$140,000 new truck purchase

[mojazzn]

Good evening to all, safe travel...looking to purchase new 2019 dump truck, first new class8. Dealer is clamy what should i expect to be a fair discount off asking price of $140,000. Tandem axel, auto major brand. Thanks

[Joe Ditchkus]

What are the specs on this truck ? I would think for $140,000.00 it is not heavy spec for tri-axle dump with 46,000 rears 20,000 lb front axle and most likely no lift axle.Most dump tri-axle trucks I see  at 2018 prices are at least $170,000.00 + FET. These are 46 rears 20 fronts steerable 18-20,000 lb lift axle double frame,Detroit engine 13 liter or larger,Mack 405-505 HP or Cummins500 Hp.

 

[tjc transport]

with a price of $140 grand, my bet is a plain jane vulva throw away truck. 

[mojazzn]

370 hp

6speed auto

20000fawr, 46000rawr 66000 gvwr

16' dump

[tjc transport]

even if you will be running all flat ground, that truck will be an underpowered dog that will not be able to get out of its own way. 

and forget about using it in hilly terrain.

 

 

[mojazzn]

thanks tjc i have been leaning toward mack minimum 405-425 tri axe 16' dump (ox) or comparable 

[kscarbel2]

On 12/7/2018 at 9:31 PM, mojazzn said:

Good evening to all, safe travel...looking to purchase new 2019 dump truck, first new class 8. Dealer is clamy what should i expect to be a fair discount off asking price of $140,000. Tandem axel, auto major brand. Thanks

What brand and model truck?

Dealer name and location?

Full specifications list?  (scan and attach the quotation)

No such thing as an average discount along the lines you are thinking.

[Maxidyne]

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!

[kscarbel2]

8 hours ago, Maxidyne said:

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!

I think International deserves credit for first creating the modern "Baby 8" with their Loadstar 6x4 models.

 

[Maxidyne]

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

[fjh]

I have never understood why they spec low powered units with no gears behind the engine, always 250 horse -300 and an 8 or 10 speed trans makes no sense to me! Why  not an 18 or 13 sp to make up a bit  for the lack of power!??? Example Concrete pump usually spec a less than 400 hp power plant  and a 10 speed trans ,Mixers Are in a similar situation! I understand today's and  mentality emissions play a role how ever the transmission thing has always bothered me a bit! 

[Maxidyne]

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. 

[HeavyGunner]

2 hours ago, fjh said:

I have never understood why they spec low powered units with no gears behind the engine, always 250 horse -300 and an 8 or 10 speed trans makes no sense to me! Why  not an 18 or 13 sp to make up a bit  for the lack of power!??? Example Concrete pump usually spec a less than 400 hp power plant  and a 10 speed trans ,Mixers Are in a similar situation! I understand today's and  mentality emissions play a role how ever the transmission thing has always bothered me a bit! 

I’m with you. Put some gears so you can make shorter rpm splits and keep the engine in the sweet spot. Nothing more frustrating than driving an underpowered dog that can’t get out of its own way. Not only does it make for a long day but it makes a much more dangerous day for the driver who’s truck can’t even do the speed limit and or drops 10-20mph at the sight of any rolling hill because every impatient yahoo has to pass you no matter if its safe or not. 

Edited December 9, 2018 by HeavyGunner
Damn autocorrect

[tjc transport]

2 hours ago, fjh said:

I have never understood why they spec low powered units with no gears behind the engine, always 250 horse -300 and an 8 or 10 speed trans makes no sense to me! Why  not an 18 or 13 sp to make up a bit  for the lack of power!??? Example Concrete pump usually spec a less than 400 hp power plant  and a 10 speed trans ,Mixers Are in a similar situation! I understand today's and  mentality emissions play a role how ever the transmission thing has always bothered me a bit! 

probably because most steering wheel holders these days have problems with 5 or 8 speed trans, let alone a 13 or 18 speed. 

and as far as the myth that lower power engines/less gear trans trucks get better fuel mileage, we get over 7 mpg with my C-15 cat and 18 speed triaxle Kenworth W900 tractor and the T800 triaxle dump with 475 hp C-13 and 18 speed.

 another trucker in the yard has a Mack CL700 with a 15L cummins 600 hp and 18 speed, triaxle dump.he is also getting over 7 mpg with that truck. 

the same guy has a 99 RD Mack tandem with 350 and 8ll trans. that truck gets less than 4 mpg on the same runs as the triaxles.

[Maxidyne]

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...

[tjc transport]

i am talking real world  with pre emissions trucks, not computer generated mileage predictions. 

[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!

[Maxidyne]

Here's a good example of a proper road test by Commercial Motor: https://www.commercialmotor.com/sites/default/files/2010_heavy_haulage_tractors.pdf This is a classic- a 5 way comparison test of not just garden variety heavy trucks, but heavy haulage tractors running at over 100 tons loaded!

[tjc transport]

i don't care about Europe, or their magazines, or what they do or write.

i am an American truck driver  in America. 

[Maxidyne]

The science is the same on both sides of the ocean(s).

[kscarbel2]

3 hours ago, tjc transport said:

i don't care about Europe, or their magazines, or what they do or write.

i am an American truck driver  in America. 

I get what you're saying. Now that said, as an American who has sold trucks around the globe, I personally have come to care (find huge interest) in what is going on in all global markets. And, truth be told, the three largest global truck markets are converging.

[Hobert62]

Are other parts of the world using DEF, DPF, and similar emission crap like the US?    If so are they more successful with it?   Or do they have similar issues like we have here with it?

[kscarbel2]

1 hour ago, Hobert62 said:

Are other parts of the world using DEF, DPF, and similar emission crap like the US?    If so are they more successful with it?   Or do they have similar issues like we have here with it?

Yes, they are using it. The systems used in Europe and China for example (two of the three major truck markets), are generally trouble-free.

One aspect of the US market is the low expected price point for trucks. The result is often cheaper systems with lower reliability.

[HeavyGunner]

2 hours ago, kscarbel2 said:

Yes, they are using it. The systems used in Europe and China for example (two of the three major truck markets), are generally trouble-free.

One aspect of the US market is the low expected price point for trucks. The result is often cheaper systems with lower reliability.

So what everyone has been preaching on here about wanting a better quality truck styled how we want would sell. I thought I read in one of the threads on here awhile back that other places in the world are behind us as far as emissions go. I thought that was the reason they can still get C15’s and we can’t when I asked why we couldn’t buy them here still. 

[kscarbel2]

1 minute ago, HeavyGunner said:

So what everyone has been preaching on here about wanting a better quality truck styled how we want would sell. I thought I read in one of the threads on here awhile back that other places in the world are behind us as far as emissions go. I thought that was the reason they can still get C15’s and we can’t when I asked why we couldn’t buy them here still. 

A unique case, the C15 was available on CAT trucks in Australia because the country is Euro 5. But they are heading to Euro 6 and indeed many truckmakers are now selling Euro 6 product there anyway, including Scania.

China is Euro 6 in the major cities and heading for nationwide soon. They're using Euro 6 tech to reach Euro 5, so the nationwide jump to Euro 6 will be a blink.

The EU of course is Euro 6, where the trucks generally speaking have no issues.

Remember EPA2007 and all the EGR issues? American Macks had windshield washer reservoirs melting under the hood. EPA2007 was the equivalent of Euro 5. EU operators had a choice of SCR or EGR. The Scania and MAN EGR trucks had no issues.