RoadwayR
-
Posts
596 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
BMT Wiki
Collections
Store
Posts posted by RoadwayR
-
-
I think they were Cummins' answer to the 318 h.p. 8V-71. Flat torque curve, pull to 2,800 r.p.m., only needed a 5 speed transmission. They did have a very nice sound to them. 50 years in production, but not in any highway trucks since the early 80's. Cummins has had worse ideas.........
-
2
-
-
Hello, Navistar........
-
Hmmm, MV's..... Wonder if there will be any surprises in store for their high volume medium duties other than the redesigned cab.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
I am not convinced VW Truck will eventually take Navistar over, but I do see VW at some point divesting their truck operations. After that, possibly a merger, creating a very strong global truck manufacturer. Just a hunch on my part......
-
3
-
Impressive, but how long before Hackett sells off Ford's interest to fund domestic EV development? On the bright side I don't think such a sale would slow Ottosan down too much. You never know, it might open the door to a strategic alliance with a global truck manufacturer..............
-
1
-
-
Is Isuzu still coming out with a tandem for the U.S.? I would suspect if so that would be a cabover.
-
Last line in the first post:
"The company is also developing a medium duty straight truck in a partnership with Navistar".
Is that in addition to the 6500 XD Isuzu based LCF and the chevy/International class 4/5?
I heard rumors that GM might partner with Navistar on the DuraStar replacement.
-
Just the start:
I think VW needs to do this more than Daimler does, but the reasoning is sound in both cases.
-
1
-
-
Isn't that interesting? They are already in class 4 and 5 with Ram, currently the sales leader in that market. Does mean mean Cummins is looking or has found another class 4/5 customer for their engines? And does that refer to the B6.7L or the new 5L V-8? This article asks more questions than it answers!
-
Interesting little tandem, and it looks like the lighter versions have independent front suspension.
-
Like to see a gasoline option in the Chevy 6500XD cabover.
-
1
-
-
-
Good for Cummins, they will have most of Navistar's mid-range business until the International's all get MAN diesels!
Navistar needs to consider alternate fuels more seriously too, but that's another subject.
-
So those were the last of what began as the DT's? End of an era, I really liked the old mechanical DT-466.
-
None of this makes sense. For a minute I thought when UD pulled out of the U.S. market it may have been in preparation for Volvo and/or Mack to sell UD medium trucks through their dealers. Didn't happen. I am sure we won't be seeing this Isuzu-built UD here.
-
1
-
-
Volvo is starting to look like White did in 1979.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
I think both VW and Daimler should think about spinning their truck operations off. Volvo and Fiat have done this, and in both instances it helped the truck operations considerably. Little or no 'synergy' between mass auto manufacturers and commercial truck manufacturers anymore.
In VW's case, I think there is a very real threat that their car business will eventually damage the truck business.
-
3
-
It looks interesting. Seems to be an I-beam front axle under it, and judging by how high the cab sits on the frame I would be willing to wager it has straight frame rails front to back. Tip hood and fenders too, looks like it has DuraStar hood hinges above the front bumper. More of a class 6 design than a 4/5, much like the old TopKick/Kodiak or TerraStar. Might not be too much trouble to expand that platform into the higher GVW ranges.
-
1
-
-
Grocery stores out to love it. And that is not necessarily a dig.
Anyway, listening to the comments on this thread and my own observations indicate to me that Volvo needs to rationalize their operations in North America. I think the sensible thing to do would be to focus Mack on vocational and heavy haul, and focus Volvo on regional and OTR. Mack gets a steel cab, Volvo get aluminum. Share basic engine platforms to a point, but optimize to application. Mack gets severe service frame/axle/suspension options, Volvo gets light weight highway components. I would not offer a Volvo mixer chassis, nor would I have a Mack version of this new VNR (I would offer a way to spec. a Mack for OTR highway service just because I am nostalgic!). Sell both lines at all dealers.
Oh yeah, and get Mack back into medium duty. They used to be pretty good at it. Volvo wasn't..........
-
1
-
-
-
No complete trucks, just gliders?
-
I think the point is the FTR was first in fuel economy, and by a considerable margin. I personally could care less about acceleration, as long as the truck can safely keep up with traffic. Since if the Isuzu placed mid-pack in the acceleration comparison, it is probably acceptable.
-
1
-
-
16% to 22% better fuel economy, comparable performance.
Interesting to see how the FTR does against the M2 when it gets the DD5.
Any word on the tandem FTR?
-
- Popular Post
Well, keep in mind GM has not been accused of any 'cheating' by the EPA, at least not yet. Take a look at who Bronstein, Gewirtz, and Grossman LLC is and what they specialize in. My guess is that Ford is next, and keep in mind Toyota and Hyundai don't sell diesel light trucks in the U.S..
Really staring to think diesel engines are on the way out. I think it is going to be too expensive to clean them up to the standards the EPA is calling for,
-
4
BMT Forum Logo
Cummins readies next-gen, future commercial power
in Trucking News
Posted
Well, they got Navistar, at least for the near future. Personally, I would like to see International use the GM/Isuzu Duramax to replace the ISB 6.7 in everything up to class 6, and MAN for everything above that. Cummins ought to focus on export highway and industrial applications, just saying. I say this after my Insite has just treated me to a surprise update/renewal 'offer' in the middle of trying to diagnose a problem.............
They will be in big trouble if they ever loose RAM!