Class 8 Expediter Trucks

[MikeC]

I was at the Landstar party last week and saw the Mack Super Truck. It looked like expediting would be childs play for that unit.

There were Volvo,Peterbuilt and Kenworth tractors on display. Ispoke to the three reps about making the tractor into a straight D unit. The Pete and KW guys said there would be no problem for them but the Volvo guy was relucant to comment. When I asked him why he finally said ,front axle weight is a issue with the big Volvos and by streching the frame you add so much weight up front that you have to be very carefull as too how you load.

I said that was interesting but there some Expediters running Volvo's and seem to be satisfied. He then went on about a Volvo with a huge sleeper and short box that was at his IL location and the driver was trying to trade it as the steers would only last about 5-6 months.
They declined to work with him as they felt it was a limited market.

I was wondering if any Volvo owners could respond to this as I am interested in one but certainly don't want to spend big bucks for tires twice a year. I asked the sales rep who the truck was leased to and he said Fedex.

The Landstar party was great,I left Fedex last year to go to LEA and it was the best decision I have made.

 

[arkjarhead]

i think the ateam run a volvo with a big sleeper and lil box you might could pm them and ask about it.

 

[greg334]

I can throw my 2 cents in here.

Not owning a Volvo, but I talked to some engineers over at GM's testing center about it a couple years ago and what you heard about the front end being too heavy for this work is true. They test these trucks out in all kinds of configurations and they were convinced that the wear on the tires and front end parts and the reduced safety margins were a factor in their minds when using it for our work. My FL contacts also suggested staying away from any Volvo too.

 

[LDB]

It's been too long since I checked into it so I don't remember exact details however Volvo has a heavier front axle that's something like 14,600 instead of the usual 12,000. Along with that are front tires that are 2 or 3 sizes larger than the standard steer. That front end is designed for the heavier front weights and supposedly does fine even in this type application. I talked to one guy who has it and he says even with 13k on the steers he has no problem with abnormal wear. He also said he has no problem with scales as the scale officers recognize the much heavier duty tires and know it's within specs. As much as I like the 780 I'd still go with a T660 if I were building another.

Leo Bricker, 73's K5LDB, OOIDA Life Member 677319
Owner, Panther trucks 5508, 5509, 5641
Highway Watch Participant, Truckerbuddy
EO Forum Moderator
----------
Support the entire Constitution, not just the parts you like.

 

[davekc]

I agree with Leo on this one. We speced a Volvo with a aftermarket sleeper and the dealer said no way. Same problem as the front would be too heavy. Too many tires, weight, and safety issues. They said you could do a 770 and it would be fine, but highly advised about using it with a after market sleeper.
As Leo mentioned, I think the KW660 is much better suited for a straight application if going beyond their factory sleeper configuration.
Just the simple engineering numbers that Gregg mentioned from FL would tell you there would be problems.







Davekc
owner
23 years
PantherII
EO moderator

 

[arkjarhead]

I know you guys know what you are talking about but it seems it these people you see running the KW W900L and Pete 379s as d units would be having this problem not the volvo owners with the short slanted hoods. Just seems kinda reversed. plus 14K on the steer axle? Hope that isn't empty because that truck is already overweight. I thought 12 k was the max on steers. then again I could be wrong. You fellas now more about this stuff than I do.

 

[LDB]

I built a W900B with my local dealer. Even with the shorter hood of the B it is fairly heavy on the front end. The biggest drawback to it is the gigantic turning radius. The T6's, whether original 600 or new 660, have a much tighter turning radius. Additionally, the T is going to be $10k or so less money since it doesn't have the dual everything chrome stuff on it.

With the optional axle the Volvo 780 is legal up to 13,600 or so on the steers. I don't remember the exact details but they do have a heavier front option that also is road legal due to the suspension/tires combination.

Leo Bricker, 73's K5LDB, OOIDA Life Member 677319
Owner, Panther trucks 5508, 5509, 5641
Highway Watch Participant, Truckerbuddy
EO Forum Moderator
----------
Support the entire Constitution, not just the parts you like.

 

[ATeam]

Diane and I run a class 8 Volvo straight truck and the front end is NOT too heavy.

Front axle weight is a function of many things. If we moved the rear axle a few feet back from its present location, the weight on the front axle would increase. If we put a bigger sleeper on the truck and loaded it up with more stuff, the weight on the front axle would increase. If we removed the liftgate from the truck, the weight on the front axle would increase. If we selected a heavier engine for the truck, the weight on the front axle would increase. If we put bigger fuel tanks on the truck or positioned them further forward, front axle weight would increase when the tanks were filled.

Get the idea? It's not about whether Volvos are heavy or not. It's about what you do or do not do to the truck to make it heavy or not.

The same applies to all truck brands. I know of a class 8 Kenworth that was made into an expediter, brand new from the dealner. The front axle was over the legal limit when the disappointed owner drove it to its first scale stop. That did not happen because the Kenworth was "too heavy." It happened because the truck was put together wrong.

Regarding tire wear, our history is documented in the Centramatics thread in the Truck Talk forum. See: http://www.expeditersonline.com/cgi...z=show_thread&om=1692&forum=DCForumID16&omm=0

That was a tire balance problem, not a front axle weight problem.

With our current set of steers, and 50,000 miles on them, it is so far, so good. As I did with our first set of steers, I'll report the results on our second set as the miles accrue. For now, there is nothing to report, except that I expect to get more out of them this time around.

If there is another big-sleeper Volvo in the FedEx Custom Critical fleet, I'd love to meet the owner-operator. It would be fun to compare notes and talk shop. We have never been to a Volvo dealer in Illinois. Thus, the truck you heard about from the dealer you talked to is not ours.

No worries about us wanting to trade our truck. If we had it to do over again, we would build the very-same truck. We are very pleased with our ride and hope to stay in it ten years or more.

If you are interested, our truck specs, including axle weights are on my web site at: http://www.successfulexpediters.com/Madsen/MadsenTruckSpecs.htm

P.S. Glad to hear things are working out well for you at Landstar.

P.S.S. If you are serious about buying a Volvo for an expediter application, the dealer that served us well would serve you well too. His name is Mike Landwehr. He is at VoMac Truck Sales in New Haven, Indiana, near Fort Wayne.

 

[kwexpress]

KW Express
o/o till i die

I have an old volvo class 8 its a 94 with a 24'box I have scaled 18k and never been stopped at a scale for overweight.I have right at 1 million miles on it and its still running strong.tire wear is not an issue for me but I have heard others complain.but I would also add most of my loads are under 13,000.

 

[Thornapple]

KW:
Is your unit a standard sleeper unit? Or do you have an aftermarket sleeper added to a day cab?

If it's a standard sleeper how long is it?

Where did you put your tandem wheels in relation to the 24' box?

I've been looking at some that have the tandem set about 1'-0" back of the centerline of the box. What ever the length.

I've been looking at a '99 with a low ratio and a 61" sleeper. That should take a 22' or 24' box. I know the placement of the tandem will make the difference if the load get's heavy.

Thanks for the help.
t.

 

[davekc]

You shouldn't have a problem with a factory or smaller sleeper. The issues usually come up with a sleeper of greater length. Pretty much the reason you don't see any Volvo straights with a aftermarket sleeper greater than 90 inches.








Davekc
owner
23 years
PantherII
EO moderator

 

[ATeam]

http://www.expeditersonline.com/dcforum/DCForumID16/1743.html

 

[kwexpress]

KW Express
o/o till i die

like dave said you wont have the problem with the factory sleeper

mine is the integral sleeper just enough room to turn out of your seat and get in the bunk.Im not into big fancy stuff or truckstops so it works for me.if I want room I stop into a motel but Im not usally out that long.

I dont know how far back my axels are thorn but I will measure them today and let you know.

 

[FAMILYEXPDT]

I almost missed this myself, but while they USDOT was having an issue with Arkansas enforcing their own weight limits over fedearl, it appears as if steering axle weight limits were changed.


Motor Carrier Height and Weight Restrictions

Height and Weight




WEIGHT ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM
LEGAL SIZE RESTRICTION (including load)


Total length (including bumpers and load overhang) - Single Motor Vehicles
40 feet


COMBINATIONS ON NATIONAL TRUCK NETWORK AND APPROVED ACCESS ROUTES
(Interstates and certain designated primary highways)
Truck Tractor and 53' or shorter trailer - No Length Limit - Maximum Width 8 ½ feet (41 feet max. - King pin to center of rear axle group)
Truck Tractor and Two Twin Trailers - No Length Limit - Maximum Width 8 ½ feet (trailer lengths 28 ½ feet maximum)
Conventional 5th Wheel and Automobile transporters (plus overhang) 65 feet (Overhang; front - 3 feet, rear - 4 feet)
Note: Trailer Length does not include refrigeration equipment or airfoil devices (bubbles).


ALL HIGHWAYS GENERAL WIDTH RESTRICTIONS
(excluding mirrors and sunshades)
Overall Width 8 feet Truck Tractor and 53' or shorter trailer - No Length Limit - Maximum Width - 8 feet (41 feet max. - King pin to center of rear axle group)
Single Trailer Household Goods carriers 53' or shorter trailer - Maximum Width - 8 ½ feet
Truck Tractor / single twin trailer (trailer length - 28 ½ feet Maximum) Maximum Width 8 ½ feet
Nondivisible loads on highways having a roadway width of 20 feet or more 8 ½ feet


GENERAL LENGTH RESTRICTIONS
Stinger Steered Automobile Transporters and Saddle Mounts (plus overhang) 75 feet (Overhang: front - 3 feet, rear - 4 feet)
Conventional 5th Wheel Automobile Transporters (including overhang) 65 feet (Overhang: front - 3 feet, rear - 6 feet)
Maximum length of a nondivisible load carried on a combination of vehicles 70 feet (No overall length limit for the combination)


HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS
Overall Height 13 ½ feet


LOAD OVERHANG RESTRICTIONS
(excluding mirrors and sunshades)
The extension of a load beyond the extremities of the vehicle can't exceed the measurements listed below:
Front 3 feet
Rear 6 feet
This may be exceeded for combinations carrying nondivisible loads not exceeding 70 feet (length of load).


LEGAL WHEEL, AXLE & GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHTS WEIGHT PER WHEEL
The maximum weight per inch of width of tire is 800 pounds on any one wheel. Tire manufacturers' rated width is used in calculations; thus a 9.00-23 tire has a nine-inch width.
Axle Weights for Trucks and Combinations Registered in Classes 1 through 20 (less than 73,280 pounds), may not exceed the lesser of the GAWR or the following weights:
The axle weight upon the steering axle may not exceed 20,000 pounds.
If the Center-to- Center Distance Maximum Axle Weight in Pounds upon
Between Two Adjacent One of Two Adjacent Other of Two Axle Axles Adjacent Axles
6feet 18,000 18,000
6 to 8 feet 18,000 22,400
Over 8 feet 22,400 22,400
NOTE: Exceptions to this table are three-axle trucks in class 17, which are allowed 21,400 pounds on each tandem axle and four-axle trucks registered in class 20 which are allowed 21,400 pounds on any tandem axle with the group of three tandem axles limited to 60,000 pounds. These exceptions do not apply when the trucks are traveling on Interstate highways.

We checked at a couiple of scale houses in various states and were told it had been changed from 12,500.


-charlotte


-charlotte

 

[greg334]

So I go back to my comment and what I am told by people who work on the designs and competitive testing of these trucks, that the safety margins are not there even though there is an improvement in technology and materials - in other words, Volvo did not intentionally take any of their trucks and re-design it for this purpose. I trust the people I talk to far more than I would ever trust any dealer.

My point is with the after market sleeper and a truck like the Volvo. The integrated sleeper is not the best either but there is a wider margin involved between the two.

So I agree with Leo, KW is a better choice, as is any FL or Pete.

What I understand from all of this discussion is;

the feds with their great wisdom have increased the axle weight, maybe because some company needed the increased weight

the specs for the actual roads have not changed in the last 40 years to match the increase in axle weights or increased traffic

trucks on the road still depend on an outdated braking system and with an balance problem with the weight there is more of a problem - maybe let's start seeing disc brakes on the trucks

the loading of trucks is now getting to be more of a science instead of common sense, got to move the groceries out of the fridge so we can put that 20lbs on the truck

the laws of physics has not changed, hence what is going down the road at 70MPH that weighs 60K lbs is still as dangerous as ever.

Maybe I am naive about the whole thing and being a cheap small truck owner, I look at things differently. Safety first before whatever.

 

[Paul56]

The scuttlebutt around the shop is that there are still issues with Volvo's, weight and the front-end.

But don't take my word for it... this is coming from a Kenworth dealership. :+

 

[MikeC]

Thanks for all of the replies. I did find out that the Volvo that had the problem started out as a day cab and had a huge sleeper and box added on. I guess if you stay with the factory configuration you will be ok, but none the less I think I will look at Pete's.

 

[LDB]

If you are going with a factory sleeper do yourself a favor and skip Pete's and look at KW's. The sleepers are far nicer and the 86" studio is an entire class above the top Pete sleeper. The Pete/KW line is to trucks what Chevy/Cadillac is to GM cars. If you are going new do yourself another favor and deal with Fred Sargent in Houston at Performance Kenworth. He knows how to build them with the correct frame length from the factory and can help you with cargo box etc. as well. He and I built my W9 and it's a fantastic truck. I wouldn't do another W9 but I'd do a T6 if I was doing another factory class 8 and I'd only build it with Fred supervising.

Leo Bricker, 73's K5LDB, OOIDA Life Member 677319
Owner, Panther trucks 5508, 5509, 5641
Highway Watch Participant, Truckerbuddy
EO Forum Moderator
----------
Support the entire Constitution, not just the parts you like.

 

[davekc]

I would take Leo's advice and go with the KW. I like the 660 and may consider one of these with a large sleeper. We heard the same issues as Paul with regards to using Volvos past the factory versions.
Before considering one, I think I would want to wait until you see a handful used in a straight application with a aftermarket sleeper, and experienced no front end, tire, or weight issues.







Davekc
owner
23 years
PantherII
EO moderator

 

[Thornapple]

What about runnin with the Big Dog?
How bout a 2000 Mack CH613 Vison with E7 460 motor and 18 speed and a 80" stand-up sleeper? Has all the power goodies and low miles.
Would this be a good one to take to the 40' mark?
You better say yes cause someone is going to win one like it on Sat.
Right?
t.s. What do all those numbers and letters mean with a Mack?