While in Europe recently I could not help but notice the differance in appearance of European v American Heavy haulage Trucks. Invariably Europe favours the Cab over design, but it seems to go further than this, engine placement, exhaust placement, engine sound and the sound of gear changes all suggest there are more fundamental differences. Why should this be? What are the advantages/disadvantages of Cab over v Conventional?
American v European Trucks
- Thread starter Spitty
- Start date
- Status
Perhaps I should have posted in General Automotive?
If so could the moderator please move this thread.
If so could the moderator please move this thread.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
Originally Posted By: Spitty
Invariably Europe favours the Cab over design
Makes for a shorter tractor-trailer and affords the driver improved maneuverability and a better view of what's right in front of him.
Remember the guy in the wheelchair who got snagged and pushed for a few miles by a big rig?
Invariably Europe favours the Cab over design
Makes for a shorter tractor-trailer and affords the driver improved maneuverability and a better view of what's right in front of him.
Remember the guy in the wheelchair who got snagged and pushed for a few miles by a big rig?
Yes I can see that, there have been people run over around here, because they were not visible in front of a 'Conventional' rig.
So what is the reason the U.S. seems to favour having the engine out front?
So what is the reason the U.S. seems to favour having the engine out front?
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
Originally Posted By: Spitty
So what is the reason the U.S. seems to favour having the engine out front?
I think we should let an American answer that.
That said I can't help but speculate, though. The design with the cab behind the engine offers a longer wheelbase, which should make for a more comfortable ride. Not that truckers in Europe don't drive thousands of miles, but maybe American behinds need more cushioning. If the truck has a sleeper cabin, tilting the cab to gain access to the engine might be a hassle with stuff flying around. Also, truck demolition derbies are safer with the engine up front. Then there is the intimidation factor: not much is as impressive as the grille of a Peterbilt 281 showing it's hideous grin in your review mirror. Just ask Chris.
So what is the reason the U.S. seems to favour having the engine out front?
I think we should let an American answer that.
That said I can't help but speculate, though. The design with the cab behind the engine offers a longer wheelbase, which should make for a more comfortable ride. Not that truckers in Europe don't drive thousands of miles, but maybe American behinds need more cushioning. If the truck has a sleeper cabin, tilting the cab to gain access to the engine might be a hassle with stuff flying around. Also, truck demolition derbies are safer with the engine up front. Then there is the intimidation factor: not much is as impressive as the grille of a Peterbilt 281 showing it's hideous grin in your review mirror. Just ask Chris.
Along with what Mori said, there's also a percieved level of safety that dissapears with the cabover design. Having a long hood with the front steer axle and a 4,000lb engine sitting in front of you would surely calm my nerves fearing a head-on collision.
Freightliner offered the Argosy model until 2001 I believe. I'm sure low sales caused them to pull the plug on it. Volvo has a big line of cabovers only offered to Europe, New Zealand, and Australia. I think they quit offering them here around the mid 80s.
Freightliner offered the Argosy model until 2001 I believe. I'm sure low sales caused them to pull the plug on it. Volvo has a big line of cabovers only offered to Europe, New Zealand, and Australia. I think they quit offering them here around the mid 80s.
I'm not positive, but I suspect that the length, engine placement, sound is all driven by the extreme regulation of trucks in Europe. At least in Germany. I never got in to detail but one or two comments I heard when I was flying out of Rhien Main in the mid-90's was the trucks in Europe are regulated way beyond what DOT does to trucks here.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
Originally Posted By: Bill_P
I suspect that the length, engine placement and sound are all driven by the extreme regulation of trucks in Europe, at least in Germany.
With high population density come tighter regulations. History of truck development in Germany: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langhauber
You don't have to read it, just look at the first schematic:
Placement of the engine in front of the front axle and cab was common before WW2. Placement of the engine over the front axle (resulting in short hood) became predominant by the 1960s. The reason was the legal limit on the allowable total length of the tractor trailer unit. Cab-over design has now almost completely replaced designs with short or long hoods. The only large trucks with hoods in Europe are some military trucks. In case of small trucks (vans, combies), the short-hooded design is however more popular than cab-over designs (likely due to increased safety and better aerodynamics).
Maximum weight for regular commercial trucks in Germany:
- not more than 8 tons per axle and not more than 44 tons
A truck that can be operated anywhere within the EU must
- not exceed a length of 18,75 meters in case of road trains, or 16,5 meters in case of semi-trailers
- not exceed a height of 4,0 meters
- not exceed a width of 2,55 meters (without side view mirrors), or 2,6 meters -- mobile cranes may be 3,0 meters wide
Sweden allows road trains with a length of up to 26,50 meters and weight of up to 60 tons.
Switzerland restricts truck length on roads (Autobahn excluded) to no more than 12 meters.
Source: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lastkraftwagen
I suspect that the length, engine placement and sound are all driven by the extreme regulation of trucks in Europe, at least in Germany.
With high population density come tighter regulations. History of truck development in Germany: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langhauber
You don't have to read it, just look at the first schematic:
Placement of the engine in front of the front axle and cab was common before WW2. Placement of the engine over the front axle (resulting in short hood) became predominant by the 1960s. The reason was the legal limit on the allowable total length of the tractor trailer unit. Cab-over design has now almost completely replaced designs with short or long hoods. The only large trucks with hoods in Europe are some military trucks. In case of small trucks (vans, combies), the short-hooded design is however more popular than cab-over designs (likely due to increased safety and better aerodynamics).
Maximum weight for regular commercial trucks in Germany:
- not more than 8 tons per axle and not more than 44 tons
A truck that can be operated anywhere within the EU must
- not exceed a length of 18,75 meters in case of road trains, or 16,5 meters in case of semi-trailers
- not exceed a height of 4,0 meters
- not exceed a width of 2,55 meters (without side view mirrors), or 2,6 meters -- mobile cranes may be 3,0 meters wide
Sweden allows road trains with a length of up to 26,50 meters and weight of up to 60 tons.
Switzerland restricts truck length on roads (Autobahn excluded) to no more than 12 meters.
Source: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lastkraftwagen
We have a pretty even spread of Euro,US and Japanese trucks here in New Zealand....the US trucks either COE or conventional,Euro and Japanese all COE.When you have length and loading regulations,you can just fit more stuff on a COE.Euro trucks are more plush,and have syncromesh gearboxes.Japanese trucks are very driver friendly,giving great comfort and visability,they have lower power ratings,but lower running costs.On a typical overnighter from Wellington to Auckland,a Fuso with 350 hp will be 10 minutes slower than a high power KW,and cost less to do the trip.Actually comes down to owner driver or fleet driver....owner driver will pick a US truck,fleets pick a Japanese truck for multi drivers,Euro for a truck with dedicated driver.
Thanks Guys 
Not sure on the exact dates, and I'm too lazy to look it up. But back in the 70's and early 80's, there were relatively strict "overall length limits" on trucks in the U.S., and cabovers were quite common. The trucking industry was deregulated sometime in the 80's, and cabovers have steadily been decreasing in popularity every since. Meanwhile conventionals have been (mostly) getting shorter.
"Meanwhile conventionals have been (mostly) getting shorter."
Yes and, at least on medium duty trucks, at the expense of engine accessibility. The cabs now cover the rear of the engine making it difficult to work on the rear. At least with the COE you could tip the cab up and get at the engine.
Yes and, at least on medium duty trucks, at the expense of engine accessibility. The cabs now cover the rear of the engine making it difficult to work on the rear. At least with the COE you could tip the cab up and get at the engine.
Do you think the Visibility/Pedestrian safety Issue will ever sway America to COE type trucks? I think if I was a 'Ralph Nader' I would be all over this one.
I remember getting a shove from a BIG engine in-front of cab truck w/tank trailer. I saw nothing but grill in the rear view. Thankfully, he had a tall chrome bumper that cough mine, otherwise the rear hatch to the wagon would have been, well, crudely modified!
I think the sense of driver's safety and feel (I didn't like sitting over the front axle in a van we once owned...being "swung around", rather to be "pulled along" by sitting behind the front axle), along with the freedom to chose that accounts for the lack of COE designs. Also added noise and heat I would think, to the driver's compartment as I also recall from a van. There is the issue of wind resistance also (operating costs). Pedestrian safety is a counter point however.
But like has been preciously mentioned, what rig layout would you like the best if having to personally own one?
Take care.
I think the sense of driver's safety and feel (I didn't like sitting over the front axle in a van we once owned...being "swung around", rather to be "pulled along" by sitting behind the front axle), along with the freedom to chose that accounts for the lack of COE designs. Also added noise and heat I would think, to the driver's compartment as I also recall from a van. There is the issue of wind resistance also (operating costs). Pedestrian safety is a counter point however.
But like has been preciously mentioned, what rig layout would you like the best if having to personally own one?
Take care.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
Originally Posted By: Curious Kid
what rig layout would you like the best if having to personally own one?
How big a rig?
The biggest I'd ever consider owning would be a Mog, ideally a Unicat. All Mogs are COE with a super-short hood.
Nifty Unicat Unimog Extreme RV
what rig layout would you like the best if having to personally own one?
How big a rig?
Nifty Unicat Unimog Extreme RV
That Unicat looks like it could hold its own.
Though I have a fascination for big rigs, I've never really explored the whole thing. One year at a hot rod show there were a few LARGE truck units with trailers in one of the enclosed show areas - vender spot I think. You definitely have to do some climbing to get in one of those things, and man...what a large grill area!
Though I have a fascination for big rigs, I've never really explored the whole thing. One year at a hot rod show there were a few LARGE truck units with trailers in one of the enclosed show areas - vender spot I think. You definitely have to do some climbing to get in one of those things, and man...what a large grill area!
I drove longhaul back in the 70's and loved my Kenworth cabover. I think one of the main reasons the cabover was fased out was due to fuel mileage. Those flat nosed trucks pushed a lot of wind and got lousy mileage, but they were great for getting around in the city. I know from experience you did not want to be in one if one of the front tires blew out. Especially the left one.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
Originally Posted By: Curious Kid
That Unicat looks like it could hold its own.
A medium size UNICAT Extreme Off-Road RV costs over $600,000. I better hold its own!
That Unicat looks like it could hold its own.
A medium size UNICAT Extreme Off-Road RV costs over $600,000. I better hold its own!
Price of fuel being what it is in Europe, I'd be surprised if fuel consumption was 'Higher' with the Euro Trucks. Anyone have Stats? I did note that they tend to Fill the area between the Cab and the trailer, and try to blend the top of the Cab to the top of the trailer.
Skirts are also used between the axles, but this may also be a Safety thing, to stop wayward cars getting between the axles.
The Rigs seemed very quite, and I did not hear any Jake Brakes!
I wonder if this is mandated?
Skirts are also used between the axles, but this may also be a Safety thing, to stop wayward cars getting between the axles.
The Rigs seemed very quite, and I did not hear any Jake Brakes!
I wonder if this is mandated?
The Cab-over design is dead in the US. I think it finally died in the 80s. Every big rig these days is of a conventional design, where the engine is out front and the cab is over the trans. It makes engine maintenance much easier and it is probably cheaper to produce and assemble the vehicle as well.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
