Traditional conventionals vs Aero conventionals

[BigBad]

So it seems like we have a lot to say about the traditional look and the aero look of modern trucks, let's bring it over here!

There has been talk about conventionals like the W900L, the 379, 389 and Freighliner Classic being easier to modify and accessorize than others like the Prostar, Peterbilt 387 or 587, or a Kenworth T2000.

There has been talk about aerodynamic fuel efficiency versus the prouder look of a long square nose 379. And other stuff! Want to talk about it? Bring it here.

Personally I like the classics, cabovers, new classic conventionals and some aero-trucks. The question that started it all was "Why is it that most truck drivers, afficionados, lovers, whatevers... Don't really like the new Aero-trucks such as the Prostar. No opinion is wrong, I wanted to clarify the reason why these trucks are less-liked. I highly dislike the T2000's front end though...

[lapazleo]

I think it must be an individual thing, that beauty is in the eye of the behoder thing. IMO the KW t700 is the ugliest truck ever built but if someone produced a decent kit I would still build it. Overall anything called a truck interests me even European designs.

[jekylljr]

Well for me growing up with trucks my dad always drove cabovers and traditional trucks square hoods etc so i guess his style grew on me after driving areo trucks and now driving a pete 379 show truck i wouldnt have it any other way parts for custom work is ey easily available and easy to apply....its all about pride sure i pay a lil more for fuel but not much...i feel more safe with more metal n aluminum around me i also enjoy seeing the externals like tanks n battery boxes n dual air breathers to me thats a truck not fairings n junk like that

[BigBad]

Pride and chrome go well together, don't they?

[BigBad]

And also I think a big part of it is that aero conventionals are so **** ugly! They are just like all them new cars. Just pure UGLY!

One example is the Kenworth t700. I do like the aero conventionals from the 80's and 90's though such as the t600.

The T700 is not perfect... The T2000 was even worse. To add to the T600, the T660 is not bad either. The first Freightliner aero was the FLD and I thought it was pretty good looking at the time, still does. I'm not too fond of the newer aero Freightliners, be it a Columbia, a Century or the Cascadia. I still think the Prostar looks pretty darn good.

[mackinac359]

Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike aero-trucks, I appreciate all designs. I see trucks as an art form.

Some of the new designs have me scratching my head. The T700 is too slab-sided. The 587 and 386 have the nameplates crooked. The Cascadia has those awful "I give up-don't shoot me in the back" spot mirrors. One of the big problems the truck manufacturers face with making an aero truck is trying too hard to stick with the traditional blood line. The result is a mixed bag of traditional and aero that sometimes doesn't work. (think the 1990 Cadillac Sedan DeVille with the composite headlamps and cladding on the body- the original look became blurred and muddy). KW and Pete have been using the same basic cab for 25 years which really limits how they design aerodynamic parts around it. Rounded windshields and visors can only do so much. Navistar and Freightliner broke that pattern with Prostar/Lonestar and Cascadia. Mack has been slowly tweaking their aero trucks. Nobody has mentioned Western Star in any of this - the WS designs are all areo - with air cleaners stuck on the side and a squared grille. Volvo has always had the aero design, their foray into the long hood war was a lost battle before the first shot was fired. The market was gone by that time. Truck manufacturers have tried in the past to kill off the long hood models - forcing customers to their other products - but the market has demanded the long hood remain. Even as recent as 2 years ago the 389 was supposed to end, but dealers and customers demanded it remain - so it does until the market for it eventually dries up.

My top pics for aero styling:

Navistar Prostar

F-liner Cascadia

KW T660

Peterbilt 587

Peterbilt 386

Mack Pinnacle

With the huge demands on the manufacturers from the upcoming EPA MPG standards, the manufacturers will be pulling out all of the stops to smooth out the bumps and chunks in the truck designs. We will really see some radical designs in the future.

Funny thing about aerodynamics - in the 70's drivers were buying big bulky add-on air shields and foils and other devices to save fuel.

Back then all you needed for a custom truck was cool paint, nice lettering, some lights snazzy interior.

Tim

[Chris guthro]

well heres the prostar dad drives. its a 2011 that was rolled over and had the big condo sleeper with all the flarings to match. they started by replacing the back cab panel with a daycab one. its a real sharp looking truck going down the highway with the landohl 455 and a garbage truck on the back of er haha. thats pictures of my prom day where i took it

[tooltas]

what would say a lone star would be call i think its both its got its old school look but still in the aero class truck prostar is not a traditonal truck in my book

[Chuck Most]

Traditional style... aero style... matters not to me. If I like the design, I like the design, and that's all there is to it. Granted, there are a few less-than-pretty aero designs out there, but the same could be said for the earlier rigs as well. I think a lot of the divide is just simply people being used to the earlier designs- people haven't warmed up to the newer stuff yet. Yes, Aero trucks aren't really anything new, but it seems like its only been the last few years that truck manufacturers have been phasing it in and using it to replace the earlier designs on a large scale. Face it- the days of freestanding headlamps, big flat front bumpers, and split windsheilds is getting pretty close to the end of the line. Diesel isn't getting any cheaper, and there's only so much you can do with a design that's about as aerodynamic as the broadside of a barn, even if the consensus prefers that style from an aesthetics point of view.

[BigBad]

What would you consider this Bob, Aero, Traditional or a little of "both"?

Anthony, as far as my opinion goes, this is the late model Coronado (SD, is it?) which was the crown jewel of Freightliner, wasn't it? This is a modern interpretation or an evolution of a traditional conventional, therefore more aerodynamic (probably more efficient too...) than the previous models of the Coronado and the "Classic XL" but not as all out "aero" like the Cascadia or the Century and geared more toward the "traditional" truck buyer. But that's my opinion. And, by the way I think this truck looks a whole lot better than the models it replaces... maybe except the Classic XL. I didn't mention this model before, did I?

[Semi Trailer Mechanic]

So it seems like we have a lot to say about the traditional look and the aero look of modern trucks, let's bring it over here!

There has been talk about conventionals like the W900L, the 379, 389 and Freighliner Classic being easier to modify and accessorize than others like the Prostar, Peterbilt 387 or 587, or a Kenworth T2000.

There has been talk about aerodynamic fuel efficiency versus the prouder look of a long square nose 379. And other stuff! Want to talk about it? Bring it here.

Personally I like the classics, cabovers, new classic conventionals and some aero-trucks. The question that started it all was "Why is it that most truck drivers, afficionados, lovers, whatevers... Don't really like the new Aero-trucks such as the Prostar. No opinion is wrong, I wanted to clarify the reason why these trucks are less-liked. I highly dislike the T2000's front end though...

When I worked at Swift there was a pole take on what would be the most favored truck to get company driver to become lease opps if Swift were to offer their favorite truck. The answer was the W900. That lasted about a year before a problem came up. Obease drivers were having trouble getting in and out of the 900's and the T2000's were very driver friendly. So the W900's were still an option but most of the guys were opting for the T2000, They claimed there were getting better miles per gallon and much easier to get in and out of.

Ya see .... executives that run major trucking companies see trucks and trailers w/ much different eyes than those who like trucks for a hobby.

[ARTEMIS1759]

Lol, good thread, I was just thinking today we should stop hijacking the other thread. Was gonna start one. You know I love classic wheels ( pretty much anything older than 1965 whether it is a car, truck, semi, train and so on) so that is probably why I don't have a big affection for newer vehicles, but I see the design in everything and feel anything can be worked with. One complaint I had with newer trucks is the abbreviated length of the hood they seem to have. I feel that a newer truck although not impossible is harder to work with from a kustomizing standpoint. Then also on that behalf I wish I still had that T600 I designed in 8th grade that would probably cost at least a half a million to build. But that was like 1960s Barris meets the trucking industry. Everything from a corvette tooth style grill to phantom headlights (molded bars over the top) and integrated huge sleeper on a quad axle frame and frenched stacks, airhorns and running lights with full rear fender skirts. It would be a hell of a model to build if I could sketch it out again. If anyone wants to give it a shot. It also had drop belly reefer with a full architectural office and sleeping quarters in it. Its baically like Ford vs Chevy vs Dodge, domestic vs import. Its what you like but fun to hear everyone's opinions. I have come to the conclusion no vehicle is better then another it is just who owned it before you.

Edited February 20, 2012 by ARTEMIS1759

[BigBad]

Lol, good thread, I was just thinking today we should stop hijacking the other thread. Was gonna start one. You know I love classic wheels ( pretty much anything older than 1965 whether it is a car, truck, semi, train and so on) so that is probably why I don't have a big affection for newer vehicles, but I see the design in everything and feel anything can be worked with. One complaint I had with newer trucks is the abbreviated length of the hood they seem to have. I feel that a newer truck although not impossible is harder to work with from a kustomizing standpoint. Then also on that behalf I wish I still had that T600 I designed in 8th grade that would probably cost at least a half a million to build. But that was like 1960s Barris meets the trucking industry. Everything from a corvette tooth style grill to phantom headlights (molded bars over the top) and integrated huge sleeper on a quad axle frame and frenched stacks, airhorns and running lights with full rear fender skirts. It would be a hell of a model to build if I could sketch it out again. If anyone wants to give it a shot. It also had drop belly reefer with a full architectural office and sleeping quarters in it. Its baically like Ford vs Chevy vs Dodge, domestic vs import. Its what you like but fun to hear everyone's opinions. I have come to the conclusion no vehicle is better then another it is just who owned it before you.

Well it sure brings up a lot of passion out of an expressive hobby! Chuck Most said it best "If I lke the design, I like the design..." He should make it his signature! He's right, but as passionate as the trucking (and model) community is, everybody will have a strong opinion about the style of rig they prefer and that is what makes it so colorful!

I saw a nice slightly customized black and chrome, small sleeper Pete 379 when I was going back home this afternoon. Man, that trucker must be so proud of driving that thing! It stood out because it was pulling a gravel trailer and the whole rig was soooo clean! Against all that winter-coming-to-an-end-dirty-cars-on-dirty-roads, it really shone! Big and long square nose, Texas bumper hanging low, gleeming 4 strap fuel tanks, sky high polished stacks, polished buds... IT was a sight to behold, as stunning as any Corvette or hot-rod coming down the road.

Edited February 21, 2012 by Z06Bob

[Chuck Most]

Here's a question... the subject is about conventionals, but what ever happened to cabovers? You used to see quite a few cabover tractors out and about, even a few done as straight trucks, but nowadays about all the cabovers you see are medium and lighter duty trucks.

[lapazleo]

Deregulation and relaxed length laws negated the need for them. Also driver comfort issues. A nicely done cabover can be very sharp though.

[ARTEMIS1759]

Once the length laws were lifted if you talk to most truckers from that era, they hated driving cabovers for various reasons so I think they lost their place in the trucking industry unless you are overseas. Sorry late posting.

Edited February 21, 2012 by ARTEMIS1759

[skulls]

Another thing that comes into play is the fact that when someone thinks of "chrome" the first thing that comes to find is the typical 379, W900, and the Classic/Classic XL all tradional style trucks. Nobody turns around and goes into any shop and says "I want a chrome bumper with lots of lights on it for my Freightliner Cascadia or a T660. The aerostyle trucks seem to be going in the way of paint styling schemes to modify and not so much into the "chrome" aspect. So that is where I see the major differance in the vs. battle.

[ARTEMIS1759]

Exactly Skulls. I they look anything like the full chrome bumper conversions on new pickups they look like garbage. On another note, anyone seen this bad boy yet. 2012 KW Aussies K200? I suppose you aussie's were holding out on us? This one looks like it could be cleaned upand kustomized.

[BigBad]

Hey, when i see a Freightliner Argosy going by, I notice it! So if I'd see one of those K200's on the road today, I'd flip. These Australian types all almost more American (vehicle wise) than actual made in the USA people! They have actual modern muscle cars with V8's, they have their own race series called Supercar V8, they still have El Caminos (utes they call them...) and their trucks are bigger than the ones in North America (trains...) And now this: they still have that old cabover Kenworth, they updated it and called it a K200. The headlights are a little large (needed for desert roads I gess) for my taste though but the remainder is spot on. Australia must be one great place to live in!

[jacobus]

i drive in europ and now only in my country but always drive coe,s becouse overall lengt and not much space on factories or in my place chemical plants

sometimes i see a conventional but has always trouble to get on the load or onload place or not the mentioned the weigfbridge

i have drive a lot of different names an some trucks have a face if i can see so

and sometimes a airdeflectior and panels makes it ugly but runs cheaper for the company,s

if i could i wil once drive a kenworth w900

so im stil dreamin of it jacobus

[Jim B]

I think you can still get the Argosy: http://www.freightlinertrucks.com/Trucks/Models/Legacy/Argosy

[BigBad]

The Freightliner site is not quite clear... What does Legacy mean in this case? Older models I know, but are they out of production or they still make them? I see the Columbia, the Century the older model Coronado and others but I don't understand what's going on in this case.

Edited February 23, 2012 by Z06Bob

[lapazleo]

The reason Freightliner dropped the Argosy in the US is because being a low sales volume model it was to costly for engineering for the 08 emmisions engines with the dpf and all. Had sales volume been higher the costs might be justifiable. Freightliner's words not mine.

[Jim B]

It does make sense. I mean, why would you offer something for sale if you were only going to make one or two of them? Not worth the production costs.

Now I don't travel the highways much, but when I do I try to take notice of the trucks. I think I've maybe seen three Argosys, and when I do it's like "Oh, my God! A cabover!" I actually stopped next to one at one of the NYS Throughway Plazas last year.

[skulls]

I completly agree, I honestly would be worried to own an argosy or any other out of production cabover just fo rthe simple fact of the parts. Think about it as a driver, "sir, we had to order a shift lever cable(or rod) for your argosy, but the part is on backorder and due to low production of the trucks the parts are more difficult to come by, so the estimated time will be about 4-6 weeks before we could see that part"......Now how is that response for someone who makes there living off of having the wheels turn on that truck that is currently down because of a low production part...