noteven Posted August 22, 2015 Report Share Posted August 22, 2015 http://www.kijiji.ca/v-heavy-trucks/calgary/2003-freightliner-argosy/1094573939?enableSearchNavigationFlag=true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timon Posted August 22, 2015 Report Share Posted August 22, 2015 First thing that comes to mind is that being a cab over you loose the crush zone of a conventional rig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark and Dale Bruss Posted August 22, 2015 Report Share Posted August 22, 2015 Depends what you are planning on crashing into. You might be above the collision zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
remoandiris Posted August 22, 2015 Report Share Posted August 22, 2015 Several more feet behind the cab to carry "stuff" while maintaining overall length. That is a nice point to cabovers. Since you would likely own it for years, have you researched the quiet/comfort levels of the truck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob86ZZ4 Posted August 22, 2015 Report Share Posted August 22, 2015 Jeff has an Argosy. I think he likes it. I like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob86ZZ4 Posted August 22, 2015 Report Share Posted August 22, 2015 $17k CDN? Seems pretty reasonable. Looks like kind of a short sleeper though. Might be hard to equip with enough items to license as an RV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Posted August 22, 2015 Report Share Posted August 22, 2015 Having had cabovers when it was necessary to carry long pipe in the "short states" I would think twice about this. They are a pia to get in and out of and since you sit over the front axle seem rougher riding. We actually still have an 85 Freightliner cabover. Use for a water truck in spray season. There are a lot of better choices in my opinion. We got a 2004 Volvo 780 for 10k. Had some issues with the egr that we fixed with a delete kit. Awesome truck so far. Has air ride front axle, lots of room, and a neat work station. Just 1 opinion though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barncats Posted August 22, 2015 Report Share Posted August 22, 2015 If you are registering it in Alberta, you won't need to worry about Motorhome/RV status. You can register it as a private vehicle. With that many kms, I'd be leary of the engine if it hasn't had an inframe done yet. But for that price, might be worth getting and paying for an inframe yourself. Just something to consider Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Star Dreamer Posted August 23, 2015 Report Share Posted August 23, 2015 Having had cabovers when it was necessary to carry long pipe in the "short states" I would think twice about this. They are a pia to get in and out of and since you sit over the front axle seem rougher riding. We actually still have an 85 Freightliner cabover. Use for a water truck in spray season. There are a lot of better choices in my opinion. We got a 2004 Volvo 780 for 10k. Had some issues with the egr that we fixed with a delete kit. Awesome truck so far. Has air ride front axle, lots of room, and a neat work station. Just 1 opinion though. The Argosy that Jeff has is very easy to get into, actually even easier that a non-cab over as it has steps that come out when you open the doors. We think an Argosy would make a great RV hauler when you want to limit your overall length and even if you don't. The rides is much improved over regular cab overs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G&K Posted August 23, 2015 Report Share Posted August 23, 2015 My understanding is that all those steps were replaced on a recall. Salt didn't like them or something. Given a free budget and free choice I would have a 750 hp Volvo F H and never look back. Geo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Heiser Posted August 23, 2015 Report Share Posted August 23, 2015 I'd love to have an Argosy to us as a platform for my RV hauler. It would make it much easier to get to the 65' magic number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G&K Posted August 23, 2015 Report Share Posted August 23, 2015 I completely agree Chad. I just came across the ferry to the Island today. They run you up and down twice. Apparently the scale is calibrated by Weights and Measures Canada. I am 66.9 feet long. I have no problem rounding that to 67 as I thought I was give or take 70. Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noteven Posted August 23, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 23, 2015 I should have said we aren't thinking of an Argosy. I just thought it seemed to be a reasonable price for a project truck if someone wanted a cab over and some cab to end of frame real estate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Mayer Posted August 23, 2015 Report Share Posted August 23, 2015 Given a free budget and free choice I would have a 750 hp Volvo F H and never look back. Geo Me too, George. Wonder if we can get a fleet price Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deezl Smoke Posted August 23, 2015 Report Share Posted August 23, 2015 I should have said we aren't thinking of an Argosy. I just thought it seemed to be a reasonable price for a project truck if someone wanted a cab over and some cab to end of frame real estate. Darn written text can do that once in a while. But for the topic, not advice to you, modern COE trucks get the same fuel mileage as the common conventional. I grew up driving a coe, 1962 KW with a 280 cummins, 5+4 trans and center point steering. Only gripe with the coe on my mind would be getting used to securing your personals inside the truck before you tilt the cab for any maintenance. I recall some broken windows when drivers forgot to secure the sleeper contents and tipped the cab. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncohauler Posted August 23, 2015 Report Share Posted August 23, 2015 Darn written text can do that once in a while. But for the topic, not advice to you, modern COE trucks get the same fuel mileage as the common conventional. I grew up driving a coe, 1962 KW with a 280 cummins, 5+4 trans and center point steering. Only gripe with the coe on my mind would be getting used to securing your personals inside the truck before you tilt the cab for any maintenance. I recall some broken windows when drivers forgot to secure the sleeper contents and tipped the cab. Really sucks when you leave a full big gulp in a cup holder and a mechanic comes along and tilts the hood not knowing. Also had the pants scared off me a couple times training new drivers. It takes a while getting used to driving with your arm right on the white line. They would always drift too far to the right riding the shoulder or just missing park cars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noteven Posted August 23, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 23, 2015 .... Only gripe with the coe on my mind would be getting used to securing your personals inside the truck before you tilt the cab for any maintenance. I recall some broken windows when drivers forgot to secure the sleeper contents and tipped the cab. 'Specially the Porta-potty from your "motorhome conversion" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthofBorder Posted August 23, 2015 Report Share Posted August 23, 2015 I will go for this Volvo FH 750 HP as long as white color. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmzero Posted August 23, 2015 Report Share Posted August 23, 2015 GoPro has a nice cabover setup they take to events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beyerjf Posted August 23, 2015 Report Share Posted August 23, 2015 First, the kick out steps were never recalled, they are available on the Argosy you can order from Freightliner today as a glider. There is a new big yellow one at the proving grounds Freightliner uses( the former Studebaker Proving grounds) I am sitting 2 miles from in New Carlisle IN. They are not any cheaper or more expensive used than any other configuration, gone are the days when Hunt or Schneider cabovers were dirt cheap. If length and maneuverability is an important consideration they can't be beat. Fatality accident rates for cabover drivers are no different than conventionals, never have been. Personally I would order a DAF XF. Like this: http://www.daf.com/en/products/euro-6-range/daf-xf-euro-6# Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mant Posted August 23, 2015 Report Share Posted August 23, 2015 How hard is it or possible to get one like that sweet DAF shipped to the US? Seems like the RV hauler's dream! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Heiser Posted August 24, 2015 Report Share Posted August 24, 2015 I haven't researched this on my own, but maybe one of you will know. What is the largest sleeper size you can get on an Argosy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buscrusher Posted August 24, 2015 Report Share Posted August 24, 2015 I haven't researched this on my own, but maybe one of you will know. What is the largest sleeper size you can get on an Argosy?Having driven buses for 28+ years I'm a fan of cabovers since I'm used to the forward-mounted controls. I think the way Freightliner measures the Argosy is from the front bumper to the back of the cab, which is basically windshield-to-the-back-wall. The biggest number I've seen is a 108". So maybe do an experiment and put your tape measure at the windshield and go to the back wall of your T2000 and see how close it is to that.On edit, I see Jeff's 110" number...I had a feeling I was off, but couldn't remember by how much... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beyerjf Posted August 24, 2015 Report Share Posted August 24, 2015 The biggest Argosy cab, like mine they refer to as a 110" BBC, (bumper to back of cab). The largest European cabovers are 88" BBC because of the Euro over all length limitation of 54'. There are 2 problems with importing any new truck into the US. 1st, there is still a 25% tariff left over from the bad old days(1970's) trying to keep Japanese compact pickups out of the US. The second has to do with the way the European Union tests an engine for emissions, which is slightly different than our EPA. The Engine and Truck manufacturers have been asking for years for a standard that is universal, but to no avail. They are up to Euro level 6 there, we are at approx Euro level 5 now. So, as an example, when Paccar decided to start using a DAF(which is owned by them) engine in their Kenworth and Peterbilts, the built an engine plant in Alabama, but couldn't build and install the exact same engine already used and developed by DAF. They had to modify it to meet EPA standards, at some significant cost. All of the manufacturers have decided that the cabover market is not large enough to justify the considerable engineering and bureaucratic costs, so they are not here. Of course I tend to disagree, but then again I just drove my 1951 Studebaker to the Studebaker national meet to gather with 400 other Luddites.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deezl Smoke Posted August 24, 2015 Report Share Posted August 24, 2015 First, the kick out steps were never recalled, they are available on the Argosy you can order from Freightliner today as a glider. There is a new big yellow one at the proving grounds Freightliner uses( the former Studebaker Proving grounds) I am sitting 2 miles from in New Carlisle IN. They are not any cheaper or more expensive used than any other configuration, gone are the days when Hunt or Schneider cabovers were dirt cheap. If length and maneuverability is an important consideration they can't be beat. Fatality accident rates for cabover drivers are no different than conventionals, never have been. Personally I would order a DAF XF. Like this: http://www.daf.com/en/products/euro-6-range/daf-xf-euro-6# The idea of "first one to the wreck" etc., falls into the same line as the old cars that were made with lots of metal are safer than today's engineered cars with crumple zones etc. Much of it was started and supported by old coe drivers that finally got a conventional when they retired. The ease of entry was so much easier "then" that you could fall out of a conventional and not break as many bones as falling out of a coe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.