the last two quarters. This, along with post-integration operational efficiencies, should enable us to deliver meaningful earnings growth even if revenue growth remains tepid.” Forward Air is projecting second quarter year-over-year revenue growth to be in the range of 1% to 5%, with income per diluted share to be between 57 cents and 61 cents, compared to an adjusted 51 cents per share in the second quarter of 2015.

Because the American people have been "programmed" from an early age, via school and other, to be generally submissive, realizing they are powerless to effect genuine change. You have to hand it to the powers that be, they really have it down to a science. From age 50 or so, some begin to reflect and question. But it ends there. Paul, this isn't about Obama. It's been happening since 1776. This Tubman event is merely one speck on the timeline.

Car & Driver / April 2016 Until recently, diesel and pickup were words that went together only for buyers of Detroit-brand medium- and heavy-duty rigs, the ones commonly described as three-quarter-ton or one-ton trucks. Hyper-capable, they’re also huge, stiffly sprung machines that far exceed the needs and pocketbooks of buyers who use their trucks for household chores and recreation. The Nissan Titan XD with its Cummins V-8 engine changed the “Detroit-brand” exclusive on diesel pickups while splitting the difference between light- and medium-duty ratings, but it’s still too much truck for many people who might otherwise appreciate a diesel’s fuel efficiency and torque. Ram brought diesel to a broader audience for 2014, offering its EcoDiesel in the 1500 series half-ton pickup, and now diesel has trickled down to the mid-size class in the Chevrolet Colorado/GMC Canyon with a 2.8-liter four-cylinder Duramax. We found the GMC promising when we first drove it, and now we’ve run our full test regimen on a Canyon with the new engine offering. It’s not quick, but that’s not why one buys a diesel. It’s the abundance of low-rpm, cargo-hauling, trailer-pulling, off-road hill-climbing torque that appeals—that and the promise of greater fuel economy. Buyers have to pay dearly for those attributes, however, as GMC doesn’t make the engine available on Canyons in the lower-cost trim levels and commands a significant premium for the Duramax. Diesel sales in the U.S. passenger-car market have fallen off a cliff, tainted by the Volkswagen emissions scandal that has removed the “green” glow of lower CO2 output (directly proportional to fuel economy). In the truck segment, though, diesel sales are hanging tough. Diesel-truck buyers have adapted to the need to periodically add DEF (diesel exhaust fluid), which helps to clean the exhaust, and are generally less motivated by ecological concerns than by capability and fuel efficiency. We measured a significant fuel-economy advantage in comparison to our previous tests of the gasoline-fueled 2.5-liter four-cylinder and the 3.6-liter V-6 Canyon 4x4s. With those trucks, we recorded an overall average of 18 and 17 mpg, while this diesel returned 23 mpg, right in line with its EPA combined rating. During a 200-mile highway test at a steady 75 mph, we averaged an impressive 28 mpg. With a 21-gallon tank, that makes for a range of nearly 600 miles on a long interstate journey. When doing fuel-economy comparisons, consider, too, the need to add DEF when the dashboard indicator advises that remaining range is 1000 miles or less. We didn’t need to add DEF in the two weeks this truck spent with us. The 5.4-gallon DEF tank, which you top up through a secondary filler under the same lid as the one for fuel, should last at least as long as a half-dozen tanks of diesel fuel if you’re working it like a borrowed mule, and up to 10,000 miles normally. A 2.5-gallon bottle from Walmart runs about $8; if you have the dealer pour it, the factory stuff will cost much more. Handling and braking performances at the track were comparable to our measures on other Canyons, cornering at 0.72 g and stopping from 70 mph in 184 feet. All of our tested Canyons were four-by-fours with all-terrain tires, and their figures are competitive—better than we recorded for an off-road-equipped Toyota Tacoma that was slightly smaller and lighter. Although our drivers complained of poor acceleration in the 200-hp gasoline four-cylinder Canyon 4x4, few griped about the 181-hp diesel’s performance even though its test-track numbers were similar. The diesel we tested was in the Canyon’s biggest, heaviest configuration, a Z71 Crew Cab with the long bed, riding on a 140.5-inch wheelbase and casting a shadow 18.7 feet long; it weighed just shy of 5000 pounds. Getting to 60 mph in 9.4 seconds, this example was 0.2-second slower than the gas four-banger. The diesel beat that truck in the quarter-mile by one-tenth of a second, though. The turbo-diesel’s 369 lb-ft of torque paid off, too, in making it slightly quicker (a tenth of a second) to 30, 40, and 50 mph than the gasoline four-cylinder, even though that one had the advantage of being a shorter extended-cab model and was 783 pounds lighter. In around-town duty, a poke at the pedal yields a strong, immediate response in situations where the 2.5-liter gas model needs to spool up some rpm and find a lower gear in the six-speed automatic transmission. That makes the gas version feel like it’s working really hard while the diesel model’s 178 lb-ft torque advantage, available at 2400 fewer rpm, seems to shrug off similar challenges. Your ear has a lot to do with such impressions, and our sound-measuring equipment says the diesel is 4 decibels louder than the gasoline four-cylinder at wide-open throttle, 2 dB louder at idle, but—surprise!—a full 4 decibels quieter at a steady 70 mph cruise. The V-6 was all but inaudible at idle, but it was much louder than the diesel at full song and only 1 decibel quieter at cruise. GM puts extra sound-deadening measures in vehicles equipped with this engine, and the low-rpm torque means you rarely need to mat the accelerator, something we had to do often with the smaller gas engine. This one makes a growly background clatter, not unpleasant but never absent, that’s likely to please the truckers motivated to buy this vehicle for its 7600-pound towing capacity (the rear-drive version has a 7700-pound tow rating). That’s plenty to pull a two-horse trailer, a serious boat, or a camper that would be the pride of your local glampground. Shoppers with lower towing needs are likely to find the better around-town performance and lower buy-in cost of the V-6 a preferable alternative in a light-duty truck. And those who want a diesel truck for work, towing landscaping equipment or the like, probably would be better off with the Ram 1500 EcoDiesel, rated for even tougher duty and available in more-basic trim levels within a few hundred dollars of the $40,735 sticker on the cheapest diesel Canyon. This is because the GMC is offered only in Crew Cab SLE trim and higher. The diesel also will be available in a Denali luxury version for 2017. The diesel option price of $3730 brings a standard trailer-brake controller and an exhaust-brake feature and requires that the buyer choose either the Z71 All Terrain Adventure package ($3585 for off-road suspension, hill-descent control, 255/65R-17 all-terrain tires, and a bunch of cosmetic bits) or the Driver Alert package, which is only $395 for lane-departure warning and forward-collision alert. The latter features aren’t available on four-by-fours, however. Choosing either of those further requires another $575 for the SLE Convenience package of automatic climate control, remote start, and a sliding rear window. And $250 more for a mandatory trailering equipment package, minus a $750 discount on the All-Terrain Adventure package when you’ve chosen all of the above. Getting the diesel, then, adds up to some $7,000 on a four-by-four. Atop those options, our tested truck had a Bose audio upgrade ($500), an 8.0-inch color touchscreen with navigation and Apple CarPlay ability ($495), and Cyber Gray metallic paint ($395), for an option total of $8955 minus the $750 package discount. Despite all this spending on options, our $43,990 Canyon still lacked a full power-adjustable driver’s seat and had just a single zone for its automatic climate control. And this is a lot of money to offset against a 6-mpg improvement in fuel economy. You can do your own math, but it’s pretty clear that there’s reason behind GM’s projection that only one in 10 buyers of its mid-size trucks will opt for the turbo-diesel. That’s still a decent number of folks who will be able to enjoy the advantages the engine offers without having to deal with a truck so large it might not fit in your garage. Still, if you’re looking for outright capability, you’re probably better off with a full-size rig. Photo gallery - http://www.caranddriver.com/photo-gallery/2016-gmc-canyon-diesel-4x4-crew-cab-instrumented-test

The Wall Street Journal / April 21, 2016 Werner Enterprises and Knight Transportation blame too many trucks, too few customers for smaller first-quarter profits Three of the largest U.S. trucking companies reported a drop in profits as demand for freight-hauling services slumped. Werner Enterprises Inc. said first-quarter earnings fell 13% from a year earlier to $20.1 million, while Knight Transportation Inc.’s profits sank 24% to $22.5 million over the same period. Thursday afternoon, Swift Transportation Co. said profits fell 16% from last year, to $31.9 million. Trucking companies say too many big rigs are plying the market, driving down the rates they can charge customers. Demand has also taken a hit from persistently high inventories at major retailers, which reduces the need for shippers to restock stores and warehouses. Rising driver wages are also squeezing profits, they said. “Customers are aggressively working to take advantage of the favorable shorter term trends to the detriment of carriers,” Werner said in a news release. Dave Jackson, Knight’s chief executive, said spot-market trucking prices are declining this year even compared with rates last year that were down as much as 20%. “So if you start to look at it over a two-year period, it’s an unbelievable decline in pricing,” Mr. Jackson said. Mr. Jackson said he expects capacity to tighten and earnings to improve this year as truckers slow the growth of their fleets and manufacturing picks up. Companies ordered 37% fewer trucks in March compared with a year earlier. Swift blamed a “soft freight environment,” including fewer total loaded miles driven and weak pricing, especially in the refrigerated cargo segment. The company said it plans to further delay equipment purchases and get rid of some of its tractors over the next quarter to reduce truck count by 200. Werner, Knight and Swift are among the largest companies in the truckload market, where truckers carry full truckloads of goods for retailers and manufacturers, typically to distribution centers and factories. Raymond James analyst Art Hatfield downgraded Knight’s shares after the announcement, in which Knight also lowered its second-quarter earnings guidance. The company said it is seeing contract freight rate increases from flat to 2% this bidding season, rather than the 2% to 3% it had expected at the beginning of the year. Cowen and Co. lowered its earnings estimates for Werner, writing in a research note that the company “had been just about the only major [truckload] carrier with 2016 fleet growth plans, but such plans are no longer set in stone.” Knight shares ended roughly flat at $26.72 Thursday. Werner’s stock dropped 9.6% to $25.73. Swift shares dropped 4.5% to $17.47. The company released earnings after markets closed. The weak freight market is forcing large trucking companies to find more business in the spot market, where prices are more volatile, as opposed to signing long-term contracts with customers, analysts say. The first quarter “is typically the weakest freight quarter of the year with improvement in Q2,” said Casey Deak with Wells Fargo. “With that in mind, it is not all that surprising that carriers were forced into the weak spot market maybe more than they would have liked. If the core customer base strengthens, we believe that quarterly results could see improvement as early as Q2.” Werner’s revenues fell 3% year-over-year, from $495.7 million to $482.8 million. Knight’s revenue fell 6.3% over the last year to $272.1 million. Swift revenue, including fuel surcharges, fell 4.7% to $967.8 million. Separately, Landstar System Inc., a company that arranges freight services, including trucking loads, for shippers, reported a 3% decline in first-quarter net income to $29.2 million on $711.6 million in revenue.

At a moment when our government should be using its time and effort to focus on serious issues confronting the country and world, why are our employees in Washington wasting their time (my opinion) by going through the motions to put Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill? I, John Q. Public, have not submitted a request for this change to my employees in Washington. I want the face of America’s seventh President, Andrew Jackson, to remain on the $20 bill. Harriet Tubman is one of a long list of famous Americans, but her face doesn’t belong on our currency. “If” Harriet Tubman was worthy of consideration, then why not John Glenn, Thomas Alva Edison, George C. Marshall, Dwight Eisenhower or John Wayne? We have a long-standing and just policy dictating that the face of U.S. Presidents and founding fathers be on United States currency. Harriet Tubman does not qualify. The American people have NOT voted to change our currency policy. If anything, the face of Thomas Jefferson, one of America’s greatest founding fathers, should be transferred from the little used $2 bill to the $20 bill, and the face of three-term President Franklin Delano Roosevelt honored on the $2 bill. $1 bill – George Washington $2 bill – Thomas Jefferson $5 bill – Abraham Lincoln $10 bill – Alexander Hamilton $20 bill – Andrew Jackson $50 bill – Ulysses S. Grant $100 bill – Benjamin Franklin $500 bill – William McKinley $1,000 bill – Grover Cleveland $5,000 bill – James Madison $10,000 bill – Salmon P. Chase $100,000 – Woodrow Wilson

Ford's win with the original GT in 1966 was the culmination of a several year long effort........AND most of all due to the contribution of one lanky Texan named Carroll Hall Shelby.

Please let us know what you learn from TRW.

One can justifiably use Delphi and Dollar Store in the same sentence. Delphi has only ONE major heavy truck fuel injection customer in the entire world......Volvo. Delphi's lack of popularity speaks volumes about dimly their technology is viewed.

Within the Mack brand area of Volvo's U.S. headquarters in Greensboro, North Carolina, there isn’t a single career truck man onboard. I mentioned that here.....last post (http://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/44866-local-mack-boss-out-volvo-confirms/). Former Mack brand President and CEO Paul Vikner was the last Mack man (who was thrilled to get out there and retire April 1, 2008). He was replaced by Dennis Slagle, whose background is construction machinery. All you can do is call Customer Satisfaction at +1 (866) 298-6586 and speak with a clueless individual who only knows that a truck is bigger than a car.

Gouging parts pricing is orchestrated by Mack brand owner Volvo (There is no Mack now, it's just a nameplate). Price gouging is Volvo's global market philosophy.

I'm going to be honest with you, I came to expect a (Ross Rhodes) Mack reman engine to have the same life as a new engine, because they were not rebuilt........rather, they were remanufactured. It's an entirely different concept. The Middletown reman assembly line was identical in format to the new engine line at Hagerstown. Every component utilized in the assembly of a Mack remanufactured engine was as good as new.....and sometimes new.

You're trying to do it right and you're willing to pay up for it. But............ In the days of Mack Trucks, when we first opened the Mack Reman center in MIddletown, Pennsylvania (just east of Harrisburg), this massive and state-of-the-art facility was headed by a high caliber gentleman named Ross Rhodes. He created an incredibly professional and highly skilled team of people. He earned and held the respect of this family of people (a huge family if your will), and it showed. The quality of the Mack reman product we shipped out either directly to the dealers or for stock at our seven PDCs (parts distribution centers) was virtually perfect. In all my years at Mack, I never once heard of a reman engine fail. They were as good as a new one.

Brazilian truck collector Osvaldo Tadeu Strada and his 22 restored FNMs. http://blogdocaminhoneiro.com/2016/04/o-colecionador-que-ja-acumula-27-caminhoes/

(The story begins at 2:07 ) Also, note how similar the Bedford TK/KM cab looks to the International Harvester CO Loadstar and Cargostar. The TK was introduced in 1959, the first CO Loadstars in 1962.

Transport Engineer / April 21, 2016 A&F Haulage of Bolton has taken delivery of 20 new Volvo trucks – 14 FM models and six FMX 8x4 tippers. Supplied by dealer Thomas Hardie Commercials, of Manchester, the Bolton-based haulier’s new additions increase its fleet to 85. All are powered by 11-litre Volvo D11K engines, producing 410bhp and up to 1,950 Nm of torque. The vehicles’ I-Shift automated gearboxes are equipped with software to enhance off-road and construction capabilities. The FMX eight-wheelers are fitted with Day cabs and feature Bulkrite insulated bodies with Edbro tipping gear and Easysheet systems. The 14 sleeper-cabbed FMs are fitted with Wilcox Wilcolite bodies, Edbro tipping gear and Easysheets. The new trucks also incorporate a five-way recording camera system, covering front, rear, left and right, as well as one camera to give an overview of the body. A&F’s managing director Ali Majeed says: “Volvo represents good, strong and reliable trucks and with the B-Ride high suspension option offering excellent chassis ground clearance on both the FMX and the FM, these new trucks are ideally suited to the type of construction work with which we’re involved.” The drivers have praised the vehicles as well, he adds, in particular the improved interiors and, with the FMX, the lighter steering. “The majority of our fleet is Volvo FM trucks, although with this latest delivery we now have 10 FMX, too,” says Majeed, adding that the dealer support is “nothing short of great”. .

Transport Engineer / April 20, 2016 Savilles Freights has added eight DAF XF 460 FTG tractors, with Super Space Cabs, and a 26-tonne CF 330 FAS with a Space Cab to its general haulage operations. The Bristol-based operator runs a mixed fleet of 30 trucks spanning four marques, all of which have been good, according to Darren Saville, a director of the family-owned business. “We have now dropped one manufacturer and refreshed the line-up with these new DAFs,” he says. “Right now, the feeling is that we will try to rationalise further and finish the year with just two marques in the fleet,” he continues. “That will happen as we work through a rolling replacement programme based on either contract hire term ends, or a five-year life cycle on our wholly owned vehicles.” Supplied through Imperial Commercials Western Region, the new XFs are on three-year contract hire packages through Paccar Financial, with the CF rigid being acquired under a two-year R&M deal on outright purchase. Saville says he was tempted to look again at DAF trucks following an abortive negotiation to take over the management of transport operations for an own-account operator running an all-DAF fleet. “While we were not able to reach a positive conclusion on that opportunity, the good thing that came out of it was our exposure to today’s DAF range and the meetings it required us to have with Imperial Commercials,” states Saville. “They have been on top of every little detail for us since we expressed an interest in DAF in our own right, and came up with solutions to our used asset disposal that allowed us to focus on the new trucks we needed,” he adds. Savilles Freights is monitoring fuel on the new DAFs through its own telematics system, as well as receiving weekly reports direct from DAF. “It’s reassuring to see the two systems tally with fuel reports,” cmments Saville. “These new trucks are already matching other Euro 6 vehicles in the fleet and have yet to get properly bedded in.” .

SvD Naringsliv / April 19, 2016 This week, several of the Stockholm Stock Exchange's heavyweights including Volvo will release their quarterly reports. On Friday, the market will among other things give weight to whether Volvo can show positive margins from the merger with Chinese truckmaker Dongfeng Commercial Vehicles. “If it can find success, the joint venture with Dongfeng would make Volvo one of the world's largest truckmakers by volume. But so far, there has been no meaningful development. Now it is up to Volvo to show some evidence of progress,” says Jonas Olavi, equity strategist at Alfred Berg. Lars Söderfjell, chief strategist at Swedbank, believes that the market’s focus regarding Volvo will be on existing businesses, such as North America, Brazil and the EU and how the company is managed with the relatively new CEO Martin Lundstedt at the helm. “Lundstedt will do great things with the company, but it will take time and it will not appear in the first quarter. One bright spot, however should be a decent cash flow”, says Söderfjell.

Today’s Trucking / April 20, 2016 Three western Canadian trucking associations are calling on their respective ministers of environment and transportation to adjust weight regulations to allow fuel-saving, wide-base single tires that would reduce harmful emissions and save trucking firms’ money. The proposal from the Alberta Motor Transport Association, British Columbia Trucking Association and Saskatchewan Trucking Association aims to harmonize regulatory standards, which have been at a standstill out West since the single-tire technology debuted some 16 years ago. While Ontario, Manitoba and Quebec have made exceptions for the new generation tires, the Western provinces say they’re missing out on fuel savings of up to 10% compared to single tires, and GHG emissions reductions of about 8.5 tonnes per truck per year when using wide-base single tires. While fleets can load up to 9,000 kgs (19,842 lb) per axle in Ontario and Quebec, the limit is just 7,700 kgs (16,976 lb) in Western Canada. Potential damage to weaker pavements has been the main argument against the new generation tires. The Canadian Trucking Alliance (CTA) has also been championing for harmonization, having written to federal and provincial officials to work together to amend the weight restrictions. “Constraining compliance options in such a way limits our industry’s ability to easily apply new technologies to existing equipment,” wrote the CTA in March. “It is in all parties’ best interest if trucking companies from across Canada have access to the same carbon reducing technologies that the federal government has deemed necessary for compliance.”

Engines: Is smaller the next big thing? Fleet Owner / April 7, 2016 Rightsized—not oversized—engines are getting the job done for fleets seeking efficiency and performance If you’ve ever heard the saying “go big or go home” and shook your head thinking there are many situations where it really doesn’t apply, welcome to the evolution of heavy-duty trucking in North America. Engine and power­train technology has progressed to a point where more is possible with less, and there are a number of other factors also coming into play. It’s all helping drive a move by more trucking companies away from a 14-15L engine standard toward a 13L sweet spot, and increasingly to the 9-12L range. “The old bread and butter isn’t the bread and butter anymore,” says Frank Trzaska, director of maintenance support at third-party logistics company NFI Industries, one of three fleets Fleet Owner spoke with on the topic. In an industry where companies have been finding ways to shave off little slices of excess and chase down incremental gains in efficiency, particularly when it comes to fuel consumption and mpg, is it any surprise fleets are considering smaller-displacement engines? And you don’t have to look far for options: Cummins Inc. calls its 11L ISM “one of the flagship engines” of its heavy-duty product line; Paccar launched its MX-11 of that same displacement in North America last fall; Mack says its MP7 11L is “the light engine that packs a punch”; and Volvo notes that its D11 can minimize costs of operation, to name several heavy-duty powerplants south of the 12L mark. All four of those, incidentally, can be spec’d with upwards of 400 hp. and 1,500 lbs.-ft. of torque. More than meets the eye “We call it ‘powertrain downsizing’ or ‘engine downsizing,’ if you may,” notes Sandeep Kar, global director of commercial vehicle research at economic consulting group Frost & Sullivan. With technology advancements, he tells Fleet Owner, “what’s happening is we’re creating a foundation where engines will be smaller in displacement yet will not compromise on power output, which means power density is increasing.” Kar is quick to point out, however, that 15L engines aren’t going anywhere. “On the contrary, 15L engines will remain the industry leader in terms of installations, but the share they hold will decline.” And why is that? First, smaller engines can offer higher fuel efficiency, lower acquisition cost, and essentially the same power bandwidth as larger engines, Kar contends, especially when paired with today’s automated manual transmissions. But beyond that, what “doesn’t meet the eye” is that OEMs like Daimler, Volvo and Paccar are introducing engines in ranges like 12-13.5L in efforts toward vertical integration, he says. In other words, they’re looking to gain market share with their own products against Cummins’ widely popular ISX15. “So fleets can carry more freight and more payload because of the light weight, and the trucks are more fuel-efficient because of the OEM proprietary engines married with OEM proprietary transmissions that give interesting fuel economy benefits,” says Kar. “And fleets love that.” Frost & Sullivan has also found that more fleet managers of the nation’s top 100 fleets say they’re “okay with the idea” of same-sized trucks with smaller-sized engines—that was 20% of fleet managers surveyed in 2012 and 33% in 2014. “But had I asked this question 10 years ago, the figure probably would’ve been 2-3%,” Kar says. Another factor is the Panama Canal expansion project, which started in 2007 but is now mostly complete. “All those mega container ships that used to come to the Western Seaboard will now come to the Eastern Seaboard; hence, we will not need to rely on long haul as much,” Kar explains. “We’re looking at the rise of regional haul at the expense of long haul,” he adds. “So the long-term outlook for smaller-sized engines is definitely promising.” One size doesn’t fit all Start with a less-than-truckload (LTL) carrier fleet operating in the Northeast like A. Duie Pyle, where all you’ll find are 11L and 13L diesels in single- and tandem-axle tractors, respectively. The 11L tractors are used primarily in a pickup-and-delivery operation and occasionally in line haul, says director of fleet maintenance Dan Carrano, while the larger-engine tractors are used both for line haul and pickup-and-delivery operations. “Aside from being an LTL carrier, we also have a liquid bulk operation where we must achieve a precise load capacity,” he notes. In that operation, the Pyle trucks have a gross combination weight (GCW) of about 100,000 lbs., Carrano says, “and we’re more than able to move that load with a 13L engine. “But we have not had one experience where we’re underpowered, even with our 11Ls,” he continues. The 11L trucks run a GCW up to 66,000 lbs., “and that 11L is more than powerful enough to meet our expectations. Our goal is to spec the right equipment for the right application—it’s not a 'one size fits all' in our eyes.” NFI Industries, on the other hand, operates nationally and has found more of a sweet spot with 13L engines, which you’ll find in nearly all the fleet’s tractors along with “a handful” of 9L CNG-powered engines. “Everything we could think of, for every avenue we went down, a 13L worked for us, and it worked well,” says NFI’s Trzaska. “We have a 450-hp. 13L, where 20 years ago we were running 350-hp. 15Ls,” he points out. “Today, there’s plenty of horsepower and torque in those 13Ls, and it’s in the low rpms—it’s in a great range—to power 80,000-lb. gross vehicle weight down the road all day,” Tzaska explains. NFI also specs direct-drive, automated manual transmissions, “and these 12-speeds can shift all day long, up and down, constantly, where a driver would be worn out come the end of the day from all that shifting. “So today we can have a smaller engine with a smaller powerband and less horsepower [compared with the latest 15Ls], and it does the exact same work,” Trzaska adds. “And our driver is just as fresh when he’s done with his day as when he started it. That transmission will keep that engine in that tight power­band he needs and operate the truck efficiently for mpg, engine life, and proper speed. For our fleet, there’s no sense in thinking about a larger engine for any of our operations anymore.” Or take a company with very diverse equipment like Ryder, where “we have every possible configuration of engine and chassis out there in our fleet,” according to Scott Perry, vice president of supply chain management. Among its heavy-duty trucks, Ryder has some 9L and 11L engine variants as “pretty rare exceptions,” he notes, with “the vast majority” sporting 13L, 14L and 15L configurations. “We’re seeing really good performance out of our 13L platforms, but we’re still very disciplined in making sure that we’re putting them into the right applications,” Perry says. “We generally don’t put a 13L engine in a sleeper tractor. We stick to a 14-15L heavier, higher-displacement engine in those just based on the types of duty cycles that those trucks could end up in. “We’re also very conscious of the GCW limits, and that probably applies more to our Canada operation,” he continues. “We make sure we don’t put a 13L engine in anything higher than an 80,000-lb. GCW application.” Pros and cons Geography and type of trucking application—e.g., the A. Duie Pyle LTL, Northeast-region model—are primary considerations when considering how to rightsize engines for your equipment, but there’s more to it than that. More heavy trucks are ending up having to go through local communities and neighborhoods, for instance. “A lot of areas we deliver in were designed for 40- and 45-ft. trailers,” Carrano notes. “So we always consider the length of the trailer and the size of the tractor. We’re looking for the right piece of equipment for the right application, and you have to consider things like infrastructure and roads; we’re always looking to help set our drivers up for success.” Smaller engines and the tractors to house them also are a factor at NFI, both in terms of agility and lighter weight of equipment, which means more freight/payload capacity and better mpg. “A shorter hood on a tractor also gives the driver better visibility and maneuverability when he’s parking behind a warehouse or pulling in to a storefront,” Trzaska tells Fleet Owner. “It’s just much easier and safer to drive around all the other things on the road.” Lighter, smaller-displacement heavy-duty engines in the 9-13L range today can have plenty of horsepower and torque —in some cases surpassing the larger-displacement engines of yesterday—thanks to things like better oils and the use of new materials like compacted graphite iron. They even have maintenance intervals and life expectancies similar to or equal to their bigger siblings. “Like the Paccar MX-13 engine, the MX-11 has a rated B10 life of 1 million mi.,” says Charles Cook, marketing manager for vocational products at Peterbilt. “This means the MX-11 engines are designed and tested that 90% of the engines produced will reach 1 million mi. without a major overhaul.” Those smaller engines may even offer a few maintenance advantages, points out Mario Sanchez-Lara, director of on-highway marketing communications at Cummins. With the company’s medium-bore, heavy-duty engines like the ISL9, ISM and ISX12, “in general, their maintenance intervals are shorter [vs. 13L and larger engines], but the cost of some aspects of it is more cost-effective. Smaller engines on a big chassis offer lots of space with great serviceability,” he says. However, smaller engines still don’t hold up quite as well in terms of residual value in the secondary market, Fleet Owner heard. That was once the case for 13L engines, though the market largely has warmed to those now, but it remains the situation for smaller engines like 11Ls, according to Trzaska. Owner-operators shopping the used-truck market once “didn’t believe that a 13L could do everything, because they had to have a truck that could do anything at any time—those guys were always looking for the high horsepower, big engine that would last forever.” “You get a 13L, and it’s 300 lbs. lighter than a 15L; an 11L could be 400 lbs. lighter than that,” he adds. “Owner-operators figured that out. They’re businessmen today. They figured out that by rightsizing their engine, they can shed hundreds of pounds that they can put into payload and charge somebody for.” The green argument The three fleets we spoke with all said a smart strategy is to know your application, location and duty cycle, and rightsize—not oversize—your engines for the job. Like Ryder does now, NFI and A. Duie Pyle said they wouldn’t hesitate to spec larger 14-16L engines if the job called for them. And while NFI’s Trzaska said that in its experience and real-world use, the company wasn’t able to get more fuel economy out of an 11L vs. a 13L engine, there’s also the argument of lower overall emissions. For some companies, Ryder’s Perry points out, smaller-displacement engines could be a differentiator in a highly competitive industry. “There’s organizations that will definitely leverage that and will focus on that to differentiate themselves with regard to how they’re designing their distribution networks and making sure they have the most efficient powertrain available,” Perry says. “So private fleets with their brand on the truck, for example, if that’s part of their messaging to the marketplace, they definitely will want to pay attention to that and make sure they’re making those good, informed decisions.” .

The sponsor of the BMT website is Watts Mack. Why don't you give them a call or e-mail? http://www.wattsmack.com/parts-department/

Autoblog / April 20, 2016 Just in time for Ford to start accepting applications from prospective Ford GT customers, company leaders like Bill Ford and Raj Nair are discussing the challenges of creating a successor to the famous GT. The team conceived of the GT as a racecar and a production supercar from the beginning, which brought major hurdles to the project. In terms of engineering, the road-going version needed to connect with the wealthy clientele behind the wheel, but quick lap times are the only thing that matters when the GT arrives at Le Mans. Ford's bosses admit using a turbocharged V6 is risky for a roughly $450,000 supercar, but they say the powerplant allows them to take the GT to the racetrack, and then market the technology's successes to the public. The same concept applies to the GT's cutting-edge aerodynamics and extensive use of carbon fiber. Bill Ford apparently already has an order on the first GT and promises to drive it as often as possible. We hope he does. With just 250 of the supercars coming from the company each year, they will remain a rare sight on the road.

Autoblog / April 20, 2016 Icon's Derelict one-offs are impressive for the way they take classic vehicles and invisibly incorporate modern amenities. The recently finished 1960 Willys Overland Wagon in this video shows this design ethos perfectly by looking original in all the important places but packing the latest tech to hit the road everyday with no problem. Plus, Icon founder Jonathan Ward once again shows his painstaking eye for even the smallest details. Willys made these wagons for work, and this one originally served for hauling around kids at a summer camp. The owners really took care of it, though, so Ward was able to use the original body, upholstery, glass, and headliner for this build. Some of the parts, like the seats, just needed refurbishing. Modern utility makes it easy to live with the vintage looks. The Willys now has a custom chassis and uses a General Motors E-Rod V8 crate engine. Power goes to the rear through a five-speed manual, and there's a locking differential in case the owner gets caught out in the snow. Inside, Icon hides an air conditioning unit under the dashboard and adds an iPhone-based stereo system. Let Ward take you on a complete tour of the Wagon in this clip. Driving it looks like a ton of fun. The interior still rattles like you would expect from a vintage vehicle, but there are all the modern conveniences inside.

You're welcome. I aim to please, and also enjoy following his restoration work. Good guy.