There is a maximum vehicle length though, and a maximum weight, the former ensures vehicle maneuverability, the latter serves road stability, bridge specifications, optimized no-waste parking provisions for pass-through parking spots in said truck stops edit: and ferry capacity. Ireland, Finland are connected by Ferry.
Manufacturing is pretty much internationalized, reusing parts and designs globally. Freightliner and Daimler are one company, for example.
Fuel economy is indeed a point, albeit the combo of trailer and truck define the overall fuel economy. As the trailer usually is equivalent to a standard 40ft container, the ideal truck has a boring standard form, too.
The text is German, the pictures are self explanatory-ish though wrt optimal and sub optimal wind résistance: https://en.vda.de/dam/vda/publications/FAT-SCHRIFTENREIHE%20...
There is something like a 70-90% parts commonality between a sleeper cabover and a conventional tractor, indeed - the only parts that differ are body, frame, and a couple interior pieces - even drivetrains are shared - and commonly shared between europe and NA - though European engines do not have the best reputation among US drivers (neither the Volvo or Mercedes Class 8 engine is well thought of - parts are expensive and take a long time, and sadly they're needed with alarming frequency). Indeed, many interior parts can be shared between a cabover and conventional truck, including the dash, and most of the interior appointments.
I typically do this in incognito windows as I do not always want for instance English and Italian results.
For example, a 2mx2mx0.5m pack can be slotted between the cabin and trailer.
A 2mx6mx0.25cm can be laid on the roof ?
Etc..
(I have seen demos of an Australian truck where the fossil engine is removed, and the pack is inserted from the front.)
The maximum length of an articulated vehicle in Germany (and most of europe) is 16.5m or 54 ft. [1]
The maximum length of a vehicle in California is 65 ft. California is one of the more restrictive states when it comes to vehicle length simply because of the age of the road network.
The longest vehicle you'll see in the states are turnpike doubles, which are around 130 ft long, the longest total permitted vehicle length in Europe is 65 ft.
The US used cabovers before vehicle length rules were liberalized, and thats why we don't anymore, drivers prefer conventional trucks, the ride better, largely handle better, and are safer for the driver.
[1] https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/dimensions...
Sort of.
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/legal-truck-a...
The STAA (Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982) trucks can have unlimited length cabs but are primarily limited to interstates and marked state routes.
So while yes, I used California's state limit as an easy from of comparison, because it is one of more restrictive western states - you're correct in that the STAA allows a longer tractor. In the end, the rules are lightly enforced - but the state limits guide the total length of combination. It's why (for example) you almost never see doubles being pulled by anything other than a day cab.
There is also the weight factor - even if you could legally have 90ft trailers and 25ft cabs, it would probably put you over the weight limit for many roadways and negate the savings.
Personally I'd optimize a bit more for everyone else's safety, since you know, there's more of them. Plus a semi is a multi-ton missile going 90kmph.
School buses typically have a large nose in front of the driver. Are they unsafe?
https://www.mercedes-benz-bus.com/content/dam/mbo/markets/co...
Intuitively it would make sense that being able to see in front of you with no obstruction would have an impact on safety. How much, I can't say ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> School buses typically have a large nose in front of the driver. Are they unsafe?
Guess what, European buses don't have a nose, either :-)))
I have seen four wheelers do all sorts of stupid shit around trucks, stuff that endangers everyones lives, I want that extra little bit of hood in front of me.
I agree that going to a hybrid model is good, where its a short nose conventional cab, like the Cascadia - rather than a long hood-high hood model.
Interesting, in Germany there happen 4 truck accidents on highways every day, every third one of those is a truck driving into the end of a traffic jam [0], in total they apparently cause more deaths than speeding [1].
[0] https://www.autofahrerseite.eu/sicherheit/524-lkw-unfall-sta...
[1] https://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/lkw-unfaelle-fordern-...
A cabover has better close up visibility, not distance.
What makes the road network in CA so old compared to eastern states that had roads built so much earlier?
A lot of highways in California have warnings like "no services for 100 miles" and you won't encounter a lot of other vehicles (similar to Nevada and Oregon adjacent).
What road is that? How about the Pennsylvania Turnpike?
Differences are typically that a freeway is designed and constructed to allow maximum speed and no interruptions/stops (hence all the on/off ramps, lack of lights, lack of toll booths), and is available to the general public for use without significant restrictions or costs.
Which make it far easier to use, faster, etc. the interstate highway system was designed largely using the model.
One key thing at the time I believe was the grade separation/right of way stuff, which I think had only occurred on toll roads for any distance before.
Previously almost all highways ended up having to stop or intersect with other roads (and hence stop signs, or traffic lights, or whatever). Most highways are still that way, outside of major arterials.
Most major arterial highways are the same as freeways now everywhere of course, but I think that’s more about economic factors. California I think was just the first mover on it (and got exposed to those same economic factors earlier than most).
At the time (and still does, though it gets less press now), California was a huge oil state, and was at the forefront of designing and building refineries too.
It's pretty natural both have somewhat differing regulations in regards to transportation.
One non obvious thing in article; apparently up until 1986 both US and Europe had a strict limit on length of trailer + truck, which is a clear incentive to shorter cabs (gets you more trailer). In 86 US relaxed this, correlates pretty well with the fall off on cab-over designs.
Do you have any idea why dump trucks make them self so much longer without providing any more load capacity?
Edit: Here is an example. You could fit another truck in the space between the truck and the trailer: https://d2uhsaoc6ysewq.cloudfront.net/53248/Dump-Trucks-West...
As for load, these trucks are completely loaded, there is no waste. This is simply because the things that a tipper transports (bitumen, dirt, grain, gravel etc.) are very dense. Load limits, at least in Australia, are based on the amount of axles under the vehicle, so the only way to increase the load capacity of these trucks is to increase axle count. Example: https://www.aeitransport.com.au/biggest-load-to-be-moved-in-...
The image of the truck and dog you linked seems especially long. This might be a specialised setup for roadworks, where the driver can actually tip the load (in a controlled manner) through the drawbar and drive the dog over the top of it. The longer drawbar would leave room for the tipping body on the truck to raise completely, and also lower the angles experienced by the hitch if the driver offloads too much material between the truck and dog.
My father and grandfather spent a lot of time reading the laws and charts every time they'd build out a new truck or trailer to try and maximize what they could haul. More axels allows for more weight, that seems obvious, but more distance is required between the truck and trailer as well.
It gets to be a really fun problem when one state wants a tongue/drawbar length of 28' and the neighboring state says that is too long and only wants 16'. What to do? Make the length adjustable and switch it over at the state line.
The last and biggest combo they ran was over 100' long, 9 axels, 34 tires and hauled 80,000 pounds. I don't remember the gross weight.
Cabovers had all of those things too.
But trucking in Europe is a mess with massive companies squeezing truckers and importing cheaper workers from wherever to keep salaries low and conditions shitty.
At least one sector where Europe out-big-corps US?
> makes it harder for a single competitor to play into the both markets
I don't think this is the case, because many of the top European and American brands are owned by the same conglomerates. For example Paccar owns DAF in Europe and Kenworth and Peterbilt in America.
I find it hard to believe. There are tons of trucks, having multi-day cross-country runs. I know a few truckers, they all have. They sleep in their cabs. Sometimes there are 2 truckers, so they can swap whenever limits reached.
I see trucks from different countries any time I hit the road. If you ride on German autobahn, there is a never-ending stream of trucks from different countries.
IMO it's entirely down to the road networks. Driving across the US is like driving across one very broad road network. Driving across Europe is like driving on many fragmented, narrow road networks.
There is a big difference between the motorways in a country like the Netherlands vs those in Moldova [0]
There is often also vastly different regulations in terms of vehicle safety requirements, and many other differences, the combination of which also leads to quite different per capita traffic deaths [1]
[0] https://landgeist.com/2021/09/07/the-best-and-worst-roads-in...
[1] https://www.euronews.com/2018/12/07/which-countries-in-europ...
Ironic, because back in the 70's when there were more CoE designs driving around in the US, it was generally known through crash tests that CoE cab trucks were a lot less safe than conventional cab trucks in front-end collisions because of the driver's distance to the collision.
If CoE trucks have gotten safer in front-end collisions, it's because a lot of engineering work has been done to mitigate this old problem.
Common perception in America (contrary to actual testing) believed having all that bulk in front made a conventional truck safer.
There's a hood in front of you for conventional, and I guess crumple zone deceleration comes in to play there? But as this article mentioned US trucks have a much higher average/top speed so you're probably just as likely to go through the window.
> Ironic, because back in the 70's when there were more CoE designs driving around in the US, it was generally known through crash tests that CoE cab trucks were a lot less safe than conventional cab trucks in front-end collisions
That's not ironic: safety in collisions from one direction and safety for avoiding collisions from the same direction are very different and often opposed things.
Back then we barely had seat belts, let alone airbags, adaptive cruise control, automated braking in case of collision, blind spot detectors, etc.
Furthermore truck logistics in the USA is mainly based on FTL (full truck load), which means the truck just drives from A to B. In Europe LTL (less than truck load) is more common, which means pickup and delivery on multiple stops. This requires a better maneuverability, hence shorter trucks.
Another factor unmentioned is the amount of independent truckers in the US who own their trucks and who primarily do longhaul sorties spanning a week or more. Can't find any data on this but it is a very commonplace thing in the US for truckers to live in their trucks more than their homes and I'm not sure that is the case in the EU.
They could easily have multiple destinations they drive to one after the other, with different cargo each time
I think it's pretty obvious and comes down to a few things:
* European trucks typically run shorter hauls, and do not require a bunk in the cab as often as multi-day cross-country runs.
* European Semi's need to accommodate all countries' roads and parking lots. This means the much wider range of nonstandard roads, docks, fueling stations and parking lots extends much farther towards the "small" side. Tight streets and parking lots - making it necessary for the truck to be shorter for tighter turns and parking compatibility.
* It has been proven that a cab-forward design is safer for avoiding accidents directly in front of the vehicles, something that is more focused on in the EU.
* The least obvious but possibly the most relevant reason why it remains: Having and ingraining differing standards makes it harder for a single competitor to play into the both markets. EU is largely locked down by EU manufacturers since any US manufacturers would have to significantly change their design and production to sell there.
The fuel economy point seems to be a distant consideration since the majority of drag economy comes from the trailer and not the tractor.