I know the 16' box van would be preferred due to size, but which is better for the O/O? The GMC 3500 with the 16' box can only carry 2600 pounds anyway so is that extra room usually wasted anyway? The Sprinter gets about 7 MPG more than the GMC. So I'm thinking it can usually take the same loads weight wise as the 16' box van and then you save a bunch on fuel. Is the Sprinter the way to go due to MPG or will the 16 footer really benefit the owner operator from it's extra size?
GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is bett
- Thread starter Mileater
- Start date
DannyD
Veteran Expediter
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
>I know the 16' box van would be preferred due to size, but
>which is better for the O/O? The GMC 3500 with the 16' box
>can only carry 2600 pounds anyway so is that extra room
>usually wasted anyway? The Sprinter gets about 7 MPG more
>than the GMC. So I'm thinking it can usually take the same
>loads weight wise as the 16' box van and then you save a
>bunch on fuel. Is the Sprinter the way to go due to MPG or
>will the 16 footer really benefit the owner operator from
>it's extra size?
Hi,
Of the above choices, I'd actually go w/ "neither." If you're going to get a 16 foot truck, you'll want to be able to carry more than 2600 pounds, which I think you already are aware of simply by how you stated things.
The Sprinter is an expensive truck to get. The payment/Insurance on that thing could well be over $1000/month. You're going to have to work quite a bit (like over a week in many cases) to make $1000/month. Factor in the gas you'll need to make that 1000 & now you're up to $1300 or so just to make your truck payment. Then you get to go to work for yourself.
I realize the above sounds somewhat negative, but there is a way to go about things if you're going to be in a D unit. Ya can get a used vehicle that's a few years old. Keep the payments down. Now you're looking at a payment/insurance of under $500. That's one week per month extra that you'll be working for yourself rather than for your vehicle.
When things are slow, & there will definately be slow times out there no matter what kind of vehicle you drive, there won't be nearly the stress. There are instances where getting a Sprinter might be the right choice, but someone just getting starting in the business isn't likely to be the person it's the right choice for.
Ya really have to be careful buying a new vehicle for this job. Keep your payments low & you'll be able to put a lot more money in your bank account.
Best of wishes,
Danny
>I know the 16' box van would be preferred due to size, but
>which is better for the O/O? The GMC 3500 with the 16' box
>can only carry 2600 pounds anyway so is that extra room
>usually wasted anyway? The Sprinter gets about 7 MPG more
>than the GMC. So I'm thinking it can usually take the same
>loads weight wise as the 16' box van and then you save a
>bunch on fuel. Is the Sprinter the way to go due to MPG or
>will the 16 footer really benefit the owner operator from
>it's extra size?
Hi,
Of the above choices, I'd actually go w/ "neither." If you're going to get a 16 foot truck, you'll want to be able to carry more than 2600 pounds, which I think you already are aware of simply by how you stated things.
The Sprinter is an expensive truck to get. The payment/Insurance on that thing could well be over $1000/month. You're going to have to work quite a bit (like over a week in many cases) to make $1000/month. Factor in the gas you'll need to make that 1000 & now you're up to $1300 or so just to make your truck payment. Then you get to go to work for yourself.
I realize the above sounds somewhat negative, but there is a way to go about things if you're going to be in a D unit. Ya can get a used vehicle that's a few years old. Keep the payments down. Now you're looking at a payment/insurance of under $500. That's one week per month extra that you'll be working for yourself rather than for your vehicle.
When things are slow, & there will definately be slow times out there no matter what kind of vehicle you drive, there won't be nearly the stress. There are instances where getting a Sprinter might be the right choice, but someone just getting starting in the business isn't likely to be the person it's the right choice for.
Ya really have to be careful buying a new vehicle for this job. Keep your payments low & you'll be able to put a lot more money in your bank account.
Best of wishes,
Danny
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
Thanks for the info, I started looking at big but have been steered towards the smaller vehicles. Since the companies I talked to like the under 10k category I think I will start here first. Plus parking is easier for these. I've wondered where I would park a 24' expeditor truck. I think I can get away with parking a cube van at the side of my house, I can add some 10' evergreen trees for cover, but no way can I park a straight truck at my house.
Another valid comparison is just a normal GMC 3500 extended cargo van compared to a GMC 3500 16' Cube Van. Both carry about the same weight, just the Cube Van will carry more bulk.
Thanks for the info, I started looking at big but have been steered towards the smaller vehicles. Since the companies I talked to like the under 10k category I think I will start here first. Plus parking is easier for these. I've wondered where I would park a 24' expeditor truck. I think I can get away with parking a cube van at the side of my house, I can add some 10' evergreen trees for cover, but no way can I park a straight truck at my house.
Another valid comparison is just a normal GMC 3500 extended cargo van compared to a GMC 3500 16' Cube Van. Both carry about the same weight, just the Cube Van will carry more bulk.
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
Mileater,
Sprinter: High initial cost, expensive parts and downtime because of difficulty finding parts will wipe out any fuel savings you have.
Please think about maintenance costs on a Sprinter. I cannot find filters, trans fluid, brake fluid at my local auto store. I have to buy at dealership and it is expensive. If you go to a Sprinter dealer, ask them how much a quart of trans fluid costs. I think they ship all that stuff from Germany. I have a dually and even the tires are a weird size. The local tire store wanted $140 apiece. 6 tires = $840 for 15" tires. I have a cousin in the tire business that got them for me at his cost $600, but I had to wait for 2 months so he could order them.
I would recommend getting the best Ford or Chevy you can find!
Mileater,
Sprinter: High initial cost, expensive parts and downtime because of difficulty finding parts will wipe out any fuel savings you have.
Please think about maintenance costs on a Sprinter. I cannot find filters, trans fluid, brake fluid at my local auto store. I have to buy at dealership and it is expensive. If you go to a Sprinter dealer, ask them how much a quart of trans fluid costs. I think they ship all that stuff from Germany. I have a dually and even the tires are a weird size. The local tire store wanted $140 apiece. 6 tires = $840 for 15" tires. I have a cousin in the tire business that got them for me at his cost $600, but I had to wait for 2 months so he could order them.
I would recommend getting the best Ford or Chevy you can find!
greg334
Veteran Expediter
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
>I cannot finnd filters, trans fluid, brake fluid at my local auto
>store. I have to buy at dealership and it is expensive. If
>you go to a Sprinter dealer, ask them how much a quart of
>trans fluid costs.
RonandPam,
Hope this helps.
A long time ago I worked on Mercedes vehicles, specifically diesels and went through their training program. I know that things haven't changed much in the way of how Mercedes handles maintaince and parts. Dodge and F/L hasn't been forced to change as far as I am concerned.
First you should be able to use regular brake fluid (aka DOT 4) or synthetic fluid(aka DOT 5). You should not mix fluids and if you have a chance to get the brake system flushed (like caliper change out)to replace the fluid get DOT 5.
Second the transfluid (from my Dodge manuals mind you) state MOPAR ATF+4 or equivilent but my mercedes manual states ATF+. I haven't had a need to buy this but I know I have seen it at the parts store.
Third there are a number of people who sell filters on eBay. They import them by the case. I thought of doing this but not making enough to justify the cost.
>I cannot finnd filters, trans fluid, brake fluid at my local auto
>store. I have to buy at dealership and it is expensive. If
>you go to a Sprinter dealer, ask them how much a quart of
>trans fluid costs.
RonandPam,
Hope this helps.
A long time ago I worked on Mercedes vehicles, specifically diesels and went through their training program. I know that things haven't changed much in the way of how Mercedes handles maintaince and parts. Dodge and F/L hasn't been forced to change as far as I am concerned.
First you should be able to use regular brake fluid (aka DOT 4) or synthetic fluid(aka DOT 5). You should not mix fluids and if you have a chance to get the brake system flushed (like caliper change out)to replace the fluid get DOT 5.
Second the transfluid (from my Dodge manuals mind you) state MOPAR ATF+4 or equivilent but my mercedes manual states ATF+. I haven't had a need to buy this but I know I have seen it at the parts store.
Third there are a number of people who sell filters on eBay. They import them by the case. I thought of doing this but not making enough to justify the cost.
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
I'm not a van driver but I still like the aerocell concept.
I think it is www.unicell.com
Davekc
owner
21 years
PantherII
EO moderator
I'm not a van driver but I still like the aerocell concept.
I think it is www.unicell.com
Davekc
owner
21 years
PantherII
EO moderator
Jack_Berry
Moderator Emeritus
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
okay, on the unicell. if you went for the larger cell, the aerocell would you put it on the kodiak chassis rather than the 3500 ext? the gvwr i was told is 17K for the kodiak so that is scale teritory. otoh with the 3500 aero you could carry less and have a decent sized sleeper. again otoh dieseldoctor gets along quite nicely in his shorter unicell sleeping above the freight.
Jack Berry
okay, on the unicell. if you went for the larger cell, the aerocell would you put it on the kodiak chassis rather than the 3500 ext? the gvwr i was told is 17K for the kodiak so that is scale teritory. otoh with the 3500 aero you could carry less and have a decent sized sleeper. again otoh dieseldoctor gets along quite nicely in his shorter unicell sleeping above the freight.
Jack Berry
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
GMC is sounding better here. Tare weight of 6750 pounds so I take it this means I can load 3250 pounds including myself and possesions with me. Even though they are marked 2600 pounds max payload inside the box, as long as I don't go over the max GVW it should be legal I think.
GMC is sounding better here. Tare weight of 6750 pounds so I take it this means I can load 3250 pounds including myself and possesions with me. Even though they are marked 2600 pounds max payload inside the box, as long as I don't go over the max GVW it should be legal I think.
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
Thanks Greg, I also found a website www.europarts-sd.com that has good prices for maintenance supplies/parts etc.
Thanks Greg, I also found a website www.europarts-sd.com that has good prices for maintenance supplies/parts etc.
DannyD
Veteran Expediter
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
I pretty much agree w/ Ronandpam's post. I thought I'd get great savings, & I did w/ the fuel but it got eaten up in other areas. As for your own van, are you intending to sleep in it? If so getting the extended van might be the way to go. Otherwise I'd go w/ the 250 model (Ford) or the 2500 model for the GMC.
Others may have different experiences but when I had an extended van, rarely did the extra space get me a load. It never once got me a run back when I was out. It may/may not have gotten me a run while I was home. Even then there might have been a better 2 skid run that went to someone else because they gave me the 3 skid run. Ya never know how those things would have worked out if ya just had a standard size vehicle.
I would only get the extended van if I was planning to use that extra space for a sleeping/storage area. Even then, you can usually sleep in a standard size van unless you're loaded. And if you are loaded, a padded footstool will fit perfectly in between the seats allowing you to sleep across the seats if you need to sleep & have a load in the back.
Good luck to ya,
Danny
I pretty much agree w/ Ronandpam's post. I thought I'd get great savings, & I did w/ the fuel but it got eaten up in other areas. As for your own van, are you intending to sleep in it? If so getting the extended van might be the way to go. Otherwise I'd go w/ the 250 model (Ford) or the 2500 model for the GMC.
Others may have different experiences but when I had an extended van, rarely did the extra space get me a load. It never once got me a run back when I was out. It may/may not have gotten me a run while I was home. Even then there might have been a better 2 skid run that went to someone else because they gave me the 3 skid run. Ya never know how those things would have worked out if ya just had a standard size vehicle.
I would only get the extended van if I was planning to use that extra space for a sleeping/storage area. Even then, you can usually sleep in a standard size van unless you're loaded. And if you are loaded, a padded footstool will fit perfectly in between the seats allowing you to sleep across the seats if you need to sleep & have a load in the back.
Good luck to ya,
Danny
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
>I pretty much agree w/ Ronandpam's post. I thought I'd get
>great savings, & I did w/ the fuel but it got eaten up in
>other areas. As for your own van, are you intending to
>sleep in it? If so getting the extended van might be the
>way to go. Otherwise I'd go w/ the 250 model (Ford) or the
>2500 model for the GMC.
>
>Others may have different experiences but when I had an
>extended van, rarely did the extra space get me a load. It
>never once got me a run back when I was out. It may/may not
>have gotten me a run while I was home. Even then there
>might have been a better 2 skid run that went to someone
>else because they gave me the 3 skid run. Ya never know how
>those things would have worked out if ya just had a standard
>size vehicle.
>
>I would only get the extended van if I was planning to use
>that extra space for a sleeping/storage area. Even then,
>you can usually sleep in a standard size van unless you're
>loaded. And if you are loaded, a padded footstool will fit
>perfectly in between the seats allowing you to sleep across
>the seats if you need to sleep & have a load in the back.
>
>Good luck to ya,
>Danny
I do plan on throwing down a portable bed when I have to. Are you talking about a standard GMC cargo van like this one? This would be ideal as it would fit in my garage with my extra high 8' doors, but it would not be sufficient to sign on with the company's I'm looking at.
This one below with a 12' box is the smallest that I can use, but it is 8.6' high, so it will not fit in my garage.
So I might as well just get one of these with a 16' box, I think.
>I pretty much agree w/ Ronandpam's post. I thought I'd get
>great savings, & I did w/ the fuel but it got eaten up in
>other areas. As for your own van, are you intending to
>sleep in it? If so getting the extended van might be the
>way to go. Otherwise I'd go w/ the 250 model (Ford) or the
>2500 model for the GMC.
>
>Others may have different experiences but when I had an
>extended van, rarely did the extra space get me a load. It
>never once got me a run back when I was out. It may/may not
>have gotten me a run while I was home. Even then there
>might have been a better 2 skid run that went to someone
>else because they gave me the 3 skid run. Ya never know how
>those things would have worked out if ya just had a standard
>size vehicle.
>
>I would only get the extended van if I was planning to use
>that extra space for a sleeping/storage area. Even then,
>you can usually sleep in a standard size van unless you're
>loaded. And if you are loaded, a padded footstool will fit
>perfectly in between the seats allowing you to sleep across
>the seats if you need to sleep & have a load in the back.
>
>Good luck to ya,
>Danny
I do plan on throwing down a portable bed when I have to. Are you talking about a standard GMC cargo van like this one? This would be ideal as it would fit in my garage with my extra high 8' doors, but it would not be sufficient to sign on with the company's I'm looking at.
This one below with a 12' box is the smallest that I can use, but it is 8.6' high, so it will not fit in my garage.
So I might as well just get one of these with a 16' box, I think.
DannyD
Veteran Expediter
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
>I do plan on throwing down a portable bed when I have to.
>Are you talking about a standard GMC cargo van like this
>one? This would be ideal as it would fit in my garage with
>my extra high 8' doors, but it would not be sufficient to
>sign on with the company's I'm looking at.
What you'd want is the 3/4 ton truck in either Ford or GMC, which w/ the Ford is the 250 & GMC the 2500. They will handle 2 skids. Ya gotta be careful of those box trucks. If they aren't dock high a ya can find yourself in some unfavorable situations freight wise. Plus there's really nowhere to sleep in a lot of those things. I drove one of those things for two deliveries, when I used a company truck. The comfort level on the one I drove left a little something to be desired.
I've never had a GMC but have heard favorable things about em for the most part. My 3/4 ton Ford will fit in a garage w/ an 8 foot high door. Not sure if a GMC will or not. Best thing to do is when ya test drive it, take it to your house & see.
Btw/ which company are you going to be signing on w/? Are they requiring you to be able to haul at least 3 skids? If they are, & you're sure this is the company you want to sign on w/, go w/ the extended van. IMO it's not as good as a 3/4 ton when ya factor in costs/runs taken, but it would be better than a box truck.
So in a nutshell, in order I'd get a 3/4 ton standard van. Then a 3/4 ton extended van, & would avoid a box truck altogether.
Best of luck,
Danny
>I do plan on throwing down a portable bed when I have to.
>Are you talking about a standard GMC cargo van like this
>one? This would be ideal as it would fit in my garage with
>my extra high 8' doors, but it would not be sufficient to
>sign on with the company's I'm looking at.
What you'd want is the 3/4 ton truck in either Ford or GMC, which w/ the Ford is the 250 & GMC the 2500. They will handle 2 skids. Ya gotta be careful of those box trucks. If they aren't dock high a ya can find yourself in some unfavorable situations freight wise. Plus there's really nowhere to sleep in a lot of those things. I drove one of those things for two deliveries, when I used a company truck. The comfort level on the one I drove left a little something to be desired.
I've never had a GMC but have heard favorable things about em for the most part. My 3/4 ton Ford will fit in a garage w/ an 8 foot high door. Not sure if a GMC will or not. Best thing to do is when ya test drive it, take it to your house & see.
Btw/ which company are you going to be signing on w/? Are they requiring you to be able to haul at least 3 skids? If they are, & you're sure this is the company you want to sign on w/, go w/ the extended van. IMO it's not as good as a 3/4 ton when ya factor in costs/runs taken, but it would be better than a box truck.
So in a nutshell, in order I'd get a 3/4 ton standard van. Then a 3/4 ton extended van, & would avoid a box truck altogether.
Best of luck,
Danny
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
>>I do plan on throwing down a portable bed when I have to.
>>Are you talking about a standard GMC cargo van like this
>>one? This would be ideal as it would fit in my garage with
>>my extra high 8' doors, but it would not be sufficient to
>>sign on with the company's I'm looking at.
>
>
>What you'd want is the 3/4 ton truck in either Ford or GMC,
>which w/ the Ford is the 250 & GMC the 2500. They will
>handle 2 skids. Ya gotta be careful of those box trucks. If
>they aren't dock high a ya can find yourself in some
>unfavorable situations freight wise. Plus there's really
>nowhere to sleep in a lot of those things. I drove one of
>those things for two deliveries, when I used a company
>truck. The comfort level on the one I drove left a little
>something to be desired.
>
>I've never had a GMC but have heard favorable things about
>em for the most part. My 3/4 ton Ford will fit in a garage
>w/ an 8 foot high door. Not sure if a GMC will or not. Best
>thing to do is when ya test drive it, take it to your house
>& see.
>
>Btw/ which company are you going to be signing on w/? Are
>they requiring you to be able to haul at least 3 skids? If
>they are, & you're sure this is the company you want to sign
>on w/, go w/ the extended van. IMO it's not as good as a
>3/4 ton when ya factor in costs/runs taken, but it would be
>better than a box truck.
>
>So in a nutshell, in order I'd get a 3/4 ton standard van.
>Then a 3/4 ton extended van, & would avoid a box truck
>altogether.
>
>Best of luck,
>Danny
Danny,
Are you suggesting a 3/4 ton van because it is more efficient and are probably carrying the same paying loads as a 16' cube van? If that is the case I can see your point because you have the same income with a heck of a lot less expense. Maybe it is not often you need more room with not much more weight carrying capacity, which makes a cube van not very cost effective compared to a standard cargo van. I just gave those points to see if they are the reason you suggest smaller is better than bigger. I would definitely prefer a standard cargo van if I can get signed with the right company with one.
I have looked at a few tiny mom and pop company's and the big ones that I have talked to are Con-Way Now, Panther. As far as dock high, none of the cargo vans or cube vans are dock high, so no difference here.
The loads vary, so I believe that at times they must need the extra room for more skids because I was told that they prefer a 15' cube van over a Sprinter. I have looked at a lot of company's and remember reading one that said they prefer the box trucks of around 15' that are under 10k GVW also. So there must be some benefit but I'm not sure overall if it is a benefit to the company or the O/O. I guess if you have to eat higher expense for the same pay just to get an extra run here and there, it's not worth it. But if you consistently get more loads and maybe a few higher paying loads then it is worth it.
Depending if a standard cargo van is not an option for me, then maybe to satisfy the company, a happy median would be to get the smallest cube van shown above with a 12' box.
Thanks.
>>I do plan on throwing down a portable bed when I have to.
>>Are you talking about a standard GMC cargo van like this
>>one? This would be ideal as it would fit in my garage with
>>my extra high 8' doors, but it would not be sufficient to
>>sign on with the company's I'm looking at.
>
>
>What you'd want is the 3/4 ton truck in either Ford or GMC,
>which w/ the Ford is the 250 & GMC the 2500. They will
>handle 2 skids. Ya gotta be careful of those box trucks. If
>they aren't dock high a ya can find yourself in some
>unfavorable situations freight wise. Plus there's really
>nowhere to sleep in a lot of those things. I drove one of
>those things for two deliveries, when I used a company
>truck. The comfort level on the one I drove left a little
>something to be desired.
>
>I've never had a GMC but have heard favorable things about
>em for the most part. My 3/4 ton Ford will fit in a garage
>w/ an 8 foot high door. Not sure if a GMC will or not. Best
>thing to do is when ya test drive it, take it to your house
>& see.
>
>Btw/ which company are you going to be signing on w/? Are
>they requiring you to be able to haul at least 3 skids? If
>they are, & you're sure this is the company you want to sign
>on w/, go w/ the extended van. IMO it's not as good as a
>3/4 ton when ya factor in costs/runs taken, but it would be
>better than a box truck.
>
>So in a nutshell, in order I'd get a 3/4 ton standard van.
>Then a 3/4 ton extended van, & would avoid a box truck
>altogether.
>
>Best of luck,
>Danny
Danny,
Are you suggesting a 3/4 ton van because it is more efficient and are probably carrying the same paying loads as a 16' cube van? If that is the case I can see your point because you have the same income with a heck of a lot less expense. Maybe it is not often you need more room with not much more weight carrying capacity, which makes a cube van not very cost effective compared to a standard cargo van. I just gave those points to see if they are the reason you suggest smaller is better than bigger. I would definitely prefer a standard cargo van if I can get signed with the right company with one.
I have looked at a few tiny mom and pop company's and the big ones that I have talked to are Con-Way Now, Panther. As far as dock high, none of the cargo vans or cube vans are dock high, so no difference here.
The loads vary, so I believe that at times they must need the extra room for more skids because I was told that they prefer a 15' cube van over a Sprinter. I have looked at a lot of company's and remember reading one that said they prefer the box trucks of around 15' that are under 10k GVW also. So there must be some benefit but I'm not sure overall if it is a benefit to the company or the O/O. I guess if you have to eat higher expense for the same pay just to get an extra run here and there, it's not worth it. But if you consistently get more loads and maybe a few higher paying loads then it is worth it.
Depending if a standard cargo van is not an option for me, then maybe to satisfy the company, a happy median would be to get the smallest cube van shown above with a 12' box.
Thanks.
DannyD
Veteran Expediter
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
>Danny,
>Are you suggesting a 3/4 ton van because it is more
>efficient and are probably carrying the same paying loads as
>a 16' cube van?
Yes, Exactly.
If that is the case I can see your point
>because you have the same income with a heck of a lot less
>expense.
Again, exactly. Your income might be a touch higher w/ cube van, but probably not much. And your expenses will be a lot higher, so your net in a the van will more then likely be higher than your net in a cube van.
>The loads vary, so I believe that at times they must need
>the extra room for more skids because I was told that they
>prefer a 15' cube van over a Sprinter.
Well yea. A company is generally going to want "bigger" vs "smaller" in vehicle size. I would to if I was a company. The company doesn't have the expense of maintaining the vehicle though.
I have looked at a
>lot of company's and remember reading one that said they
>prefer the box trucks of around 15' that are under 10k GVW
>also. So there must be some benefit but I'm not sure
>overall if it is a benefit to the company or the O/O.
Not sure what company this is, & there are a few out there that have a lot of box truck runs. You had mentioned ConWay & Panther, those companies would be fine w/ a 3/4 ton van. If you're going to be travelling around the country, ya def. don't want to be doing it in a box truck. Box trucks are meant for local only. I'm not sure if they require logs, but there's nowhere to sleep in em.
I
>guess if you have to eat higher expense for the same pay
>just to get an extra run here and there, it's not worth it.
>But if you consistently get more loads and maybe a few
>higher paying loads then it is worth it.
Again, agree totally.
>Depending if a standard cargo van is not an option for me,
>then maybe to satisfy the company, a happy median would be
>to get the smallest cube van shown above with a 12' box.
If you're going to go this route, make sure you're doing local deliveries. I don't know if there's log requirements w/ box trucks. Even if there's not, you're going to have to sleep somewhere. You can't sleep in the back unless there's a way to get to it from your cab. If you have to get a hotel every nite, there won't be any profit in this for you.
Good luck,
Danny
>Danny,
>Are you suggesting a 3/4 ton van because it is more
>efficient and are probably carrying the same paying loads as
>a 16' cube van?
Yes, Exactly.
If that is the case I can see your point
>because you have the same income with a heck of a lot less
>expense.
Again, exactly. Your income might be a touch higher w/ cube van, but probably not much. And your expenses will be a lot higher, so your net in a the van will more then likely be higher than your net in a cube van.
>The loads vary, so I believe that at times they must need
>the extra room for more skids because I was told that they
>prefer a 15' cube van over a Sprinter.
Well yea. A company is generally going to want "bigger" vs "smaller" in vehicle size. I would to if I was a company. The company doesn't have the expense of maintaining the vehicle though.
I have looked at a
>lot of company's and remember reading one that said they
>prefer the box trucks of around 15' that are under 10k GVW
>also. So there must be some benefit but I'm not sure
>overall if it is a benefit to the company or the O/O.
Not sure what company this is, & there are a few out there that have a lot of box truck runs. You had mentioned ConWay & Panther, those companies would be fine w/ a 3/4 ton van. If you're going to be travelling around the country, ya def. don't want to be doing it in a box truck. Box trucks are meant for local only. I'm not sure if they require logs, but there's nowhere to sleep in em.
I
>guess if you have to eat higher expense for the same pay
>just to get an extra run here and there, it's not worth it.
>But if you consistently get more loads and maybe a few
>higher paying loads then it is worth it.
Again, agree totally.
>Depending if a standard cargo van is not an option for me,
>then maybe to satisfy the company, a happy median would be
>to get the smallest cube van shown above with a 12' box.
If you're going to go this route, make sure you're doing local deliveries. I don't know if there's log requirements w/ box trucks. Even if there's not, you're going to have to sleep somewhere. You can't sleep in the back unless there's a way to get to it from your cab. If you have to get a hotel every nite, there won't be any profit in this for you.
Good luck,
Danny
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
Danny? $1000 a month? A lttle blown up there? Mines about $800 with ins. included.
Weigh. wieght, weight..why such a emphasize on weight? you all know that weight when your talking vans is all not that relevent. IMO. How many times have you had to worry about 3000lbs as compared to height or length? I've had more oversized loads then weighty loads. Like tall or long if its width you can have put in lengthwise most of the time.
Danny? $1000 a month? A lttle blown up there? Mines about $800 with ins. included.
Weigh. wieght, weight..why such a emphasize on weight? you all know that weight when your talking vans is all not that relevent. IMO. How many times have you had to worry about 3000lbs as compared to height or length? I've had more oversized loads then weighty loads. Like tall or long if its width you can have put in lengthwise most of the time.
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
The ones I'm looking at are under 10k pounds GVW so no logging. Also, the 14-16' cube usually have the door to go to the cargo area so you can throw down a temporary bed if you have to. The 12' cube's have no door, so I would have to install the door myself.
I have heard the GMC 16' cube can get 14 MPG loaded.
It would be nice to see some comparison MPG for the different sizes.
Like a 12' compared to a 16'.
Also what a standard GMC 2500 MPG would be when loaded and when empty.
The ones I'm looking at are under 10k pounds GVW so no logging. Also, the 14-16' cube usually have the door to go to the cargo area so you can throw down a temporary bed if you have to. The 12' cube's have no door, so I would have to install the door myself.
I have heard the GMC 16' cube can get 14 MPG loaded.
It would be nice to see some comparison MPG for the different sizes.
Like a 12' compared to a 16'.
Also what a standard GMC 2500 MPG would be when loaded and when empty.
DannyD
Veteran Expediter
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
>Danny? $1000 a month? A lttle blown up there? Mines about
>$800 with ins. included.
Actually it was a little understated. My payment was $750/month & my insurance was 70.91/week, taken out of my check. The insurance is high because our company requires an extra coverage in there. So my payment was $1054/month. I said $1000 in my posts because I know most people can get insurance for less. I guess they can get a lower van payment also depending on how much they put down & how long they finance it for. Still, that money's got to come from somewhere so I'm thinking $1000/month for a Sprinter is in the right ballpark.
With my old company the insurance was $75/month, albeit on a 2000 model year van. So yea, there was a little sticker shock when I switched to a new van & new company. Overall though, I'll stay w/ EGL. I enjoy being home every night. It costs a little more in insurance. I'm back in my Ford & it's still $137/month more for insurance here than it us. I'll take it though.
Take care,
Danny
>Danny? $1000 a month? A lttle blown up there? Mines about
>$800 with ins. included.
Actually it was a little understated. My payment was $750/month & my insurance was 70.91/week, taken out of my check. The insurance is high because our company requires an extra coverage in there. So my payment was $1054/month. I said $1000 in my posts because I know most people can get insurance for less. I guess they can get a lower van payment also depending on how much they put down & how long they finance it for. Still, that money's got to come from somewhere so I'm thinking $1000/month for a Sprinter is in the right ballpark.
With my old company the insurance was $75/month, albeit on a 2000 model year van. So yea, there was a little sticker shock when I switched to a new van & new company. Overall though, I'll stay w/ EGL. I enjoy being home every night. It costs a little more in insurance. I'm back in my Ford & it's still $137/month more for insurance here than it us. I'll take it though.
Take care,
Danny
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
There have been several threads discussing the Aerocell. I'd take a long look at those. The Aerocell is the only oversize van body I'd consider if I were not getting a factory bodied van. My distant second choice after the Aerocell would be a Sprinter 3500 with the wheelwells modified by Harris Truck in Virginia. My final choice would be a GM 3500.
I personally believe vans will be required to log within a couple of years so I'd put a 17' Aerocell on a Kodiak chassis. I could have Bentz or someone build an extremely nice 58" sleeper and still have 12' for 3 skids. A Sprintergen or other small generator unit with a Coleman roof a/c would take care of cooling. An Espar and 3 deep cycle batteries would take care of heating and hotel power for as long as I was stopped. If needed the generator would recharge the batteries as well. Payload capacity would be in the 5k range. All this would be in a 22' OAL vehicle that has no lane restrictions, no road height restrictions other than maybe that 11'6" bridge I was guided to once, and virtually no parking restrictions.
Leo Bricker, 73's K5LDB, OOIDA 677319
Owner, Panther trucks 5507, 5508, 5509
Highway Watch Participant, Truckerbuddy
EO Forum Moderator
----------
Support the entire Constitution, not just the parts you like.
There have been several threads discussing the Aerocell. I'd take a long look at those. The Aerocell is the only oversize van body I'd consider if I were not getting a factory bodied van. My distant second choice after the Aerocell would be a Sprinter 3500 with the wheelwells modified by Harris Truck in Virginia. My final choice would be a GM 3500.
I personally believe vans will be required to log within a couple of years so I'd put a 17' Aerocell on a Kodiak chassis. I could have Bentz or someone build an extremely nice 58" sleeper and still have 12' for 3 skids. A Sprintergen or other small generator unit with a Coleman roof a/c would take care of cooling. An Espar and 3 deep cycle batteries would take care of heating and hotel power for as long as I was stopped. If needed the generator would recharge the batteries as well. Payload capacity would be in the 5k range. All this would be in a 22' OAL vehicle that has no lane restrictions, no road height restrictions other than maybe that 11'6" bridge I was guided to once, and virtually no parking restrictions.
Leo Bricker, 73's K5LDB, OOIDA 677319
Owner, Panther trucks 5507, 5508, 5509
Highway Watch Participant, Truckerbuddy
EO Forum Moderator
----------
Support the entire Constitution, not just the parts you like.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
RE: GMC 3500 with 16' Box or a Sprinter, which is
Just a thought.......
First in order for you to have a decent size box on the back with any hauling capacity, it must be a 3500, not a 2500. the extra 1000lb capacity makes a difference.
Second is that the GMC 3500 with a gas engine has a curb weight of about 5300lbs as a van and less than 5000 as a cutaway. But add a diesel and long wheel base version adds a lot more weight to the van.
Third - GMC 3500 has a GVW of 9600lbs (2006) not 10K, not 9999lbs. Mine is rated at 9660lbs. I wish I had the extra 340 lbs but don't.
Forth - The Aerocell SRW weighs 1400lbs stripped. If you add any accessories it adds up quickly. the regular Aerocell box I heard weighs close to 2100lbs (14 foot I think)- have not confirmed it yet. I recently spent a day with the Aerocell SRW truck (2006 GMC Duramax)and got to tell you it is nice but I found a few things I would like to see changed. The one thing is to be able to have that box on a 155" WB not the 135" WB - the extra 20" would be great.
I am working with a person who is building a box like the Aerocell SRW out of a better and lighter material on a 172" WB. He is hoping that he empty weight will be under 6500 with accessories (box weight under 1000lbs). Oh a while ago I seen the D-C experimental version of a sprinter with an Aerocell SRW type box and a SRW from a Dodge truck. Pretty interesting but the first thing I said is that it looked like a tick.
Just a thought.......
First in order for you to have a decent size box on the back with any hauling capacity, it must be a 3500, not a 2500. the extra 1000lb capacity makes a difference.
Second is that the GMC 3500 with a gas engine has a curb weight of about 5300lbs as a van and less than 5000 as a cutaway. But add a diesel and long wheel base version adds a lot more weight to the van.
Third - GMC 3500 has a GVW of 9600lbs (2006) not 10K, not 9999lbs. Mine is rated at 9660lbs. I wish I had the extra 340 lbs but don't.
Forth - The Aerocell SRW weighs 1400lbs stripped. If you add any accessories it adds up quickly. the regular Aerocell box I heard weighs close to 2100lbs (14 foot I think)- have not confirmed it yet. I recently spent a day with the Aerocell SRW truck (2006 GMC Duramax)and got to tell you it is nice but I found a few things I would like to see changed. The one thing is to be able to have that box on a 155" WB not the 135" WB - the extra 20" would be great.
I am working with a person who is building a box like the Aerocell SRW out of a better and lighter material on a 172" WB. He is hoping that he empty weight will be under 6500 with accessories (box weight under 1000lbs). Oh a while ago I seen the D-C experimental version of a sprinter with an Aerocell SRW type box and a SRW from a Dodge truck. Pretty interesting but the first thing I said is that it looked like a tick.