But the SD is not the production truck being monitored for the GHG production program it will eventually have to fall in line or go by the way side. I did not work on many of those so I don’t remember their exact spec sorry for that. The 122SD can be ordered with the 560 1950 set up or the DD16 which I believe is somewhere around 600/2050. With emissions choking everything down though I see this going away in the future. Updated several for sales at the shops I worked at. They order your truck and have the shop “fix it” when it comes in. Now if your sales man is worth his salt and wants to make the sale they can put a 505 1850 program in the MCM/CPC or they can go with the 560 1950 that you can program into it. The Cascadia was selected as that truck, production switch with the end of the Coronado to the 122SD. Ok so, please keep in mind my information is a little over a year old, with the GHG 17 engine they were limiting production torq and HP availability due to trying to meet the fuel economy necessary for the epa requirement in production trucks. Has the time now come that the emissions technology has finally caught up and we are able to once again operate more efficiently with smaller engines? Smaller engines did fine in the pre-emissions days, why not now? Large displacement engines seemed to become the normal for a while, as they were needed to compensate for failed emissions technology. What are you seeing in terms of fuel economy? Which engine looks to stand up the best in terms of long term maintenance costs (including potentially costly emissions repairs)? ![]() How about some real world numbers from the membership here (if you are a guest, register and post your numbers). Energy that is normally lost is recovered with standard features including low-friction pistons and a two-speed water pump, as well as optional features like turbo compounding. In addition to that, the DD13 weighs less, potentially increasing your payload. Like all of Volvo's engines, the D13 is built on a foundation of proven, developed architecture that leverages innovative hardware to maximize efficiency. Given the basic numbers: Horsepower and Torque, the number favor the smaller DD13 due to the increased torque capability. Keep in mind, we are not looking at past year models, but what is currently available now, and expected to be available in the near future. The question? Which is the better Detroit engine today for a typical 80K or less trucking operation? The DD13 or the DD15?īoth engines are more than capable of operating at 80K Gross. If you don't and don't have the funds you will be out of business.Buried in another thread on the forum, is the potential for a pretty informative discussion, one that may affect the purchasing decision of many current and future truck owners. You rarely see one of these with less than a million miles for sale with a rebuild.Īnd with all that it is still a used truck and with that amount of miles you have to buy it with the expectation that you are going to have to rebuild it soon. ![]() They pulled all the data that manufactures are required to submit to the Federal Government on warranties.īut antidotely (sp?) this is supported by looking at used equipment in truck paper. The other source came from a fleet owner that subscribed to a maintenance database through the ATA. At the time it was the company that TA used and most dealers to sample oil. Now that was a while ago and have long since deleted the files but the one source was a company out of CO that did oil samples. ![]() What made it so much cheaper than others bar far was the 1.3 MM range before rebuild. According to several sources that I accessed when I was buying my truck the VED12 had the second lowest cost of ownership behind the D60.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |