Maxidyne

No, you're comparing apples and oranges. Have you heard of NACFE? They have a sample size of thousands of trucks. Do you know what SAE type 1 and type 2 fuel economy tests are? Hint: For accurate fuel economy testing you want to control all but the experimental variable. And have you followed the good European trucking magazines that use the same route for every road test so they can accurately compare different trucks performance and fuel economy? As for computer simulations, how do you think Ford prepped for and won LeMans... In the 1960s!

My opinion is based on hard evidence- years ago I plotted out the running times on Truck magazines British test route vs. horsepower and did the same with the Eurotest route. With more horsepower running times were reduced and there was a correlation, but above 10HP/ton the curve flattened out and there was little improvement. Cummins found similar results, they actually had loaded several road's profiles into their computers and could do a similar simulations to show customers the MPG and running times they would get with different powertrain options. That's old school tech now, several manufacturers have topo maps of the world's major roads in their truck's computers to help their intelligent cruise control decide whether to hold onto a gear or shift, etc.. If you have a good dealer they should be able to access these tools to guide you in speccing a truck. And as far as your 15-16 liter engine getting 7 MPG, 8 MPG is now the norm. There's even a guy running around here hauling milk with a new Anthem that's getting 9 MPG...

Neighbor of mine was burning some wood scraps to which he'd added some tires and general garbage about 60 yards from my front window. He decides the fire isn't going good enough so he throws a bit of gas/diesel mixture on it, I here a "boom", look that way and see a human sized torch drop to the ground, then get up still partly ablaze and drop again. I grab an extinguisher and sprint over to check on the neighbor. His "drop and roll" had gotten the flames out, but now he's breathing hard, heart probably racing, and he'd had a previous heart attack. Breathing settled down but I stayed with him awhile just to make sure he was OK and eventually talked him into moving himself and his pickup further than 10 yards away from the fire as aerosol cans kept cooking off. I went back home and a deputy sheriff stopped and talked with him and left, apparently satisfied that he was OK. He finally went home and saw that parts of his clothes had completely burned through and he had burns there. Wife took him to the local ER and they referred him to Hennipen County Medical Center in Minneapolis, the regional burn center. He spent a day or two there and is back home. IIRC, Carhart makes "flame resistant" clothing, but it'll eventually burn like any other "flame resistant" clothing. Treat fire with respect, don't burn compressed flammables, etc., and a day's stay in a burn ward is a lot more expensive than taking aerosol cans to the county landfill for proper disposal.

Because in the real world more power and gears doesn't reduce trip times much. I've seen Cummins computer simulations and real world data from one of the Euro truck magazines very detailed and consistent road tests that showed that on most roads, more power than 10 horsepower/ metric ton is wasted with little or no reduction in trip time. As far as gearing goes, construction trucks need some lower first gears for off road startability, but many of the engines now have essentially flat power curves so a 9 or 10 speed transmission with 40% splits is more than adequate. Thus even though a lot of concrete suppliers are putting on pusher axles as well as "Boost a Loads" so they're running up around the 80k# weight limit when loaded, they're going with an 11-13 liter engine for fuel economy and a 9 or 10 speed automated manual or Allison automatic transmission to increase payload and reduce fuel consumption.

Yup, the Loadstar could "punch above it's weight"!

If you kept it Plain Jane you might be able to keep it under $140k. Was just looking at the bids for our state DOT trucks and most of the bids for a 6x4 chassis cab are coming in well under $100k. That's with 12k and 40k axles and usually about a 300 HP engine, so gotta figure some extra $$$ for heavier axles, a lift axle, body, and FET and sales taxes that the DOT is exempt from. If you really wanted to cut corners, Daimler threw in a bid of around $66k for an M2 6x4 with a 250 HP B-series Cummins motor and Eaton 9 speed manual, the bare minimum power and gears that the DOT required!

Agreed, couple years back 'bout this time of year I needed a 4'x8'x3/4" sheet of treated plywood to build a ramp. Was crappy weather for driving with snow covered roads and the Menards didn't even have it in stock, though at least I was able to verify that online and avoid the 40 mile round trip drive for nothing. Local lumber co-op 6 miles away had it in stock, price was only a couple bucks more and I didn't complain!

IIRC around that time the Macks were switched over to the Volvo frame design, which IIRC is a bit narrower than the SAE standard 34" outer frame width.

Similar "cost savings" at VW Group: https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/volkswagen-plans-“significant”-cost-savings-invest-future Wondering if this means Ford and VW will be paring duplicative operations in advance of the proposed partnership... Or is the deal off?

A lot of the problem is they're computerizing stuff that don't need to be, like washing machines. To add insult to injury, the computers don't really improve energy efficiency, they're just a gee-wiz gadget added as a selling point. I've had similar experience with legacy analog appliances- got old appliances included with my current house and they've yet to break down, and got the 20+ year old appliances from my old house in the storeroom for spares. Our electric utility is offering a $50 bounty on pre-Energy Star appliances, but I ain't givin' mine up!

Take a look at what's happening with cars and light trucks- You can now buy a "Chevy" light duty conventional with an Isuzu engine that's assembled by International. Or a complete Isuzu cabover with Chevy badges. Over at VW Group they're using the same platform on everything from $40k Audi A4s to six figure Lamborghinis and Bentleys. This ain't always a bad thing though, if you want an ultimate mid engine sports car the Porsche Cayman starts at a bit above $50k and is built on the same platform as the $100+k Audi R series and Lambo Hurricace. So I reckon the next generation Internationals on Scania chassis will be a big improvement, and they might even give us the Scania V8!

Great service, I and most of the companies I've worked for have been customers since they were in downtown Minneapolis in the 60s.

Red Horse, good point about the multi-brand dealerships. Here in Minnesota and surrounding states Boyer Trucks is the "big dog" in work trucks, carrying Daimler, International, Isuzu, and Ford. They started with Ford, but when Ford sold off the heavy trucks Boyer was forced to diversify to survive. If Ford isn't competitive, they can offer the customers the International version of the Chevy conventional, the Isuzu version of the Chevy cabover, as well as Daimler's offerings.

Soy bean cash prices and futures have barely budged...

GM Fleet "gets it"- Fleet purchasing departments prefer to deal with one supplier. Being able to supply everything from a compact van or pickup up though Class 8 is a major advantage in the marketplace.

Just like Volvo puts the Mack brand on their Renault military trucks for the North American market...

There's a real need for the kind of maneuverable 4x4 work truck the Jeeps, Land Rovers, etc. used to be... Sadly they've deserted those missions.

Typical Volvo... Always first with the cheapest solution!

True, but Volvo has yet to convince me as they've been real secretive about what's inside their iShifts. For years I'd ask the Volvo people at trade shows if they could show me an iShift that'd made it a million miles without a rebuild and never got an answer. Finally found a fleet that's gotten a million+ miles from their iShifts, but they haul light and pretty much on the interstates.

All the AMTs (Automated Manual Transmissions) are primarily designed for highway use, though Allison's AMT which has a torque converter might thus tolerate urban and off road use better. Volvo's single countershaft I-Shift AMT seems to do OK in highway use, probably because Volvo very tightly limits it's applications so it stays in direct drive most of the time. Then there's the iShift's $$$ 5 digit+labor rebuild price and only 5 year warranty- Many seasonal users in construction, logging, farming, etc. need to keep a truck much longer than the iShift's 5 year warranty. I'd go with the Allison automatic, though Volvo seems to demand a pretty big upcharge for it, probably to encourage you to buy their iShift. Power wise, above 455 HP Volvo really jacks up the extended warranty price.

FCA still builds a few RHD Jeeps for U.S. rural mail carriers, currently they're offering RHD Cherokees. The last of the old model RHD traditional Jeep "Wranglers" have been built out and grabbed up, FCA says they'll be offering RHD versions of the new Wrangler when production ramps up.

And if self driving vehicles are the wave of the future held back only by old regulations, how come we're not seeing it on private industrial estates, etc.?

My apologies if I was a bit snarky. I'm no fan of FCA, but I have to admit some of their products are good value and work well for some folks.

Just want to throw this out for discussion- Would going to a smaller engine that is thus working harder reduce the number of parked regens?

One of the "benefits" of these stupid trade wars is tariffs that force local assembly of small market cars and trucks like Lincoln. The result is high costs due to multiple plants building the same vehicle at far less than plant capacity, resulting in higher costs that are passed on to the consumers.