Why US Trucks DON’T Have 770 hp Like in Europe
Vložit
- čas přidán 16. 05. 2024
- Why US Trucks DON’T Have 770 hp Like in Europe
Uncover the reasons why American trucks have 500 hp compared to Europe's 770 hp in this video.
Liked this? then you might enjoy one of these
✅ 10 Best Sounding V8 Truck Diesel Engines (& Their History) - • 10 Best Sounding V8 Tr...
🚜Go visit our other channel about tractors here 🚜 / @tractortropia
🚛Subscribe to our channel: www.youtube.com/@TruckTropia/...
🚜Subscribe to our Tractor channel: www.youtube.com/@TractorTropi...
Explore weight rules, diverse landscapes, market demands, and other factors shaping this horsepower gap. Witness the nuanced intersection of regulations, landscapes, and market preferences, influencing the trucks on US and European roads.
Subscribe for more insights into the unique challenges and demands each region faces in the world of trucking.
▬▬▬ The video ▬▬▬
00:00 Start
01:00
Truck engines EU vs. US
02:26 Reason 1 - Weight Rules EU vs. US
03:23
Reason 2 - Landscape and Infrastructure EU vs. US
04:07 Reason 3 - Market demand
04:40 Not only the engines that is different
05:27 In Conclusion
▬▬▬ End ▬▬▬
Hope you like this video called Why US Trucks DON’T Have 770 hp Like in Europe
The content of our videos is for entertainment and the information contained is for you to know what is happening on the screen and has some educational value.
We enjoy making entertaining and educational vides for you, so like and share if you also like it
Copyright Issue: If you find any of your copyrighted material in this video, please leave us a message so we can resolve the issue.
For business contact trucktropia@hotmail.com - Auta a dopravní prostředky
a little disclaimer from a guy ( me ) who works in Europre as a trucker since 30+ years : the average engine power , here , is 480 hp....not 600/700 . 99% of the trucks i come across every days on the highway is 460/480 or 500 hp .....99% period !
That’s about the same for the US. The 500hp attributed to the Detroit Diesel and the 600hp attributed to the Cummins in this video is only true for the performance variants of those engines, which most companies don’t get. Most Cummins and Detroit Diesels are fleet spec “efficiency series” versions so they’re less than 500hp. The Freightliner Cascadia, which has the market share here in the states, comes with the DD15 with around 450hp and only 1650 torque. It will slow pulling an empty trailer up a moderate grade. It’s rough. It’s funny because the Volvo here in the states is only a 13L compared to Cummins and Detroit’s 15L and yet it comes standard with better power and torque. Even on fleet spec Volvos I’ve driven they pull way better than the other engines and do it with 2000cc’s less of displacement.
@@Ward413TBF the final drive ratio on fleet trucks tends to be closer to 1:1, saves on fuel. Downside is that you end up struggling to go up inclines. Basically, you'll have a great time in Nebraska and wish you could attach solid rocket boosters in Colorado or Wyoming
Trucks in the USA don't require large HP engines because they mostly run relatively low max weights compared to many European trucks. Here in Australia there is a mix of European and American style trucks pulling 120T+ triple road trains. The Euro trucks like Volvos and Scanias do a good job at these weights but the American style trucks with 15 or 16L engines with 600hp+ available are clearly the most popular choices for this heavy duty work.
Australian as a country feels like a complete mash up of British Europe and USA America in my opinion. Such a co-incidence that you have both styled trucks in Australia.
Australians love their kenworths. You'll commonly see them in the outback
Also the US have hughe flat lands.
In Europe we have mostly ups and downs.
The canyons the US has, is by far not that populated.
Availability of spareparts is also a big factor I would imagine
Torque is the key not horsepower, that and lots of gears. The trucks you find on the us west coast are vastly different than any other truck because they have severe mountain passes higher weights and 100 degree weather conditions
As a Swede... I suspect Scania and Volvo has larger engines in their inventory because they are required for other vehicles. You can find a Scania V8 in for example the CV90, an armoured combat vehicle, and in the CB90-class fast assault craft. Volvo on the other hand produces a lot of equipment for mining operations.
M Scania has kept its v8 for a couple reasons. Firstly, it's compact and powerful, secondly a v8 engine interest people now than a i6, which helps in marketing and lastly, it's heritage. V8 is the thing that made Scania so popular in the first place
The US has bigger engines too but here the government makes sure they won’t pass on road emissions standards
Also, doesn't scandinavia allow 60 ton, two trailer towing?
The us manufacturers have bigger engines too. Like the Cummins QSK19 series, 19l >700 hp engine, they just don´t offen them in trucks but other stuff only.
@@denzzlingathey do but the EPA makes sure they can’t pass US on road emissions
More than 500- 540 hp engines are in Europe rare too. Majority of trucks have 420- 500 hp.
Looks like 460 - 500 is the perfect optimum for both Europe and the US if you don’t haul more than 40 tons
The most common engine in the US is 455 and 505 HP Detroit DD15 which is heavily based on MB OM engine
In the UK its 450-550hp in most of the Lorries. Low Loaders usually on the higher end of the figure.
@@gravemind6536yep, mostly heavy haulage companies and smaller companies specialising in heavier loads. Most of culinas fleet are things like scania R450s so they’re not even v8s. Mercedes, daf, man, Iveco and Renault have their highest bhp trucks in the 500-550bhp range too, it’s only really scania and Volvo who make 750+bhp trucks
the obvious question is why that Euro V8 gets 46 hp/L while the US I6 manages only 36hp/L. It seems Euro engineers would have made that I6 smaller for that power rating and saved weight.
Yet the Daimler/Detroit motor makes more hp in a merc than a freightliner.
Not fair to compare V8s to inline 6s. The angle of the V gives a higher mechanical advantage on the crank compared to an inline engine thus typically producing more power for the displacement
American customers tend to favor "lazy" or "low stress" engines for reliability
@@fyshi6226 Volvo is a l6
@fyshi6226 That's not true in the slightest. The crankshaft of a normal V engine is still perfectly centered with the bores. The rod geometry is the same. Engine designers can use an offset crank to minimize piston side-loading, but this is most common on inline engines. A V engine just allows you to put more displacement in a smaller physical space. An inline-8 would be huge and impractical.
I never would of thought Europe had the more powerful trucks.
I think different regions of the US need the European style cabover. I drive mainly in the northeast sticking mostly to upstate NY and New England. I felt that our terrain and old-world set up of urban planning calls for better maneuvering. There are plenty if places here thata sleeper cab driver needs to hand off a load to a day cab which I find adds time to load deliveries trying to coordinate the hand off
I'd wager taller cabovers would have a serious problem with many of the low bridges across the states
@@knote4958According to Google, the average Peterbilt is 13.5 feet (4.11 meters) tall, and the average Scania is 11.15 feet (3.4 meters) tall “with an empty cab”
Once you leave the New England area of the United States you rarely see a cab over tractor. I might see one in a two or three week period.
A 440 HP truck in Norway can still operate there. Sure, it will be struggling more on the steepest and twisting roads there, but it will get the job done.
The reason is that of "how much work do you want to do", with a less powerful engine and a manual, you are going to be working through the gears A LOT in many places in Europe.
And even with an automatic, it's still fatiguing for the driver to constantly accelerate and slow down and the truck changing gears all the time. All the while you having to keep an eye out because the roads are narrow and you try to drive economically, staying in one gear, but also in a way to where you don't collect extra mass in the form of another motorist.
So the reason is not so much that a truck from the US can't do the job (assuming the long nose actually fits on the particular road) but the fact that it would be working its ass off do make the delivery and that the driver would be so fatigued by the end of it, even with an automatic, that he'd be looking for a different career.
One other thing you didn't mention specifically, in the US the roads are LONG. Not just straight and "flat". Trucks in the US (outside city congestion) spends very little time accelerating compared to the time it spends doing a constant RPM on open roads for hours on end.
US truck engines are made to run at this constant RPM with less wear and tear. Having more horsepower would be detrimental to this goal. They find a speed and drive that speed pretty much forever whereas in Europe, speed changes every kilometer or so. Acceleration is a never ending story for EU trucks, so their engines are made to this end, even the less horsepower engines are made to accelerate a lot even if not as fast as their high horsepower rivals.
MOST trucks in the EU are low horsepower variants and are owned by trucking companies with immense fleets of trucks and trailers. They opt for the low horsepower ones as they are cheaper and less expensive to maintain and also have better fuel economy across the various drivers and their driving habits. Companies struggle just as hard in the EU as they do in the US to make any money delivering goods. Europe's "Mexicans" are the east European truckers that operate out of their countries where they are paid between a half and two thirds as much as everyone else in Europe. Which further compounds the issues of trying to make a living as a trucker due to them constantly undercutting you.
In short, it's not so different after all. The big horsepower trucks are used by those who have a very special niche market in Europe. Like the heaviest loads that require the most skill, or that they are owner-operators who don't really care if the truck costs them their life savings and they barely make any money. For them it's a lifestyle more than a means to make a living.
Electric trucks would be nice. No gear change whatsoever.
@dom3827 but it will make the driver fall asleep easily
@@marxxmann8758 you already have auto transmission. You already do nothing while driving. 100% the same.
Thanks for your work
In most EU countries there is not only the total weight limit. There also is the weight per axle limit. In the whole EU you must not exceed weight per axle of 10 metric tonnes. If any axle carries more than 10 metric tonnes, there are very high fines for each extra kilogram. This is because of the load capacity of the road.
Thank you very much. I indeed always wondered about this, now I know!
Torque is not lbs per foot. It is lbs-ft: The radius of the distance the torque is measured at times the force.
It still is lbs per foot, weight/force times the radius
@@I_am_looking_for_GF Username fits. Troll or serious?
"per" implies division, not multiplication.
When I was driving, many many years ago 400 HP and 1400 lbs/ft was the King of the Hill... And it pulled B-Trains of 62500kgs...
Also worth to mention is that not every company or owner operator drives a 700 hp engine …. Usually the tractors pulling local trailers were around 320 to 400 hp trucks , the ones who go to the Nordic countries were mostly around 500 to 600 and 700 hp trucks …
Exceptions were usually the ones driving locally with heavy hauling trailers , companies specialised in heavy machinery and industries …
So on the contrary in what people might think everyone in Europe is sporting a V8 high horse powered truck , this is simply not the case , it all comes down to money and the type of work a company has … that being said , I do find a tractor powered with a V8 is way nicer to drive around in than a v6
US has big engines with automatic transmission cars, Europe have mostly small cars with small engines and manual (although hybrids and EVs are growing).
Meanwhile US trucks are smaller engines with a manual yet Europe has bigger and more powerful engines with an automatic in trucks.
Basically balancing eachother out.
😅👍 true
Unfortunately trucks in the US are starting to go with automatic transmissions these days.
@@phillhuddleston9445Eaton automatic transmissions are in reality just a manual transmission with air pneumatic controls
@@LeObsidianCraftthat's most of them except allison
@@wizard_of_poz4413 most Alison transmissions are not installed on 80k GVWR 15L heavy haul truck only light/medium duty 23-32k 8-12L trucks
Quite a number of places in Canada and the US seem to pull turnpike doubles or the little triples. You would have thought demand for bigger engines would have some sort of interest for those.
Turnpike doubles are used for light loads.
Turnpike doubles go "only" up to 59 tons.
Since Volvo discontinued their 16-liter top engine in the US, apparently there isn't that much interest.
Most of those triples are lightweight LTL loads like UPS, FedEx, ABF and others. The turnpike doubles are strickly for certain highways like NY, IN and OH. There are rocky mountain doubles that are 48' and a 28', again those loads are often lighter. Not really a need for the higher HP engines, as most of the grades are 2-3% or less and mostly straight.
@@kennethboyer2338- them 53’ doubles running up and down the NY through way hauling refrigerated groceries for supermarkets, I doubt they are light.
The trucks with higher power don't need to downshift so many gears in the hills so they go faster through the hills and less shifting the better fueleconomy .
I don’t think most Americans realise that the vast majority of euro trucks are actually in the 450-550bhp range. MAN, DAF, Mercedes, Iveco and Renault all have their highest bhp between 500 and 550. It’s only scania and Volvo who have the 750+bhp engines and they tend to be used for heavy haulage. Trucks hauling curtain sliders, fridges etc are almost always in the 450-550bhp. Most scanais are below 500bhp so most aren’t even v8. It’s just for certain more niche jobs or environments that the high bhp trucks are preferred
You need also to say that Detroit Diesel is owned by MTU (german company), Mack is owned be Volvo (Sweden), Paccar is owning DAF (Netherlands). So there is no distinct american and european manufacturer as some american truck companies are owned by european ones and vice versa.
Peterbilt and kenworth are the only wholly u.s.a based manufacturers.
DAF gets their enignes from paccar and when they arrive they fully strip them and re-machine them to make them euro5+ complaint as the paccar engines are way to polluting.
Also add in Navistar International that is now Volkswagen.
@@NinjaDefiler And to add both are own by US PACCAR as their parent company
@@kfelix2934 yeah
Can u record video about truck brakes now? Why do american trucks slow down so badly and euro ones stop almost like cars?
the simple answer is torque. horsepower sounds nice, but it's torque that gets the job done.
You can't have a lot of torque if you don't have a lot of power. The power is torque x rpm. By using the maximum power of the engine in combination with the right gear ratio you get both the maximum power and torque to the drive wheels which is what actually matters. This is pure physics.
Fuel economy is another thing. A high torque at low rpm indeed means a better fuel economy.
Our interstate highway system makes a huge difference.
This makes ETS2 seem cooler to play because of the terrain. I have driven some through the nordic countries but only motorways. I mostly play ATS right now.
4:03 no way he didnt hit that bank lol
I think, it's tight but he indeed didn't hit it. The trailer axles are swiveling, so the trailer doesn't just take the shortest path but continues towards the outer side of the turn for a little.
Well, this definitely oversimplifies things & may skew the picture if ppl are only comparing in terms of BHP. That said, which is better depends on the criteria of use; essentially, which is the best tool for the job & constraints at hand.
1) American inline 6 engines range in displacement for sure, but our larger engines do rival the same sizes as European V8s at 15.xL-16.xL sizes for our Over-the-Road (OTR) trucks. For instance, the DD16 is a 15.6L I6 (straight 6) & the Cummins X15 is essentially a 15L, 14.9L to be more precise. Comparing these to the Scania V8 770, which is a 16.35L, doesn't really say anything except for they're all relatively the same size or at least close to each other within a liter.
2) Comparing HP to HP & leaving out other figures is a moot point since you're leaving out important figures for comparison, such as torque, rpm, & fuel consumption.
3) In engines the higher the displacement, the higher the amount of torque per piston can be generated. However, this can be done either in lengthening the stroke &/or increasing surface area of the piston head. In OTR I6 engines both have been done in order to have a lighter weight block while maiking similar power. Added benefits are these I6 engines can produce more torque at lower rpm, thus reducing fuel consumption for the same amount of work. Being we can have significantly longer distances to drive compared to Europe, lower rpm is a necessity. For my European friends, please remember that we have quite a few states within the continental US that dwarf many countries in terms of land mass, especially in Europe; for example, our longest route in the US is on highway US20, which is 3,365mi or 5.415,4km (Euro format) going from the Atlantic Coast to the Pacific Coast.
Digressing, the flip side is that V8 engines typically have shorter stroke or less surface area on the piston head in a similar form factor (size of engine block) & require higher rpm for similar torque output. All in all, this means that the V8 may produce more torque in total, but at the same torque output as the DD16, the Scania V8 770 would guzzle fuel due to higher rpm.
4) Assuming the claimed output of 3700nm from the Scania 770 engine is true, it converts to about 2,729ft-lb, in which the disparity between the V8 & DD16 I6 is easily accounted for by the V8 having 2 extra pistons. When you look at this from a ft-lb/piston comparison, the Scania V8 16.35L, producing 2,729ft-lb @ 1,000-1450 (since Scania doesn't specify rpm for peak torque) & 770BHP @ 1800rpm, has ~341.125 ft-lb/piston, where the DD16 15.6L, producing 2,050ft-lb total at ~940rpm & 600BHP @ 1800rpm, has ~341.667 ft-lb/piston. So, while the Scania V8 is overall producing more torque & BHP, on a per piston basis, the DD16 is producing ~0.542 ft-lb/piston more in torque at potentially ~500rpm lower. Basing performance strictly on engine output & not including the rest of the power train, the DD16 would be stronger at lower rpm & fuel consumption compared to the Scania V8 for flat terrain. Obviously, the trade off in fuel consumption comes w/ more power for the Scania V8, so it would be a better performer in hills or mountainous terrain like the video mentioned, but it would perform worse on flat terrain compared to the I6 engines, which the video implies.
5) The I6 engine is much easier to maintain, has fewer parts that can be considered potential points of failure, & is quicker & less complicated to repair. When you own a business time == money, so the longer a truck is offline due to engine issues, the longer it isn't making money.
TL;DR:
- I6 & V8 engines are apples to oranges
- Comparing HP to HP isn't a great method if you leave out torque figures & the rpm at which said torque is made.
- Larger American I6 engines & European V8 engines are of similar displacement; the V8s are heavier due to this.
- European V8s produce more overall torque & higher HP, but use higher rpm & fuel consumption to do so.
- The longer strokes of the I6 allow for more torque per piston at lower rpm, saving weight in similar form factor blocks, fuel, & being more efficient in terms of work; lower rpm means less HP overall though.
- The I6 is a more simplistic design & requires less effort to maintain & repair while also providing less potential points of failure comparatively to the V8s.
- Over longer flat terrain, like the video stated, the I6 engines dominate. See truck trends in Australia for road trains as well.
- Steep grades the V8s will dominate, but they will consume more fuel & don't need to travel the same distances that the American I6 engines do.
- Use the right tool for the right job.
What about Volvo 750hp which is inline 6 and 3550nm torque at 950rpm. Just accept that europeans have better engines.
@@jonzzuuj1712 All engines follow the same principals. My comment wasn't about what is better or worse in general, which you clearly didn't understand even though I spelt that out pretty explicitly. My comment was overall stating that each type of engine has a better use case, like using the correct tool for the job. For example, if you're trying to hang a picture frame, you're not going to get the 20lbs sledge hammer for that puny nail & try to send it thru plaster/sheet rock if you're intelligent enough to understand that's too large & too inaccurate of a hammer for the job & you'll need to go w/ something quite a bit smaller. You also shouldn't use a wood drill bit for drilling masonry. So your argument is irrelevant & signifies that all you care about is where the tool came from & not what it's supposed to do. Euro V8 engines are terrible for what the USA requires, save very specific niche areas & vice versa is also true. Speaking of which, Volvo's I6 is only really popular in fleets owned by companies that got deals buying Volvo trucks. Owner operators in the USA typically stay w/ Peterbilt, Kenworth, Freightliner, etc & their Cummins, PACCAR, CAT, or Detroit Diesel engines because they're more reputable for the jobs I6 engines are needed for here & parts availability is certainly more so than for Volvo here in the US. While Volvo may have an I6, it was made to compete in the American truck market, not for the Euro market. So not only is your point moot, but it's not the standard for Europe, so there's not really a reason to bring it up other than an honorable mention for the American fleets. I will say that it's also an option to have the Volvo factory drop in a Cummins I6 instead for the added flexibility we require here in the States; we're against proprietary manufacturers because they usually have specialty parts we can't get elsewhere & they typically take longer when ordering replacement parts due to smaller scale manufacturing compared to other brands that aren't proprietary. Again, use the best tool for the job. Fanboying is childish & pretty stupid.
Edit: Fixed a typo from V6 to I6 since I apparently had a slip of thought while typing this up. Reasoning also addressed in following comment.
@@Gaming_Bikerне v6 а i6 у Вольво нет v6
@@ARMINIY7777 Apologies, I have to use Google Translate for your comment, since I don't speak Russian. Google shows me this, "not v6 but i6 Volvo doesn't have v6". If this is what you meant, then I apologize for my typo. I meant to say the American operators stay w/ the American I6 engines, same as I had originally alluded to in my first comment. I'm aware that Volvo doesn't have a V6, nor did I say they do, so hopefully that clears that up for you. I'll be correcting my typo in my previous comment.
The old cabovers that Food Lion used years ago had 318hp engines in them. They would pull the over gross trailers we hauled around, it just took a lot longer.
And would burn fuel and slow down the traffic.
@@bendermi They use a lot less fuel at slower speeds and everyone could pass us.
@@Lemmon714_
And in the hills they burnt fuel like no other .
@@Lemmon714_
If they were driving at slower speed the driver had to get paid more .
And if they were loaded to max it would increase the fuel consumption and the hours to get paid to the driver .
You ain't fooling nobody around here move on .
@@bendermi I'm not going to argue with a supertrucker. I've been around long enough to know better. You all can out drive, fight, and fuck anyone. You all are the biggest baddest things on the road and drive the biggest and baddest trucks that have ever been on the road. I'm just a puny lil day cab driver that only works nine hours a day, four days a week and goes home every day, so what could I possibly know about about truck driving? You gotta drive a truck with a sleeper and be gone days or weeks at a time to be a REAL truck driver. I get chills hearing you all use the jake with those straight pipes on flat ground. I get a boner when you go by my little 72mph truck at 85. I sure wish I drove 3000 miles a week in a big truck, but I just can't meet the standards for those big things.
It's all about emissions and fuel economy. Those engines are easily capable of outputting more power, but they would run higher combustion pressure and temperature. This potentially causes more wear, but would consume more diesel exhaust fluid. Fuel economy is also an issue. Freight companies don't care if you go slower up a hill, as long as your average fuel economy is good. The higher power output would allow truck drivers to accelerate faster and maintain speed up a hill, but it would reduce fuel economy and would increase operating cost. With most of the United states being fairly flat (I'm aware there are plenty of areas with 7 degree inclines for miles along with high elevations), it doesn't make sense from a manufacturer standpoint to build more powerful motors so a semi can maintain 65mph up a hill vs 45mph.
You said efficency multiple times referring to the usa trucks.... I bet whatever an Euro truck with the same cubic liters engine than an american it has better fuel economy
SAE US are dyno tested with AC, alternator and power steering fitted. DIN measure with engine only which means that there is less power loss to friction.
DIN includes accessories as well, but a different measuring method gives different numbers compared to SAE net output. The difference is 1.3 percent.
Minor detail: Torque is foot-pounds, not pounds per foot.
In Nevada where I live and in some other western states as well. the trucks are allowed to tow significantly more than 40 tons. They often tow three trailers. i believe that these longer, heavier loads are allowed on certain routes where congestion is at a minimum. i am not sure if these trucks have more HP than the shorter, more average trucks.
1:00 1:20 ‘T’ is silent in Renault.
Kind of funny considering we have trucks rolling around with 625+hp moving 150k plus non divisible loads
You should go look up the regulations in Europe. They don't allow those 100 tonne weights you were spewing. There are 50 states in the US and there are a lot of different weight restrictions that allow from more than 36 tonnes. In Canada the max is 63.5 tonnes depending on how many axles you have. Volvo engines here in North America are crap especially the 16 l version. Mack now uses Volvo 13 L engines.
In Finland largest trucks are 34,50m long and weight up to 90t kg.
We are calling them as "Ecotruck".
And in argentina they use mercedes benz 240 hp to pull 28 tons for 700 km
Surprising to me, given the stereotype that everything is bigger in the US.
Except weight regulations. American roads is far inferior to European ones and that includes bridges and overpasses.
Everything IS “bigger in the USA”. That’s a fact. However, some things need to make sense.😉
To be fair, weight regulations also vary by state. Most states go by that 80k limit but Michigan, for example, is twice that.
um... i've lived in michigan for the vast majority of my life... i have a class A cdl... the limit is 80k.
@@dippst per MDOT:
"A crib vehicle and semitrailer or trailer designed to and used to transport saw logs shall not exceed a gross vehicle weight
of 164,000 pounds."
@@RedWingsninetyone I used to haul bags of beans from MI down to a Bush's plant in TN, always amazed me when I saw all of those axles on some MI trailers.
@@Lafly84 that's kind of how I feel when I go into states like Illinois and see triple trailer rigs since only doubles are allowed here.
As slow as some people drive I wonder if there is such a thing as squirrel power!
More like sloth power 🦥 or even snail power 🐌
Interesting clip, thanks.what about fuel consumption- better in Europe ?
European trucks tend to average better Fuel consumption
Thought I heard most modern US trucks are being ordered with automatics these days?
Fleet buyers are. Less drivers with manual transission skills. Need something almost failproof.
They are. It's sad that a lot of the new drivers are too stupid to learn how to drive a manual.
@@jeepanimal2943 I don't think the issue is about finding drivers that know how to drive a manual transmission; it's more about driver comfort.
It's the same issue with cars....I grew up in Italy, and got my driver’s license at a time when automatic transmissions where very rare....I'm perfectly able to drive a manual transmission, but the comfort of an automatic, on "regular" cars, is very advantageous for everyday driving.
It’s a different story with “Sports cars”, where a Manual Transmission can definitely add to the driving experience, especially on light yet very fast and agile cars.
On a truck or bus…modern automatic transmissions are very good indeed….and manual transmission make less sense as time goes by.
@@alessandropataro4422in america manual truck transmission means unsyncronized transmission, it is not as easy to use as normal sycromesh truck transmission, what is used like car transmission, just more gears
Yes because the trucking industry here wants to hire ghetto trash to keep wages down that should never be in a truck and can't learn to shift.
It's funny in Europe most cars have manual transmissions, while for American cars it's almost always automatic transmissions and for trucks it's the other way around.
Better yet, how about the Edison Motors hybrid diesel logging truck...1000 from a dead stop and pulls more than a Tesla truck...Plus it will get at least 30 % better fuel economy...
Horsepower needs Torque? I thought it was a package.
Torque is better then HP for hauling?
I would thing that the cost of fuel in Europe would work against larger engines! 😮
This reasoning works for cars. For trucks, what counts is fuel used per ton of cargo per distance. European trucks may have more powerful engines, but the trucks themselves are smaller, with less emphasis on long-distance comfort, while the typical American long-haul tractor unit resembles a studio apartment on wheels. This combined with the more strict weight regulations makes the payload lower. Less payload equals using more fuel per ton, so, European trucks are probably more efficient too, at the cost of less range.
You miss a couple of details. The Daf engine is the Paccar engine which owns Daf. The MAN engine is the International Engine, the DD engines are the MB engines(MB owns Freightliner and WS, as well as buying out DD. Cat is attempting to return to truck engine manufacturing. Have fun
A lot of the ultra high HP truck engines used in Europe were originally designed for heavy haulage - abnormal loads such as big diggers, not 40-tonne freight loads. Some freight operators use them, sometimes because they want a truck that won't slow down much on a hill but also because they have access to good finance. Quite simply there are boy racer truck drivers who will sail past you on the M1 with a 700hp engine when he is not even loaded to 30 tonnes, let alone 40 and could easily make do with a 440hp. I've even seen 8-wheel tipper trucks with these ridiculously powerful engines and their maximum weight in the UK is 32 tonnes.
Boris Johnson is the main suspect
@@edwardvalivonis23 Brexit got a lot of the Irish boy racer truckers off our roads as they all use direct boats to France now. I was no Brexiteer but that means calmer roads and laws pollution for us.
@@IndigoJo Brexit gives you self entitled aspiring doctors and engineers crossing Channel and spending free nights at Dover's 5 star hotels
Where i work I mainly deal with home deliveries from a famous Swedish furniture store and in the morning I can gross up to about 15-18 tons, my favourite truck for these purposes is one that has 377 bhp from a 10 litre engine, which is plenty enough, and have a 12 speed gearbox which is ideal for a lorry, it is relatively quick to accelerate and rarely loses speed uphills and overtaking is easy. Most of the time however I get to drive trucks with 230-250 bhp from a 5-7 litre engine and that have a 6 speed gearbox and that I think is insufficient as these trucks are very slow to accelerate and lose speed uphills and are a nightmare if i have to overtake a slower vehicle, I mean, I need like more than one minute just to get from 0-90 km/h.
The truck is a tool for work, if a 250 hp truck is enough and reliable, it doesn't matter if it's slow or fast, just drive it and don't complain about it
@@Fran-vv4fnDidn't get your morning coffee yet?
Being extremely slow on an uphill increases the risk of a collision, since many car drivers are not paying attention. A truck so slow that you feel agitated by its underperformance all the time increases fatigue and reduces satisfaction with the job. A slow truck will make delivery times slower. While it seems only marginally slower, it makes a difference with stress levels if there is already a very tight schedule without extra delays. A truck with insufficient power will leave no margin to e.g. pass an even slower tractor, intensifying above points even more. And if you constantly have to push an engine to its limits just to keep moving, it's neither beneficial for the longetivity nor for the economic operation of the engine.
It's basically the same reasons why we nowadays have cars with plenty power instead of sticking to some moped engine in a full-size car. Would you argue that let's say a Chevy Suburban with a 30 BHP engine is adequatly motorized? I mean, it's a transportation, it doesn't matter if it's slow or fast, just drive it and don't complain about it.
@@smurface549 if one day you become an owner operator, you will know what I'm talking about, ask to somebody who deal whit his own truck
@@Fran-vv4fn Oh, no worries. I DO know what you're talking about.
The fact that one chooses a particular truck mostly for financial reasons doesn't mean that more power would not be desirable and would come with benefits for the driver and the driver's safety and wellbeing.
The same compromise also happens in any other industry. Why does heavy machinery nowadays have electronically controlled hydraulic valves instead of the old-school mechanically controlled valves?
Why do vehicles in general have an AC?
Why can't you find any modern airliner anymore without an autopilot?
Why do linemen take a man lift instead of climbing a ladder up an electricity pole?
Believe it or not, even in an office job there's a compromise about the work equipment. I can do a job with a 15" screen or a 24" dual screen setup - guess what my employer chose, despite it being a little more expensive. Think about why companies set up nice office environments with bright carpets, plants, free coffee and some corner with a sea view to hang out instead of a dark, crammed room with no windows.
It's all about safety, wellbeing and in the end productivity. If your people work with shitty equipment, they're less productive and jump ships as soon as they can.
@@smurface549I agree with you. I work in a company that uses 200kw (270ish? HP)
They weigh approx 9-10 tonnes with the body on them (curtainside)
and sometimes we can be expected to carry a further 9 tonnes in the truck.
The GVM is 22 tonnes. 6 speed auto.
Woefully inadequate, i’ve got much larger trucks passing me. Hills on the freeways I can be doing 40kmh. We work these trucks so hard it’s a miracle they survive.
And I agree, using these trucks likely causes more wear to them and increases consumption. Nothing is rated for economy at 100% duty cycle.
2:00 "pounds per foot of torque" --- incorrect statement, the units are "pound-feet" not "pounds per foot", one thing is not like the other.
80,000 lbs is 40 short tons, 36 metric tons. The former is used in the USA as a 'ton'.
Its 74 ton in Sweden now I'm pretty sure, and 34 meter long, up from 25 meters and 64 ton...
This dude say”smaller European truck” max weight in America is 80.000lbs, is Sweden and Finland a logging truck can be close to 160.000lbs
Just for the speaker : We don't pronounce the "T" on "Renault" :) We pronounce like "Renô" :)
Depends on the country. Spain will say “Renol”, Britain would say “renau” and etc
Okay, how do you pronounce , for instance, Phoenix or …. Albuquerque?😂😂😂😂😂
Arkansas or aren'tkansas@@Corleone_Napoleone
tbh economy probably
80,000 pounds is 40 tons. If you’re referring to a different ton you should specify that as 2,000 pounds = 1 ton in the US.
Also most semi-trucks have GCWRs well above 80k lbs.
80,000 lbs is 36,000KG, or 36 METRIC tons. 1kg=2.2lbs.
@@alexclement7221: I understand that, along with a metric ton there are also long tons; specificity when there are numerous tons makes a difference.
0:23 Cool - 2-stroke trucks.
So horse power is also calculated differently in metric vs standard.
EU trucks are automatic but the gearboxes are the simpler AMT, because they add no extra load to the engine and are as fuel efficient as a manual one.
Also DAF belongs to Paccar so they get their engines too.
The hardest part of trucking is make money whit it, because when it's new is just put diesel on it and run, when you have to repair it o even replace the truck for a new one, you'll need a lot of money
It's about the timing when to sell your truck before the big repair bills are coming .
I would have expected that they don't care about weight at all in the US
Some people in the US ignore the legal limit of 80,000 lbs and just avoid weigh stations. I can't imagine if they went to the EU! "I saw the red light 2 miles away but I'm 200,000 lbs how did they expect me to stop?" 😂😂😂 "It's the cars fault!"
In Sweden there is many special licensens for 90 ton and up to 34 meters in length,they sure need 700+ hp engines.
I wonder if European diesel is different from American diesel where the European engines might not run right over here with the fuel that’s offered.
That is correct actually. That’s why there was recently a recall in the US for Chrysler products which used Bosch diesel fuel pumps. Diesel in the USA is very dirty and unprocessed compared to Europe where it is heavily refined with additives for cleaning and lubrication.
Most new semis in the us are automatic now btw.
USA is mostly flat and straight roads. You'd want the most fuel efficient tractor since diesel consumption can make or break your profit. Therefore aerodynamic long hooded trucks with smaller more fuel efficient motors is most feasible.
Yet still the European trucks still tend to be more fuel efficient
@@CrestFallxn Proof? Bigger engines and aerodynamics of a brick doesn't translate to fuel efficiency.
American trucks drive on straight flat highways where the engines nearly just idle on the highway at 70 mph with a body that's more aerodynamic than your eurobrick.
Also, Euro trucks have their own engines, where as American truck companies don't have their own engines besides Volvo that is from Sweden. Cummins, Detroit diesel companies may not be as developed as the ones in Europe. Cab trucks companies in the United States take what they get from these engine makers, in Europe they have direct competition.
When it comes to horsepower champs, I always thought it was the trucks in Australia that pull their long "road trains" that were the winners. I believe some of them can pull 6 trailers at a time. And I've heard the reason they use trucks to pull those loads through their outback is that it's difficult to keep steel rails from a real railroad from buckling in the intense heat which they deal with.
It comes down to population density in Australia, no point spending millions building a railway to a town with just a few thousand people in it (80% of our population live on the coast), so that's how our road trains first came about in the early days. In the US that same town would have a few million in it so a railway is justified. As for our trucks, we get both the US and European brands down here so we can have cab overs or long noses, the smallest hp motors right up to the Volvo 750hp and Scania's 770hp.
@@brendanedwards2277why is it better to spend millions building a road to a low-populated place than spend millions building a railway to the same place?
@@Dellvmnyam It's a case of one being done before the other, so the other isn't needed. We need roads to these places so therefore don't need the rail as freight can come in via that.
@@brendanedwards2277 why the road was built first instead of the railway? Railways became common much earlier than road-going cars.
@@DellvmnyamNot Australian, but I’m pretty sure a significant number of roads in the outback are made of dirt and have very little infrastructure requirements compared to rail or paved roads
2:55! 40-44t! 3:00 3:17 76t!!!
Every Motorhome RV should have 770HP to get to the Sand Dunes quicker,
Engines don’t have HP they are given a HP rating dependent on application, fuel costs, longevity requirements to overhaul etc. ! Besides maintenance products and maintenance practices, there is a direct relationship between engine size, fuel burn rate and wear life to overhaul !
Most importantly is torque
It wouldn’t really matter. Without watching the video horsepower is simply a measurement of work being done, not power. As long as US trucks can make 2000ft lbs of torque shit were all good then.
Only reason I could guess they make more horsepower is they simply rev higher allowing more work to be performed. Let me know if I’m wrong, but torque is your rotational power, fk horsepower.
Because we have the amount of horsepower and torque we need for our roads in the United States
I saw trucks moving about 35mph on interstate highways in mountain areas such as Arizona, Utah with hazard lights on while cars are doing 70mph. Meanwhile, in Europe, I also saw trucks doing 80kph(50mph) in long uphill in the Swiss and Austrian Alps. America is not always flat, they do not have enough power. Trucks also do 70mph, some even do 75mph if it's flat.
It's not about power, it's about torque. US trucks have plenty of torque.
@TheWholeGrainBread_Real true. It's also about governing engines, with HP, RPMs & speed limiters. Not that i recommend this but in the late 90s I was a young driver with a wide open 60 series 500 Detroit with 13 manual on a 300" wheel base. Can't remember the rear end. But I could do 90+ mph at the bottom of a 6% or 7% grade, drop a gear or 2 and pull 80,000 lbs up at 65 or 75mph... 🤣 pissed people off when I did it and everyone else is going 35 with their flashers on. Them days are over...
@sonza68 In 1998, I had my cruise set at 90 mph going East to Chicago on the "Super Slab" in Nebraska at 2am. in the morning... Two sets of headlights were gaining on me in my mirrors quickly. It was two beautiful large car Peterbuilts pulling loaded cattle trailers.(Bull Racks)... We ran at roughly 115 to 120 mph for a couple of hours together, talking on the radio until went our separate ways...
European weight is 44 tonnes, not 44 tons.
Short ton (UK) = 2240 lbs
Short ton (US) = 2000 lbs
Metric tonne = 2204 lbs
44.000 kg = 44 ton in the part of Europe im from, hope the video made sense anyway
Unless you work for a company that limits the output. We have 405hp in the trucks where I work.
Boy DAF is PACCAR powered!
This video sounded a bit like it was written by chatgpt
Well was written by me 😳
Agreed. It sounded like a lot of vacuous fluff statements that string together grammatically but really have not much information in them.
Wondering what’s about road trains in oz
Most road trains are a minimum 600hp. There are a few that are smaller, but most of those are older than 2010. A lot of companies have gone to using European trucks for road trains because they’re more fuel efficient and are still pretty comfortable despite being a cab over. Mack here use the 685hp “Mack” motor, which is a Volvo. Kenworth and western star tend to run Cummins in their bigger trucks, I think they get up to about the 620hp mark. There’s still a lot of older trucks pulling road trains around too, but most of them are over 500hp.
I use to drive a Volvo with 3-4 trailers and get roughly 1.2km/litre. I done the same in a kenworth not that long back, 600hp Cummins, was getting 700metres/litre. Not a wonder they’re going European over American.
I always hear Europeans complain about weight limitations in the US. More weight usually means better payout.
“More weight” also means more wear and tear, more fuel. In the end , that “payout” cost YOU more $$$. I do not haul ANYTHING. Over 25k lb. My steer tires have 120k miles on them and I still have easily another 75-80k left. It is all about #s. Of course , if you are the boss!😉
@@Corleone_Napoleone
More weight also means less trips.
@@1wun1 I am speaking (strictly) from the perspective of a transport company. I am paid by the mile.😉
@@Corleone_Napoleone
I get your point. I meant that more allowed weight per truck means less trucks needed by shippers, or less trips for carriers.
There is also the factor that European trucks often don't have quite as long of a haul as American trucks.
Spain ,poland
The American government have put in place for american trucks to be sold mainly in the u.s because they don't want any competition for their manufacturers, like what they did in the 80s and 90s with not allowing Japanese sports cars into the u.s market because it would've out sell the american gas guzzler v.8 engines with their smaller engines at a smaller price
"M-A-N" xD Can call it "Man".
In my country we're starting to use more powerful engines even with not very heavy cargoes because it's more economical that way and the engine tend to live more.
EU went to smaller units (down from 14 to 10 litres) for lightness, then stuffed them full of compression to compensate.
Here in America you gotta tune the engine to make more power than factory
They do the same thing in Europe. It’s plug and play for over 800hp for those Volvos and Scania. Pretty sure Mercedes you can do the same thing. Most European companies build those motors to put out a heap more power than they do at factory and then detune them. You need the right program to open them up to their full power.
I've seen Scanias with 900, 1000 or even with 1200HP in Europe. Search for Sarantos Scania videos.
Did somebody in the comments seriously claim that Nordic countries have superior engine technology than the US? That’s hilarious
The engines in us trucks are all derated. Look at the c15 marine engines if you want to see what the engine is capable of. The c18 makes 1000hp
I will put my last truck up against any European truck. 13L., 18 speed, 3.9 rears, 24.5 tall. I might not do 80 mph, BUT out west I can walk Grapevine at 50 at 78,000! It is all in the setup.
I am sorry, but you need to compare engine weights, displacement and torque along with horsepower and the torque and horsepower curve. A supped up car engine can have a thousand horsepower but would be totally worthless in a truck.
This channel has significant amount of on and off incorrect information. 1. Mack does not make engine. It uses Volvo engine with Mack software and it drives like a Mack . 2. Going up the hill horsepower doesn't have significant contribution but torque does.
For the love of all that is holy, please specify you are talking U.K. tons and not USA tons when talking 80,000 lbs = 36 tons as in USA tons its 40 tons @ time stamp 2:46!!!
In Short. Europe has the better, more powerful, more refined truck engines.
America is just like "Slap that sht on there bro, we need to go" and puts some totally random engine which should do the job somehow.
it had been it's replay
In line 6 is the way...
US has one of the lowest weight limit corresponds to it’s shit infrastructure, EU has 40-70 ton, China has 55 ton
Australian road trains can be up to 200 tonnes.
DAF use Paccar engines.
American trucks are badass
Has an American truck driver ever said " I want the engine with less Horse power"
My boss said that with his concrete mixers. 71,000 lbs gross and 250 HP. I'm embarrassed to drive it on the freeway.
Guess you don't do a lot of research. Some of my trucks have horsepower measured in 4 didgets
No they dont so guess you have to do a bit research 👍
Which trucks you have?
Your trucks are over 1000hp? What are you smoking??
@l_uminary7190 one Dailey driver with a single turbo KTA600 and my play truck with a 12V71
@@davidchapman1519 So basically hot rods. This video is about regular production trucks tho.
80,000lbs isn't the max in the U.S.
@Truck Topia, you really didn't go in depth with this video did you, why didn't you explain how fuel efficient the European engines are compared to the US engines? Also you could have mentioned about how green the European engine is compared to US engines, everytime you make a comparison video, you NEVER point out how much better things are done in Europe, again your American basis shines through. European engines have fuel returns in double figures running at higher weights than in thee USA, another fact you failed to mention.
Where's your video?
A USA has more hp n tq that u can imagine trust me but it's way more efficient too for racing they 4000 hp n 7000 tq plus but there's Detroit diesel 14 liter Long block pushing way more then 700 but it's about efficiency besides my file the turbo brings up n down the numbers n more fuel efficient with the American e axles Allison 100 P or duals 136 p or meritor14xe remote control acts like 15 liter 50 mpg hybrid u can bring down the hp racing they don't even use injectors but nitrous nozzle instead with check valve ringless pistons for extreme high pressure waves
BR transportador .💙 💛 🤍 💚