I've only driven a few miles with this setup. We'll see.

But now I have a huge problem. Got a trailer shop to install a box, told them how to install it(weld brackets to the bottom of the deck). Yet they drilled through the main beam. See other thread.

 

[quote]Plus I'm not sure you're correct anyway about hoods helping flats mpg? Companies like Arrow and Anderson Truck Service are running areo more & more. Take a look at the trucks they show on their website...Almost all, even HH are pictured with areo trucks.[quote]
I went to that site. None of the 4 trucks shown are are aero...they all have side stacks and none have fairings. And horror of horrors, one may even be a W900L. And none are high rise bunks.

I saw a 2 long nose Pete's today that were pulling dump boxes. They had the mid rise bunk that was the same height as the trailer and they had the same length of hood as a 379, but they were more of a sloped needle nose design and they had that narrow ---dare I say aerodynamic---cab that is so common in a long hood. Contrast that with the so called (cough, choke) "aero" designed pete with it's massive wide and high cab....hell those bulbous pigs aren't far from a cabover.

I say again, there is more to being slippery than the length of your hood.

 

[QUOTE=rank;434121][quote]Plus I'm not sure you're correct anyway about hoods helping flats mpg? Companies like Arrow and Anderson Truck Service are running areo more & more. Take a look at the trucks they show on their website...Almost all, even HH are pictured with areo trucks.
Did you ever think they be buying aero trucks for the set back axle, not the aero dynamics, it's hard to get 20,000 on a steer axle with a set foward axle.

 

Here's what Transport Topics was quoting the pres of Transport Forecasting to say about the decline in CAT's market share and the horrible mpg with the stricter 07/08 EPA regs:>

"In 2006, Caterpillar held a leading 28.3% of the Class 8 market, versus 25% for Cummins (10-8, p. 5).

In June, Caterpillar said it would stop selling heavy-duty truck engines in the United States after 2009 (6-16, p. 1).

“Many of the truckers were already moving away from Cat prior to the announcement [of its withdrawal],” Eric Starks, president of transport forecasting firm FTR Associates, Nashville, Ind., told Transport Topics. “This change happened in fairly short order during 2007 and derived from the problems Caterpillar had getting their engine up to standards.”

Here's another from the article:> "Chris Brady, president of Commercial Motor Vehicle Consulting, Long Island, N.Y., said that because Caterpillar did not disclose its intention to halt production of heavy duty engines until mid-June, data for the first half of 2008 did not show whether Caterpillar will suffer a further deep drop-off in sales."

Here's the full article:> Transport Topics Online | Cummins Adds to Market Share in 2008 as Caterpillar?s Engine Sales Decline

 

[QUOTE=rank;434121] Yes Rank... I heard the same comparison in Q3/07 when things started slowing for hood sales. I was bidding on a couple of wholesale priced higher miles 05 379 exhd's w/Platinum 18 spd's & C-15's. They (10) were from a small fleet operator out of Orlando. Who ran his trucks West Coast turns with reefers.

I talked to the previous trade-in owner (to Rush Pete) who told me he was a 15-year longhood CAT man. What changed my mind was when he told me he was sick of the horrible mileage he got from them and had traded-in for all 387's w/Cummins. Even though most of his drivers called them "a cabover with a hood" and they'd quite for another job driving longhoods. He said "too bad, and after running them a while, he'd never go back". Rush’s wholesaler pretty much confirmed the initial trend occurring throughout the industry.

By the way, only one driver quite then came back anyway...

"A cabover with a hood" ...Yep! But they get more mpg's, especially with Cummins! Same for Volvo 670/780's, KW T600's /T-660’s or T-2000's & Pete 386's, which for areo-cabs are the ones with the best resale values. :

 

And before ACERT they had over 40% of the market. Last I checked they were around 10%.

 

Allan, there is certain difference between "quantity" and "quality". "Seiko" sure has bigger market share, than "Omega". Does it means, that "Omega" is a worse watch?

 

Per my previous comments...because they had too much trouble meeting the 07/08 stricter standards, due to all the additionally required emission devices that were added to the 07/08 engines. From what I hear, all new next generation engines are having problems.

Just didn't have the will to hang with unrealistic big-gov regs any longer!

 

When they're both in the same price market, yes it would mean they're a worse watch because the market has clearly spoken.

Cat is a loser.

 

Following that logic, the biggest "loser", was WS, b4 Freightshaker got em....