ISX vs C15 fuel economy (and 379vsW900)

[Deezle1]

If i had the money, id personally go with a 379x peterbuilt, the biggest Detroit they have or a huge cat, a 13 speed auto shift or manual ( i like to row gears ) heavy rears, mid set forward front, jake, lo-profile tires, spare and larger fuel tanks, 70" sleeper...i dont know where you'll be driving all the time, wether on roads or high way so i couldnt say what rear ratios i would get.....just thinkin out loud tho offering my friendly opinion.

Choose what ya like....just make sure you get it all

Still truckin,
Dom :draw

 

[Pacific]

Cam the 244" wheelbase is the max wheelbase allowed in B.C. coupled with a 53' trailer its one long combination. Most logging trucks have 244wb but they don't have a 53' long trailer.

When I went for my CDL I only took a 3 but the straight truck I drove was a Ford 9000 with a 244wb all I can say is making turns in the older parts of Vancouver was tough.

For a short haul like that I don't know if you really need a big shack sleeper I know the Glencoe guys don't have big sleepers on their trucks and they are running from Alberta to B.C. and up and down the Coast.

Have you considered going with a Mack ya Paccars are nice but Mack is making changes and building decent highway tractors. Fred Hemer who is a member here works for Island/Naniamo Mack.

If you are going to go with Kenworth you would have to go with a T-800 or if you go with a Pete 387 or 386 the 379 with a 244wb is a good highway cruiser but trying to navigate city traffic

 

[Camstyn]

Yeah Mack makes a very nice truck, I'm just not sold on their engines. I drove a 2000 E7-460 with the 18spd, loaded with the big standup sleeper, and while the truck probably was the nicest I've ever driven, the engine really didn't do anything for me.

I'm not too concerned about the wheelbase, it's going to be like steering a barge through whitewater rapids trying to get in/out of the city but with the time of day I'll be arriving/departing traffic should be light anyways.

I looked at the black 379X in the showroom at the Pete dealer the other day and while it's a beautiful truck, I think a loaded 379 would be just as nice and require less upkeep.

 

[Camstyn]

BTW the main reason I want the big shack is because I won't have time to sleep at home, I'll be living in the truck for 4 days at a time while my hired driver will be doing likewise for 6 days at a time. I know we could manage with 48" flat tops if need be but I'd rather go with something that will feel more like home.

 

[Pacific]

If you are going to be spending alot of time in the truck I can see why you want a bigger sleeper.

 

[Iron Horse]

If you are hauling 80,000lbs or less, why not go with a C12 Cat? Lighter engine, decent power, decent milage, and so far, they seem to be holding up better then the C15 does. I don't have much experience with the ISX motors, but I know there were some issues with the early ACCERT motors, which I am sure have been resolved.

 

[Pacific]

A C-12 is a little small for the hills we have here in B.C. the C-12 would be good for a in town truck but if your running the into the Interior of B.C. and back good power is needed. A big block engine with straight pipes rattling the windows is always good

The thing is you always want to spec the truck as a train tractor because the resale is better. So what I mean by train tractor is big power 18spd transmission super 40s or full 46s with locks, heavier rated suspension. Legal gross here in B.C. is 140,000lbs or 63,500kgs you want a truck that will gross that.

 

[Camstyn]

You know, the C12 is an interesting point though. I'm not concerned at all about performance, just fuel mileage. What would I expect out of a C12 pulling light 53 footers, compared to a C15? Hell, I'll even go with a 335horse C10 if it will save me on fuel, but I don't know if it will since it would probably need to be running almost wide open most of the time.

I'm in this thing for 5 years and a 1mpg improvement will make me $170,000 richer. A 2mpg savings and you get the picture. I'll climb those hills in 1st gear if need be!

I've been thinking more practical lately and looking at the Western Stars with a Detroit or Mercedes, but if a Pete with a lower powered C12 will get the same mileage or better, I'm game.

 

[maniac]

Although I run a W900, I would consider a more aerodynamic truck if fuel mileage was that important, not that it isn't,just that this one is paid for and I'm not looking to rejoin the "book of the month club"

KW T600 for example, better aero than W900 and same interior, also great resale.

Volvo, also aerodynamic, resale not great though. Mack is pretty much Volvo now, even Peterbilt has a new aero model.

Kind of a cross between a 379 and 387, saw its pic somewhere, gotta do a search.

Also I believe the bigger engines get the better mileage, they don't have to work as hard.

 

[maniac]

Peterbilt 386

Not bad looking at all

 

[apextrans]

I'm with maniac on the bigger motor/better MPG. Something else to keep in mind with regard to the C-12 in the Pete's. You're talking about being out of this gig in 5-6 years, right? Then add to that your legal gross of 140000lbs. Even if that set-up makes you a $hitpot full of money, I think the resale value will be horrible. Who would consider buying them when you're done having that smaller motor & needing to pull close to gross weight? Since your talking about a relatively short timespan, I would keep resale in the front of my mind. I don't care what my wife says SIZE MATTERS JMO

 

[Camstyn]

There are so many variables it makes my head spin, I wish there were an obvious choice.. I'm not going to sweat it too much until I find out for sure if I've got the job.

You hear so many conflicting reports, like Detroits getting 8mpg, guys with 550 cats pushing 7mpg, and mercedes supposedly blowing the doors off of detroits, fuel mileage wise.. I dunno. Then I hear of some Cats not being able to break 4mpg, Detroits neeeding rebuilds at 400k, it makes my head hurt!

 

[DBogo]

well pete sure does make a fine rig but have you looked into the western stars there real nice trucks too

 

[Pacific]

Western Star does build good trucks but I think the only engine choices you have now are the Detroit and Mercedes. I don't think the Western Stars have become Freightliners with a different name I mean quality wise.

I have talked with quite a few Glencoe guys they don't mind the Internationals they say the trucks are pretty basic. They use nothing but International now I think part ownership in a IHC dealer probably one of the reasons why.

I do agree a larger engine will get better mpg even if its derated abit over a smaller displacement engine thats b*lls to the walls all the time. Like I said the C-12 at 430hp would be good for a town tractor.

I know o/ops from Aggressive Transport that have trucks with M-11 power but they do get fairly decent fuel mileage but they climb the hills slower they are only doing short hauls.

The driver behind the wheel makes or breaks the fuel mileage too you could have a good engine that gets good mileage but it won't do it if you don't drive it right.

 

[maniac]

The driver behind the wheel makes or breaks the fuel mileage too you could have a good engine that gets good mileage but it won't do it if you don't drive it right.

That pretty much sums it up, sad part is a guy buys a truck with whatever specs, and as soon as someone says you shoulda done this or that, and then the doubt takes over and he tells all: "its great" pulls great, rides great, great all the way around, trouble is it ain't and he knows it but won't admit it.

I've been an owner operator since 1977, seen or heard most of it, I don't say ALL, because everytime I think I heard it all, along comes another tale of some sort. :***:

My 600Hp Cat best ever mileage 6.8 empty tank trailer from El Paso to Houston, cruise on 68 MPH, truck had just turned 100,000 miles. Once in a while now it might get 6, more often mid 5's.

So Cam, ya yet???