When Scania trucks roamed North America

[kscarbel2]

.

[kscarbel2]

.

[kscarbel2]

.

[kscarbel2]

.

[kscarbel2]

.

[kscarbel2]

.

[chuckyr]

I have this brochure.

[RFCDrum]

So do I.

Rob

[Gmerrill0516]

I don't recall ever seeing one in person. I'm not in love with the Euro looks either so I'm ok with that. Ughhh.

[Chuck P]

Telmo Abreu's fun truck.

[REEL ADDICTION]

Thelmo is the Scania king in NJ he knows his stuff!

[kscarbel2]

I don't recall ever seeing one in person. I'm not in love with the Euro looks either so I'm ok with that. Ughhh.

Please bear in mind of course that the "Euro look" you are seeing here is circa 1987.

Today's Scania exterior (and interior) design is, in my humble opinion, absolutely breathtaking. Scania is behind the most advanced heavy truck technology available today.

.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuu4D-j-Ymc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iIFW2sUERQ

[chuckyr]

I think new Scania's are among the least attractive of the Euro trucks. That raised roof just looks ugly to me. As far as the most attractive current Euro trucks to me, the Iveco Stralis Hi-Way is among the best.

[98989]

I think new Scania's are among the least attractive of the Euro trucks. That raised roof just looks ugly to me. As far as the most attractive current Euro trucks to me, the Iveco Stralis Hi-Way is among the best.

If you take a carefull look trought old models from Iveco and Scania you will find out that both often have similar visual solutions, hard to say who copy as it come alternately

those horisontal ribs on grile on Iveco are very probably adopted from Scania, maybe reason for this is because some Scania trucks are designed by Bertone

Scania 4series(1995) have some details inspired from Mercedes SK(1988) like:

-vertical door handle,

-sloping window line

-uses black color to hide transition between the windows

but I agree that new Iveco look great, when other manufacturers create extremly ugly trucks for Euro6 standards (Volvo , Renault) Iveco make very nice looking truck , i also like Daf and MAN but i think Iveco look better

as for Iveco as truck, i would say it is far below Scania in anythin , last model is lot improvement in appearance(especially inside) but those trucks are far from premium segment they suffer from varios things largest problem is electronics ,

my brother by some crazy luck always get them , in former company 2007 and 2008 models , could not open windows and roof for almost 4years, lost heating , air condition did not work in one, had problems with lights, always some electronic problem it wont turn off light in cab as it indicate doors are opened

but in other ways it was pretty robust , they used to run it with hollow radiator in hot summer it was overheated many timmes , it was always overloaded at least 25% and it was driven very carelless , they used to destroy those trucks because of bad conditions in company, they were trying to use as much fuel as they can and drive them very bad

friend of brother manage to break axle because he hit curb from perpendicular road on the right side because he was on facebook

workshop who used to work on them , always get wondered about brakedowns on those vehicles, they had most unusuall brakedowns possible , guy manage to rip off exhaust manifold, other destroy engine mounts at just 2year old truck ,

now brother works for a company with over 100 trucks most Iveco but well shaped as company is good

as for roof of iveco, Scania also have similar shape of cab on smaller highline, this kind of roof means less space inside , in Iveco when top bunk is lowered me ( 5´10´´ high and 160lbs ) have no space for sholders when standing between seats because front storage is moved rear

Scania is pretty rounded comparing to other manufacturers this take space inside ,

Edited March 14, 2014 by 98989

[98989]

Note: Scania’s 14.19 liter DSC14 V-8 of the time (and by no coincidence the same displacement as the Mack ENDT866), was available up to 500 horsepower and at least one example was sold in the U.S. market (pictured below pulling for Watkins) with an extended length sleeper cab.

when you look at Watkins truck , take a look at Euro headlights+Euro( SISU) blinkers , also E means extra heavy duty-which was never sold in USA , looks like Thelmo often fit trucks with E badge, so i would say it was converted by him

as for V8, i got informations only 2 are sold in USA, one is now in Thelmo R999 racer truck , other was used as log truck, they used to be 365hp ,those were used in experimental trucks , with tipper body and hub reduction axles (which were never officially sold in USA as were 605lbs heavier) as much i know Thelmos r999 is actually T112 not T142 so i assume it was fit with V8 after they came in USA , found information that after test, one truck was fitted with G770 5speed gearbox and single r770 diff , removed inside frame and engine build from varios marine and industrial engine parts , fuel pump sent in briefcase to Sweden with plane and latter truck had over 700hp

[98989]

i dont know how to put more qoutes in one post so i will do this

Most were equipped with Scania’s own 11-liter engine, rated at 308 horsepower DSC11(06) and 341 horsepower DSC11(03). There was some criticism about the lack of a 13-liter engine for long-distance hauling, but actually 350hp was the mainstream rating at that time so the Scania 341hp engine was competitive..

do you know what are differences with those and european engines

I am pretty confused about power standards used before

here DSC11 01, had 333PS/2000rpm-by DIN and 142kgm of torque (about 1395Nm) at 1250rpm and lowest fuel consumption 197g/kwh at 1550rpm

recently friend who work for Scania send me specs for our first scania and it says DSC11-01 252kw/340hp , maybe this is rounded number but 252 should be 343hp

i was trying to calculate and i think according to ISO/ECE-R24 and i think it would be 347hp

sometimes 420hp v8 was addvertised as 430hp and 390hp as 400

so i think by ratio 430/420 x333 it would be 341hp

as much i know 341hp in 112/3 is by SAE J1349 , but they say it have 1040lb-ft at 1300rpm

so i am not sure is this same engine or what

as for 308hp version here something like this never existed

scania had in 2series 11L natural aspired engine with 203hp for export markets, there were two turbocharged engines with 280 and 305hp in two different variants( improved characteristics) , than from 1982 ,333 turbo intercooled , in late 1985/86 363hp engine appeared this was already 3series engine , also V8 were replaced with 3series engines (which again have different values than they had in 3series 420hp have 411PS 404hp 395PS

3series had 310,320,340,360,380,400hp (only 310 was turbo without intercooler most of those trucks were made for norweigan army as they requested same trucks in 2 and 3 series for easier repairs ,380 had edc and 400 had edc+turbocompound )

[chuckyr]

but I agree that new Iveco look great, when other manufacturers create extremly ugly trucks for Euro6 standards (Volvo , Renault) Iveco make very nice looking truck , i also like Daf and MAN but i think Iveco look better

I think all Euro trucks are ugly. They all look like refrigerator boxes. The Stralis is less ugly, but ugly nevertheless.

I understand Euro trucks are constrained by the regulations they operated under; length of overall rig, width of Euro roads, uniformity of the EU standards to name a few. Nevertheless, the boxy, short wheelbase and high cabover design has an awkward aesthetic.

[98989]

When i worked for Atlas Van Lines as a company driver,we got one of these as a "loaner" from the local Freightliner dealer when my tractor was having the leaking windshield "fixed" for about the 15th time. They had just became a Scania dealer,and were really pushing these trucks,i drove one like the one in the picture for about a week,what a shitwagon! had about as much power as an air-cooled VW beetle,about as much room inside,some kind of convuluted 7 speed direct trans. with the most annoying "shift indicator" light on the dash,so bright it would blind you at nightime! i could'nt wait to get the POS Freightliner back! thats how crappy this truck was! and at the time it was brand new!..................................Mark

i think you talk with some emotions,i see some resistance to change this is often case when somebody dont want to admit that something is better than thing he have americans often dont want to admit that somebody have something better , i think deep inside your subconscious you think this was good truck

fact is old 2series was pretty advanced back than even today modern american trucks miss some things from 2series like air clutch

this engine have pretty good performances even if you compare it with today engines , this engine have something not present on any today engines and this is : green band on tacho is from 1200-1800rpm while max power is at 2000 and that make it pretty live despite low numbers on paper

fuel confumtion on those trucks is not bad either just in few last year they manage to lower it more significantly

reliability of this engine is excelent

some kind of convuluted 7 speed direct trans. with the most annoying "shift indicator" light on the dash,so bright it would blind you at nightime!

as for gearbox it had 10speed range gearbox

U.S. market Scania’s typically had a fully synchronized Scania GR871 10-speed transmission which was a pleasure to shift..

really this gearbox shift as a car gearbox , back than i dont think any truck got smoother shifting gearbox

now i would say some back sides of this gearbox , small overall ratio make it problematic (13.51:1 and reverse 13.77:1 earlier gr870 had 11:1 reverse in 1983 gr871 appeared ) , our first 112 when starting with 130k lbs or more on steep 10% hill would start to shake and clutch would be warm and you have to be very carefull with gas and clutch otherwise it could be easy to break something , back than other brands in europe were much better

those gr871 gearboxes were not most robust construction for example competition was much better , when using in most extreme applications they would become easy to destroy

as for shift indicator , i dont remember any of those in 2/3 series

now bad sides, too slow diffs(3.25 for single drive 3.4 for 6x4) no air ride for 6x4 , as you mentioned cab was pretty small ,especially for american standards

no engine brake , and many more , i also agree this truck was not suitable for american use but this was far from bad truck

[Leonardo Favaro]

[Outbehindthebarn]

Why is it that Volvo was able to gain a foothold in the North American market, and Scania dropped out?

[kscarbel2]

32 minutes ago, Outbehindthebarn said:

Why is it that Volvo was able to gain a foothold in the North American market, and Scania dropped out?

We made a mistake and came in too heavy. The specs worked alright in the northeast, but overall we should have come in with a lighter chassis (the rest of the world did and still does carry heavy loads).

We built them at the time, for example the T112MC lightweight set-forward axle tractors we sold in New Zealand.

We also should have brought over an axle-forward COE like the FK, but again lighter.

So to answer your question again, we misjudged the specs for the market.

https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/45692-the-north-american-style-axle-forward-scania-coes/

 

[Outbehindthebarn]

55 minutes ago, kscarbel2 said:

We made a mistake and came in too heavy. The specs worked alright in the northeast, but overall we should have come in with a lighter chassis (the rest of the world did and still does carry heavy loads).

We built them at the time, for example the T112MC lightweight set-forward axle tractors we sold in New Zealand.

We also should have brought over an axle-forward COE like the FK, but again lighter.

So to answer your question again, we misjudged the specs for the market.

https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/45692-the-north-american-style-axle-forward-scania-coes/

 

Do you think the 'alliance' with White/GMC maybe softened Volvo's entry too?

I was astounded at the loads I saw being moved with single axle 112's and 113's in South America. Those trucks, to me anyway, actually looked under built, but were clearly superior to anything else working from that time period.

[kscarbel2]

7 hours ago, Outbehindthebarn said:

Do you think the 'alliance' with White/GMC maybe softened Volvo's entry too?

I was astounded at the loads I saw being moved with single axle 112's and 113's in South America. Those trucks, to me anyway, actually looked under built, but were clearly superior to anything else working from that time period.

I'm not altogether clear on your question.

Volvo entered the US market in 1974 with the F86US......and went nowhere.

There was no alliance with White.....Volvo bought them in 1981.

Volvo bought the majority of GM's heavy truck division in 1987, and rest in 1997.

In 1988, Volvo GM Heavy Truck Corporation was formed as a joint venture between Volvo and General Motors Corporation. General Motors held 35% interest in the new venture, with the majority (65%) belonging to Volvo. Volvo GM’s nameplates were WHITEGMC and Autocar.

In 1994, A.B. Volvo’s interest was 87% and General Motors was 13%. The WHITEGMC nameplate was discontinued in 1995 and Volvo GM’s trucks were sold under the Volvo and Autocar nameplates.

In 1997, Volvo purchased all of General Motors interests in Volvo GM, and changed the name to Volvo Trucks North America

https://history.gmheritagecenter.com/wiki/index.php/Volvo_GM_Heavy_Trucks_History

 

[BC Mack]

Volvo made an attempt in the 60's to penetrate the class 8 market in the US with the "Tiptop", obviously they felt the competition too strong or too expensive to gain market share, this became the famous F88 and F89 series which was a major event in the history of Volvo worldwide..

I still see a few F6/7's locally... but parts support must now be as scarce as for the Renault Midliner..!!!

BC Mack

 

[kscarbel2]

19 minutes ago, BC Mack said:

Volvo made an attempt in the 60's to penetrate the class 8 market in the US with the "Tiptop", obviously they felt the competition too strong or too expensive to gain market share, this became the famous F88 and F89 series which was a major event in the history of Volvo worldwide..

I still see a few F6/7's locally... but parts support must now be as scarce as for the Renault Midliner..!!!

BC Mack

Fishersville, Virginia-based Wilson Trucking (near the I-81/I-64 intersection) was Volvo's single largest US F6/F7 operator for years and years. Volvo decided to give them deep pricing to gain market visibility when they had.......none.

This year, Texas-based Central Freight Lines purchased Wilson........... https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/48845-wilson-trucking-to-be-sold/#comment-362337

.