730 with 2.47 rear end gearing too tall?

[beyerjf]

One of the problems with a spec like a rear end ratio in the low 2's, or say the front bumper/air dam on the new Cascadia, or a short enough wheelbase to keep a 53' trailer within 36" inches of the back of the cab is at some point in the real world something is going to get damaged or shorten component life nullifying the monetary gain from the fuel economy.

You see the pictures on the manufacturer websites of this beautiful aerodynamic tractor going down a deserted highway while the ad copy blathers on about efficiency. What I see when I walk through the truck stop are bumper after bumper torn off and not repaired, trucks on the hook because the clutch gave it up at 300,000 miles or side extensions bent or removed. 

 Indeed Volvo just came out with their " new "regional tractor, the VNR 300-600-640. From their website:

The new Volvo truck has both a shorter wheel base and front bumper to the back of the cab length, making it better for regional hauling of fuel and food as well as urban pickup and delivery operations. And it’s much more effective when compared with a big rig designed to ship goods across country. 

A truck is useless unless it can pick up and deliver a load. And these more specialized specs have gone too far in eliminating the versatility a truck must have in the real world.

By the way, I have one word for the rep above with his pitch about urban pickup and delivery..

 

 

 

[I'mdonewiththis forum]

I talked to Gregg Shields of rvhaulers at the rally in Hutchinson, Kansas last year and he told me that for what the intentions are of the RV hauler crowd, anything with a 2:XX would be a decent choice for economy. It would be different if you were expecting to get 80,000 pounds moving instead of 35,000 pounds (at least in my estimation).