New Kenworth T680 brochure has "latest, comprehensive" info

[kscarbel2]

Fleet Owner  /  June 15, 2016

Kenworth has published a new sales brochure for its T680 Class 8 truck

Brochure – http://www.kenworth.com/media/52923/t680-brochure-0316.pdf

The T680, which was launched four years ago in 76-in. sleeper and day cab variants, is now available with 52-in. and 76-in. mid-roof sleepers as well as Kenworth's new space saver 40-in. sleeper.

The company says the T680 provides "an excellent, fuel-efficient, productive and driver-friendly truck for over-the-road fleets and truck operators in line haul, pickup and delivery, and regional hauling applications."

The 34-page T680 brochure provides information on things like Kenworth TruckTech+ telematics; driver performance technology; power management technology; the Kenworth Idle Management System; interior colors and options; and Kenworth seats, which feature adjustability, ride suspension and personal climate control. Kenworth PremierCare parts and service programs also are highlighted.

The Kenworth T680 comes standard with the PACCAR MX-13 engine rated up to 500 hp. and 1,850 lbs.-ft of torque, and it's available with the new PACCAR MX-11 engine with up to 430 hp. and 1,550 lbs.-ft of torque. According to Kenworth, the two engines "offer optimum performance, industry-leading reliability and durability, and a quiet operating environment for drivers."

[mrsmackpaul]

nah dont grab my fancy at all sorry KW your loosing the plot 

 

Paul

[kscarbel2]

40 minutes ago, mrsmackpaul said:

nah dont grab my fancy at all sorry KW your loosing the plot 

Paul

Paul, I completely agree with you.

The North American market Kenworth T680 and Peterbilt Model 579, which share a cab, look like a couple of plastic toys.

I despise their droopy nose styling theme.

Now as we all know, it's the performance that counts. However, when one can blend form with function, then you've got something.

An attractive looking truck can be a valuable sales tool (free advertising), and also help immensely in driver retention (a truck that driver's want to get behind the wheel of).

I don't like the new cheaper-for-Paccar shared cab. I've been all over it at the plant......it's cheap. They're making more profit, but the customer's purchase price didn't fall.

Note how truckmakers are promoting hideous* looking trucks in the US, and yet the same truckmakers are selling attractive looking trucks in Australia. 

Yes, the American market requires cutting edge aerodynamics to reduce emissions and fuel costs, but those purpose-designed trucks can still look attractive.

* http://www.westernstartrucks.com/Trucks/5700/default.aspx

versus

https://westernstar.com.au/western-star-5800-ss/

https://westernstar.com.au/western-star-4800-fxb/

https://westernstar.com.au/western-star-4900-fxc/

[mrsmackpaul]

I doubt the US ugly plastic looking trucks get better fuel efficiency than any Australian truck just think about few things our fuel costs a lot more our trucks cost a lot more we travel on a lot more sub standard roads

So I reckon our trucks would be just as good on fuel as any US truck and they look a bucket load better as well its almost like the US truck industry is trying to go out of business !!!!

The answers simple stop telling people what they want and start asking !!!! I guarantee it works every time 

 

Paul

[Dirtymilkman]

Why won't paccar use actual photos?!?! I thinks it's kind of embarrassing. They do alright showing specs and some options but the pictures are ridiculous.

[kscarbel2]

4 hours ago, Dirtymilkman said:

Why won't paccar use actual photos?!?! I thinks it's kind of embarrassing. They do alright showing specs and some options but the pictures are ridiculous.

That's another big issue I have with Paccar. Why ARE they afraid to use real photos? Photoshop photographs do nothing for anyone. Like the toy truck design theme, PS pictures look ridiculous.

[Timmyb]

I hope Aus never bring out a kW like that. Cheap looking thing it is. 

[HeavyGunner]

Certainly not a looker but then most of he trucks aren't any more due to stringent fuel effiecency standards. Think how beautiful cars from the 30's to the 60's were then got (mostly) butt ugly after that. I guess we're moving toward a more fuel efficient ugly world. 

[41chevy]

2 hours ago, HeavyGunner said:

Certainly not a looker but then most of he trucks aren't any more due to stringent fuel effiecency standards. Think how beautiful cars from the 30's to the 60's were then got (mostly) butt ugly after that. I guess we're moving toward a more fuel efficient ugly world. 

I'm staying in the mid to late last century.  I'll pay the penalty for style and looks.

[Tuffguy707]

If you look closely you will see that KW's floor slopes up by the pedals which kill leg room. It also pushes the pedals up higher which makes it difficult for someone my size (6'7" )to have any leg room. With this being the case, KW is out for me. 

[kscarbel2]

6 hours ago, Tuffguy707 said:

If you look closely you will see that KW's floor slopes up by the pedals which kill leg room. It also pushes the pedals up higher which makes it difficult for someone my size (6'7" )to have any leg room. With this being the case, KW is out for me. 

Perhaps their new shared cab is out for you......but their old traditionally designed cab (what I'd buy) remains available.

A Peterbilt Model 367 makes for a beautiful low-boy tractor.

[41chevy]

53 minutes ago, kscarbel2 said:

Perhaps their new shared cab is out for you......but their old traditionally designed cab (what I'd buy) remains available.

A Peterbilt Model 367 makes for a beautiful low-boy tractor.

 

So does the Titan and even nicer with a traditional bumper and grill guard  

[kscarbel2]

8 minutes ago, 41chevy said:

So does the Titan and even nicer with a traditional bumper and grill guard  

Too heavy and expensive for what most local U.S. low-boy operators do.

And, compared to the attractive professional-looking Australian Titan, the US market Titan with its tacky chrome trim reminds me of a Harlem pimp-mobile.

https://www.macktrucks.com.au/trucks/titan/

https://www.macktrucks.com.au/~/media/files au/brochures/titan_brochure.ashx?as=1

[41chevy]

But I just can't warm up to Brand X's...it's like having a pebble in my shoe or my skivvies on inside out, just ain't right.. 

Edited June 19, 2016 by 41chevy

[kscarbel2]

36 minutes ago, 41chevy said:

But I just can't warm up to Brand X's...it's like having a pebble in my shoe or my skivvies on inside out, just ain't right.. 

Foreign truckmaker Volvo owning the iconic American name "Mack Trucks" isn't right.

It's no different than if Toyota was allowed to acquire Ford, Volkswagen allowed to acquire GM.................and Fiat allowed to acquire Chrysler.

There's nothing at all right about the Mack logo on a North American Volvo chassis.

 

 

[Dirtymilkman]

4 hours ago, kscarbel2 said:

Too heavy and expensive for what most local U.S. low-boy operators do.

And, compared to the attractive professional-looking Australian Titan, the US market Titan with its tacky chrome trim reminds me of a Harlem pimp-mobile.

https://www.macktrucks.com.au/trucks/titan/

https://www.macktrucks.com.au/~/media/files au/brochures/titan_brochure.ashx?as=1

Actually my Titan only weighs 900 pounds more than my 2001 CL with a E7. Trucks are spec'd the same except the Titan has the big block (which makes up the 900 pounds).

[kscarbel2]

3 hours ago, Dirtymilkman said:

Actually my Titan only weighs 900 pounds more than my 2001 CL with a E7. Trucks are spec'd the same except the Titan has the big block (which makes up the 900 pounds).

My friend, you are what in many parts of the country are called "good people". I always enjoy hearing your thoughts.

They did trim weight with the US model......it underwent considerable change. But it remains heavy on average, and expensive.

I, personally, can't get past the tacky chrome trim. The Australian "original" never had it.......Oz customers would be in an uproar if Volvo suggested it.

 

 

[mrsmackpaul]

These amazing fuel figures they get in the US what are they and are they any better or are the manufactures just using the the emission rules to be a tight ass and cut costs ???

I just dont think they would be any better than out here our weights are lot heavier and we do travel a little slower but ??????????????

 

Paul

[41180]

13 hours ago, kscarbel2 said:

Too heavy and expensive for what most local U.S. low-boy operators do.

And, compared to the attractive professional-looking Australian Titan, the US market Titan with its tacky chrome trim reminds me of a Harlem pimp-mobile.

https://www.macktrucks.com.au/trucks/titan/

https://www.macktrucks.com.au/~/media/files au/brochures/titan_brochure.ashx?as=1

Because you never see a kw or Pete pimped out like a whore wagon.  

[kscarbel2]

6 minutes ago, logtruckman said:

Because you never see a kw or Pete pimped out like a whore wagon.  

They certainly can be, but it's an add-on..........not an integral factory build.

I'm merely expressing my personal opinion. If you remain pleased with your Volvo VNX (US market Mack Titan), I think that's great.

[41180]

You can get a Titan with a painted fiberglass sun visor you don't have to get the rawhide package. I think the chrome on the grill is a bit to wide but it's not a reason to snub the truck . You could custom order one with a painted steel bumper the painted visor and it quiet it down some .